The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (And the Crusades) Robert Spencer
Regenry Publishing. 2005
When I stole this book off of the internet, I had no idea that it was on the Conservative Book Club list. When I got about 15 page-turns into it and had made the note “bullshit” about as many times, I figured something was up.
There is an unfortunate us (conservative Christians) versus everyone else (humanists, Buddhists, and of course, Muslims) tone throughout the whole book. The author even goes so far as to have a “Jesus Vs. Muhammad” sidebar, which contributes nothing to the de-PCification of Islam.
And why just Jesus?
If the author was being honest here, he would make the note right up front that this is a comparison piece (which, surprise- surprise, it turns out to be).
Because Spencer knows that one of the keys to selling a book is knowing your audience. It doesn’t take long before it becomes abundantly clear that Spencer knows exactly to which choir he’s preaching with this little gem.
And why just Jesus?
If the author was being honest here, he would make the note right up front that this is a comparison piece (which, surprise- surprise, it turns out to be).
Because Spencer knows that one of the keys to selling a book is knowing your audience. It doesn’t take long before it becomes abundantly clear that Spencer knows exactly to which choir he’s preaching with this little gem.
I guess this book should be a lesson to me to not to judge a book by its title or promised content. The promise to remove political correctness should be a promise, as the author makes early in the book, to move the discussion closer to the truth. My mistake for assuming.
I have no stake in defending Islam. It would suit me just fine if it went the way of the dodo, and I think we’d be better off as a species if it did. I certainly do not disagree that the Qur’an is a fucked-up book (from what I’ve read of it), and Islam is a fucked-up religion, but I do take issue with the way the author treats his audience:
Like incurious, anti-intellectual, incapable retards.
Like incurious, anti-intellectual, incapable retards.
If this book didn’t pretend to be an honest examination, but instead was handed out at Clan meetings, I would be a little more understanding (although it's really unlikely I would've read it outside of a desire to satisfy a morbid curiosity).
Unfortunately him and his credibility as a scholar on any subject, the author tells us, “I intend this book to be neither a general introduction to the Islamic religion, nor a comprehensive historical survey of the Crusades. Rather, it is an examination of certain highly tendentious assertions about both Islam and the Crusades that have entered the popular discourse. This book is an attempt to move the public discourse about both subjects a bit closer to the truth.”
“A bit” closer to the truth. But I wouldn’t give him more than that.
This book is a poor source for much of anything aside from inflammatory rhetoric and poorly-argued conservative Christian claptrap.
If you already think that brown people are hiding under your bed, coming to take your freedom, then this is the book for you.
If you’re looking for a critical and agenda-free discussion of Islam, skip it and move on down the line.
I have a set of two-word phrases which would be well suited to appear on the dust jacket of this joke of a tome:
Weasel words:
This book is freakin’ LOADED with vague and unsupported assumptions and suggestions.
Many experts agree…. Some scholars suggest… In the X community, it is common to Y… it is said that…. The PC crowd thinks X...
Over and over and over again, and not a single goddamn one of them is ever supported by any kind of citation or reference. This might work for Fox News, but it doesn’t work for me, and it shouldn’t work for you if you give a damn about the critical analysis of an idea or set of ideas.
Citation needed:
‘Nuff said. Spencer makes lots of claims and rarely backs them up. He does, from time to time, just to keep up appearances. But when his logic or his claims become particularly slippery or outrageous, the parenthetical citations disappear and all we’re left with is his assertion that “it,” whatever it may be, “is so.”
‘Nuff said. Spencer makes lots of claims and rarely backs them up. He does, from time to time, just to keep up appearances. But when his logic or his claims become particularly slippery or outrageous, the parenthetical citations disappear and all we’re left with is his assertion that “it,” whatever it may be, “is so.”
Bitch, Please:
I can’t count the times I rolled my eyes. I’ve got at least a dozen “bitch please”s and “bullshit”s and “piss off”s in my notes for this book. Spencer is just too free with his unsupported whining.
I can’t count the times I rolled my eyes. I’ve got at least a dozen “bitch please”s and “bullshit”s and “piss off”s in my notes for this book. Spencer is just too free with his unsupported whining.
Worth Reading:
Despite my complaints about the book, there are a few reasons you might want to read it.
Despite my complaints about the book, there are a few reasons you might want to read it.
1- It openly criticizes one of the most backwards and dangerous ideological systems in the world today. If you just got through reading The Autobiography of Malcom X (which you should, if you haven't), and think that Islam is all fluffy bunnies and happy friend time, this should help to re-adjust your contemporary and historical perspective.
2-It shows a person how not to write a book if you want anyone besides Sarah Palin to take it seriously.
3- This book is wonderful inspiration. It shows us that anyone can write a book. No matter how crappy it turns out, if you put a provocative title and lots of pictures in it, someone will buy it.
2-It shows a person how not to write a book if you want anyone besides Sarah Palin to take it seriously.
3- This book is wonderful inspiration. It shows us that anyone can write a book. No matter how crappy it turns out, if you put a provocative title and lots of pictures in it, someone will buy it.
No comments:
Post a Comment