#BookReview: Lost In Ideology by Jason Blakely

‘Comparative Religions’ For US Politics Should Be Required Reading For Every Voter In An Election Year. The title of this review basically sums up the entire review. This truly is a well written “comparative religions” type text, except for US political thought rather than the various global religions traditions. Showing the history and development of each “map”, as Blakely calls them, (but without much documentation – more on that momentarily), Blakely does a remarkably balanced job of showing each school of thought in as close to a neutral fashion as may be possible – extremists within any given school may think he didn’t present “their” side good enough, or perhaps shows “their” enemies in too good of a light, but from an objective-ish position, I stand by my statement of just how neutral he really is here. And yes, I really do think this should be required reading for every US voter before really even deciding who ultimately to vote for in any given election, as this book is truly a solid primer on the various ideologies used throughout the US and their various offshoots and intersections. Truly, it will allow each individual to better understand even those they disagree vehemently with, and ultimately a voter that better understands everyone is a better informed voter, period, who ultimately would at least have the ability to make a more fully informed decision.

Indeed, the *only* problem with this book – and thus the star deduction, as it *is* something I deduct for in all instances – is the lack of documentation. Even if I were willing to slide from my 20-30% standard (and as I’ve mentioned in previous reviews, I am openly considering this with every new book), this book clocking in at just 12% documentation still feels a bit light for all of its claims, no matter how well balanced.

Still, again, every voter should absolutely read this book before making any electoral decisions going forward, whether that be in 2024 or for the next several years – until this book is invalidated by future changes, whenever that may be. Very much recommended.

This review of Lost In Ideology by Jason Blakely was originally written on December 22, 2023.

#BookReview: The Rural Voter by Daniel M. Shea and Nicholas F. Jacobs

Intriguing Investigation Marred by Academic Elitism. A disclosure up front: as I get into the meat of this review momentarily, know that I am literally a man with “R == R” tattooed on his arm, which reads “Real is Real” for those less familiar with mathematics and C-family programming, and -for those less familiar with the work in question- it is the actual subheading for Part III of Atlas Shrugged by Ayn Rand.

Now, as to the actual text at hand for this review: It really was quite remarkable. Don’t let the three star rating fool you: this is a book that you *need* to read if you hope to have any remotely accurate understanding of politics in the United States, as it is the singular best book I’ve found to date on just what makes its titular subject a truly distinct class. In likely north of 90% of the time, I can tell you straight up that no matter what you *think* the rural voter is or how you *think* they vote or what you *think* they value… you’re more than likely wrong. Read this book to set your facts straight, and proceed from there as you will.

Now, as to the star deductions: The first is fairly standard for me, though some readers may have less of a problem with it. Quite simply, I expect any nonfiction book to be well documented, and by that I mean at least approaching the 20-30% mark (which is the typical average in my experience, though as some other reviews this year have noted, I’m slowly getting less stringent on that as long as the book in question is at least close to that number). However, this book had barely half of the bottom edge of the range, clocking in at just around 11% of the text. So there’s the first star deduction, one I knew of before I ever read a word of this text.

The second star deduction is likely given away by the “Marred By Academic Elitism” part of the title of this review. Indeed, while the authors both note that they actively live in rural America and work at a small college, their active partisanship is rather blatant and even openly embraced – and of the typical sort most would expect from Academia. Indeed, one reason I didn’t deduct *two* stars here – yes, some would say the elitism and partisanship are *that* heavy handed, certainly at times – was because even as the authors wanted *Democrats* to become more active with rural voters (and yes, they specifically noted exactly that multiple times, particularly later in the text), they also openly noted that more people *generally* need to get more active with rural voters and allow those voters the active choice in candidates and policies to support or oppose, rather than simply allowing national politics to take the fore unopposed. As a two time rural/ suburban small town City Council candidate myself… that was actually *the* message I centered both of my campaigns around – that the People would have a direct choice. (For those who care, if any, I lost both races roughly 75%-25%, though the second race was a Special Election and yet had higher turnout than the first, a General Election. So I consider that fact alone a moral win. :D)

But truly, even if you don’t agree with the authors’ heavy handed elitist partisanship – read this book anyway. They really do show quite a bit of solid research that you need to understand if you expect to play well in rural America generally, and even if you grew up in the town/ region you’re hoping to win an election it… this research may show even you things about the rural voter more generally that likely apply to even your specific rural voters. It will certainly be worth your effort to read and decide for yourself.

Which brings me to another class of reader, as someone who was *also* a former Party Leader (having served as both the local affiliate Chair of my local Libertarian Party as well as on the Libertarian Party of Georgia’s State Executive Committee as both a member and an appointee): Party Leadership, and particularly those in *any* US Political Party (to be clear, any organization that considers itself such, regardless of State election laws) who are responsible for candidate training and education, or even overall Party outreach or strategy. In any of those cases and in any of those Parties, you need to read this book. (And for those unaware, there actually are literally upwards of 100 such organizations with ballot access in at least one State across the United States, though only the Green Party and Libertarian Party have threatened – or achieved – enough ballot access to *theoretically* win the Presidency this Millennium.)

