If you could dissuade people from reading one book which would it be?
- Thread starter desihawk
- Start date
assuming that is the Q book, why?
once the ayatola pays a visit to this thread he might proclaim a fatwa
The naïveté of this philosophy killed tens of millions of innocent people.
When I was younger, I read
Atlas Shrugged
The Fountainhead
We the Living
The Virtue of Selfishness
I'm a fan.
I'm also as lefty as you'll find on this board.
What does that tell you?
My vote for books not to read goes to The Stranger by Camus.
A fine, thought-provoking work, to be sure; but incredibly depressing, and hard to shake.
A fine, thought-provoking work, to be sure; but incredibly depressing, and hard to shake.
Same goes for the Bible.The naïveté of this philosophy killed tens of millions of innocent people.
Last year I finished around 100 novels and the one I didn't finish was Diavola. I can't believe it has decent reviews.
I would never dissuade any adult from reading any book.
Did you read it?The naïveté of this philosophy killed tens of millions of innocent people.
If not, how do you know it's naive?
If so, what's naive about it?
Good book about the oppressed and oppressors and the exploitation the oppressor class inflicts on the masses.
I have read it.
The belief in a stateless and classless society is naive and impossible. The directive meddling has been ruinous.
Last edited:
I was very disappointed in A Confederacy of Dunces.
Catcher in the Rye. Can’t stand that book and Holden is a world class loser.
Interesting I agree. I had to study it in one French class., then I took a class in French existentialism. (In French). We then went to Sartre.
Very depressing.
The Catcher in the Rye - most overrated book ever. I even gave it a second chance. Nope. Garbage.
The classless state and disallowing property ownership by the bourgeois are concepts that sound pretty out of the ordinary by today's standards. However, Marx did an amazing job of diagnosing the societal costs of the capitalist model and those were mostly my takeaways from the book. He pretty much called what is happened ng in the US right now.
I think it's a good book for people to read, maybe more now than ever.
Did you know the book had an ape go to space and come back in a crash landing into a cannibalistic village? The person who took this book and made it a beloved movie deserves an Oscar every year.
I actually read American Psycho, after seeing the movie, and having been told it was an amazing satire piece, etc, etc.
I thought the book's meager redeming qualities were totally overshadowed by its pornographic murder/torture scenes. In short, that book is trash, and worthy of being labeled "obscenity"; to paraphrase Justice Potter Stewart, "I know it when I see it", and in my opinion if that book isn't obscene, then I don't know what is.
FWIW. I studied English literature in college and consider myself to be a fairly well-read individual.
I thought the book's meager redeming qualities were totally overshadowed by its pornographic murder/torture scenes. In short, that book is trash, and worthy of being labeled "obscenity"; to paraphrase Justice Potter Stewart, "I know it when I see it", and in my opinion if that book isn't obscene, then I don't know what is.
FWIW. I studied English literature in college and consider myself to be a fairly well-read individual.
The only writer/philosopher that's more depressing than Camus is Emil Cioran lol.
(I like Cioran, though.)
Emil Cioran - Wikipedia
I don't think many modern economists take Marx's theories seriously.
They've been pretty much debunked.
Came here to say the exact same thing. We had to read it in high school and our teacher warned us that some of us will love it and some hate it. He said if you identify with Holden Caulfield, you will love it. If you have to be around people who identify with Holden Caulfield, you will hate it. He was 100% correct.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I was thinking a couple assassins were obsessed with it
People who say things like that are nearly always people who couldn't explain marxism to save their lives. Couldn't even make a credible attempt.
You could email some big time economists at MIT, Harvard or Yale and see what they think.
Marx said that Communism was basically about abolishing all private property.
That never worked very well.
That's why he doesn't want people reading it. Then he can make up any bullshit he wants to tell about it.
Judging from some high profile Harvard or Yale graduates have been promoting over the last couple of decades, those degrees aren't as impressive as they used to be.
Similar threads
