The Politically Incorrect Guide to....Blatant Propaganda
By Lee Russ
Saturday, August 11, 2007 at 07:11 PM
From Regnery Publishing, that bastion of intellectual rigor and commitment to truth and objectivity, comes the amazing new series that explains everything you wanted the ignorant public to think on just about every current politically controversial issue:
The Politically Incorrect Guide to American History, Thomas Woods, Jr., 2004, 0-89526-047-6, paperback, $19.95, “From the real American ‘revolutionaries’ to the reality of labor unions, this guide is all you need for the truth about America—objective and unvarnished.”These are from the publisher's online catalog. If you're a CSPAN junkie you may have had the ill fortune to see several of these authors addressing extremely right wing audiences like the Eagle Forum, mangling logic, facts, and all that is decent in the world as they attempt to show the bright faced right wing youth of tomorrow how "common sense" right wing insanity really is....all while appealing to their sense of being in-the-know, not confined by those nasty ideologues who are "politically correct."The Politically Incorrect Guide™ to Darwinism and Intelligent Design, Jonathan Wells, 1-59698-013-3, paperback, $19.95, “Jonathan Wells, a microbiologist with two Ph.D.s (from Berkeley and Yale), unmasks the truth about Darwinism—why it is wrong and what the real evidence is.”
The Politically Incorrect Guide™ to English and American Literature, Elizabeth Kantor, 1-59698-011-7, paperback, $19.95, “Ph.D. Elizabeth Kantor exposes the PC professors who have hijacked syllabuses to obliterate the great literature in the English language and provides a crash course on the classics you may have been denied in school.”
The Politically Incorrect Guide™ to Global Warming and Environmentalism , Christopher C. Horner, 2007, 1596985011, paperback, $19.95.
The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (and the Crusades), Robert Spencer, 2005, 0895260131, paperback, $19.95, "Islam expert Robert Spencer explodes the PC myths about Islam and casts a fresh and dramatic light on the crusader knights."
The Politically Incorrect Guide to Science, Tom Bethell, 2005, 089526031X, paperback, $19.95, "Part of the runaway bestselling series, this guide takes on the controversies of science, spanning evolution, cloning, AIDS, abortion, stem cell research, global warming, and more."
The Politically Incorrect Guide™ to the Constitution, Kevin R.C. Gutzman, 2007, 1596985054, paperback, $19.95
The Politically Incorrect Guide™ to the South (and Why It Will Rise Again), Clint Johnson, 2007, 1596985003, paperback, $19.95.
The Politically Incorrect Guide™ to Women, Sex, and Feminism, Carrie L. Lukas, 1-59698-003-6, paperback, $19.95, “Carrie Lukas, a young career woman and new mother, sets the record straight: correcting the lies women have been told and slamming the door on the feminist professors and the rest of the bra-burners who have done so much to wreck women’s lives.”
I've seen smidgeons of the guy who wrote the Guide to Globalism (not listed on their catalog, for some reason) and the guy who wrote the Guide to Global Warming. Trust me, you wouldn't want to meet these intellectual giants in any dark alley of thought.
And Regnery Publishing? They deem themselves the premier publisher (since 1947) of conservative thought. Complete with authors like Wayne LaPierre, executive vice president and chief executive officer of the National Rifle Association of America, G. Gordon Liddy, David Limbaugh, John R. Lott, Jr ( Freedomnomics: Why the Free Market Works and Other Half-Baked Theories Don’t, The Bias Against Guns and More Guns, Less Crime), and Rich Lowry of National Review infamy. And that's just a selection from the Ls.
How bad are the books/authors in this series of blatant propaganda? On his CSPAN appearance, The Guide to Global Warming author made much of the fact that, hey folks, Polar Bears swim, they're aquatic, what's the big deal about their habitat melting?
You can't get more common sense than that, huh?
Any suggestions for future additions to this essential library of thought?
Comments
This seems like rather strong claims. Take my book. What is it about my book, Freedomnomics, that you find so filled with propoganda?
By the way, others can judge for themselves. This Sunday, August 12, at 11:00 AM EDT; Sunday, August 12, at midnight EDT; and Saturday, August 18, at 7:00 PM EDT C-SPAN 2's Booknotes will have a presentation on my new book. The discussion each time will last an hour.
Wow, Lee! Do you have some investment in these subjects? Some faithful belief which causes you to reflexively denigrate these works without reading them?
What? Are they all of them Leftist/Democratic political platform issues? So, that any mention of "political correctness", and the stern social "big brotherism" that term implies, is automatically assumed to be a target for the typical vilification conducted democratically (you wish) by the Leftist/Democratic propagandists ...
... ever ready to project their scurrilous acts and actions onto their opponents; in that special PT Barnum way you muckrakers are infamous for performing ...
John R Lott:
I called the series of "Politically Incorrect Guide to..." books propaganda. Your book is mentioned as an example of Regnery's political/philosophical stance. I assume you would acknowledge that Regnery isn't exactly trying to present a broad spectrum of poitical views. And I hope that your book is at least an honest attempt to analyze something, though your subtitle's reference to "other half baked ideas" certainly gives one reason to doubt it.
Since I wrote the post, I've had the misfortune to also see/hear the authors of the books on American History and the Constituion. The American History author acknowledged that the "Politically Incorrect Guide" title was specifically chosen for its marketing value. After all, if this is what the poitically correct folks believe, then anyone who disagrees must be one of those "PC" jerks.
He also acknowledged that the idea for the series was the publisher's--it isn't like these authors all of a sudden had the independent idea to write such a book.
Having heard four of the authors speak, I have no doubt that these are propaganda. Straw man arguments, every claim portrayed as proved beyond a shadow of a doubt, no undertainty what the founding fathers intended, and, of course, the need to demonize all opposition.
I am all for people seeing these authors speak before the "Eagle Forum." And seeing you speak. People can make up their own minds. But viewers should understand exactly what it is they are viewing.
I cannot speak for others, but if you are interested, ou can view my talk from C-SPAN here. The book is based heavily on my research published in peer reviewed academic journals. Overall about 45 of my published research papers are discussed.
I cannot speak for others, but if you are interested, you can view the film here. The book is based heavily on my research published in peer reviewed academic journals. Overall about 45 of my published research papers are discussed.
I assume the preceding two comments are from John Lott, though I can't tell becuse neither of the links works.
For what it's worth, here's a link to the Wikipedia entry on him. Some interesting stuff, indeed.
Anyone who really wants to see his CSPAN appearance can probably track it down on CSPAN.
"Propaganda" may be a bit too strong a term here.
"Semi-pro-paganda" would be a little more apt.
Real Pros do a much better job of it, ya know.
Essentially it sounds like kiddy propaganda. Prechewed arguments fer the lazy conservative who can only think in bite sized bumpersticker logic but who still wants to regurgitate insane and illogical notions
on command and think they've added to the conversation.
Really not impressed
Lott didn't even impress you a little? How ironic!
I'd rather not watch Science Fiction unless it starts off with "Space, the final frontier"........
Or Secret Agent Man.
Be Well.
Your comments about _The Politically Incorrect Guide to the Constitution_ could not be further off base. Take the assertion that it is full of straw man arguments, for example: it is easy to make such an assertion, especially if one does not feel compelled to provide any evidence, but how about if you provide some? Give one example of a straw man argument in the PIG to the Constitution, just one.
Every argument in that book is backed by state-of-the-art historical research in peer-reviewed journals and other academically respected sources (many of them primary sources such as the personal papers of particular statesmen and judicial opinions). Provide a single instance to the contrary, or retract your unfounded calumny.