Overall a solid, if flawed, text, and very much recommended.

This review of The Rural Voter by Daniel M. Shea and Nicholas F. Jacobs was originally written on November 14, 2023.

#BlogTour: The Boyfriend Candidate by Ashley Winstead

For this blog tour, we’re looking at a tale that in some ways is a more current American President. For this blog tour, we’re looking at The Boyfriend Candidate by Ashley Winstead.

Here’s what I had to say about it on Goodreads:

Almost A Texas-Based The American President. Mostly in overall tone, and with this one being in some instances both funnier and more poignant than even that classic movie – though far from its extremely quotable climactic speech – if you enjoyed that movie, you’re very likely to enjoy this book. In both, you get a lot of Democrat-heavy politics, so if that is a major turn off for you – either because of the specific politics or because you don’t like real-world politics in your fiction, particularly your romantic fiction, generally – ummm… this may not be the book for you. If you *do* enjoy Democrat politics but want your Democrat politicians to be shown as near John Galt mythic heroes… eh… you’re going to be disappointed here, as both of our leads are shown to be very flawed people who happen to meet and fall in love in the middle of an intense campaign. And speaking of the campaign itself, this was actually a remarkably solid look at the inside of campaigning in America today, for all its positives *and* negatives, so there is that – but again, if you’re reading for more pure escapism… that may not be what you want.

Overall the book used its near 400 page length well, showing both a slow burn “fake” romance *and* the various political escapades quite solidly, while allowing several secondary characters various chances to shine as well. All told, this is a solid story for what it is that may not be what everyone wants, but there is nothing technically wrong with what it is. Very much recommended.

After the jump, an excerpt from the book followed by the “publisher details” – book description, author bio, and social media and buy links.
Continue reading “#BlogTour: The Boyfriend Candidate by Ashley Winstead”

#BookReview: How Free Speech Saved Democracy by Christopher Finan

Exactly What It Claims To Be. This is a book written by a “Progressive” (not liberal, there is a difference that is crucial in these discussions) that mostly focuses on using the Progressive dog-whistle of their version of “democracy” and showing how fighting Conservatives has “saved” that version of “democracy”. In other words, a balanced look at the whole of the Free Speech issue in America… this is not. But it also never really claims to be, so it can’t really be faulted for this. It just could have been so much better if it *had* been more balanced and thus more complete. Still, progressives will love this version and even those adamantly opposed to the “Progressive” political agenda will likely find useful knowledge here, potentially even some they were unaware of. Thus, this is recommended.

This review of How Free Speech Saved Democracy by Christopher Finan was originally written on February 5, 2022.

#BookReview: From Parchment To Dust by Louis Michael Seidman

Progressive/ Liberal Polemic That Moves The Conversation Yet Doesn’t Go Through To The Logical Conclusion. Lysander Spooner once said, during the early Reconstruction period, that “Nevertheless, the writer thinks it proper to say that, in his opinion, the Constitution is no such instrument as it has generally been assumed to be; but that by false interpretations, and naked usurpations, the government has been made in practice a very widely, and almost wholly, different thing from what the Constitution itself purports to authorize” (Spooner; No Treason: The Constitution of No Authority, Appendix; 1870), and this is the same essential point that Seidman makes in proclaiming what he terms “Constitutional Skepticism”. Argued from a progressive/ leftist perspective of current American politics, Seidman’s text here uses at least one hyperbolic source (the oft-cited and yet demonstrably inaccurate and misleading GunViolenceArchive), stretches certain terms to implausible yet popular within his political allies lengths (claiming the events of Jan 6, 2020 in Washington DC to be an “insurrection”), and generally parrots progressive/ leftist talking points about at least two Supreme Court justices, the “problem of gun violence”, etc. All of this noted, within this particular sphere, Seidman actually makes his case reasonably well that the Constitution of the United States of America is, as Spooner proclaims, “of no authority”. And *to that point* and from the given perspective, Siedman is truly solid. Where he needs to expand his thinking a bit further is that he ultimately concludes that a more current Constitution, written by and binding on the “current generation” (which he fails to define, and fails to acknowledge that in any average human’s lifetime are three separate generations alive at any one time nor determine which of those generations should be allowed to bind the others according to his thinking) would be actually better than the one written so long ago and claiming to be binding forevermore. No, this is where he would actually do well to examine the writings of Spooner and other *anarchic* Constitutional Skeptics of American history and discuss his thoughts on their ideas as well. For, as Spooner then concluded his discussion quoted above, “But whether the Constitution really be one thing, or another, this much is certain that it has either authorized such a government as we have had, or bas been powerless to prevent it. In either case, it is unfit to exist” – taking his own Constitutional Skepticism to its actual logical conclusion, which Seidman refuses to do. Still, this is very much a book that could actually help the overall political discussion both in the US and elsewhere, and it is one that many indeed need to read. Very much recommended.

This review of From Parchment To Dust by Louis Michael Seidman was originally written on October 1, 2021.