Scan barcode
jenniferbbookdragon's review against another edition
3.0
Clearly making distinctions between paranoid schizophrenics, paranoid psychopaths and paranoid societies, as well as the necessary conditions for scapegoating and moving from blame to violence, Dr. Gaylin does a a good job trying to explain the Holocaust, Al-Queda, single terrorist actions and current and historical genocides. In the end, this topic is just too big for 247 pages, and would best be used in a group setting, where people can read, process and discuss it.
caidyn's review
1.0
DNF on pg.50
Does no one else find it funny I DNFed a book about hatred? Because, through the rage I feel, it is a bit ironic. I did not like, perhaps even *gasp* hated, this book on hatred.
This was written in the years immediately after 9/11, and it shows. It really shows. And, it pissed me off to no end, even in the few pages I got into this book. That was the most egregious thing that was wrong with this book, in my opinion. I could find a niggle about there not being any citations, let alone a bibliography, in this. There were footnotes, yes, but what nonfiction book has no bibliography and citations? None that are credible. So, that threw it out the window for me. There was no way this book would get more than three stars with that. Then, there was my issue with him making the assumption that we're stupid enough to not understand the difference between bias and prejudice. Even before I knew the word bias or truly understood what prejudice was, I knew there was a difference. It was just absurd to think that an adult, or even a teenager, would not know that difference. We feel the difference. Perhaps I'm overgeneralizing that myself, but that's my problem.
Now, my main problem, again was just how he talked about terrorism. I am so glad I didn't get further into the book, when he starts talking about cultures of hatred, or that would have really set me off.
Because of such usage [of the word hatred (aka using it for little things, not big things)], most readers will assume that they have experienced hatred, but I know they have not. We are not one with the terrorists. We do not experience that which they feel, nor are we likely to do that which they do.
or
The 9/11 bombings brought home to Americans, in particular, the awareness that understanding hatred is no longer a theoretical problem. We have been treated to pictures of jubilant Arab crowds cavorting in the streets and shouting their delight at the tragic deaths in the United States as a consequence of the World Trade Center massacres. Their palpable hatred of us leaps off the screen, affronting our senses.
I'm calling a Trump with both those quotes.
1. Look at those who support Trump. Most of them are rampant racists who hate Mexicans and Muslims. Mexicans for "taking our jobs", and Muslims for terrorizing us. I'm pretty sure that they would not feel that extreme hatred towards people if we hadn't gone through 9/11. I was just six when it happened, so I only know a post-9/11 world. But, sorry. We hate. We hate a lot. We hate anything different than us.
2. Show me those pictures. Let me see them, then I'll slightly reconsider it. (No citation or proof that these even exist, so who fucking knows, man.) Trump claimed to see about the same thing, except I think he talked about seeing them on the streets in America celebrating.
To me, Gaylin wasn't helping solve the problem of hatred, he was perpetuating it by reinforcing the idea of what all terrorists are. They are bad, I do think that. But... it just didn't sit right with me. I can't explain it properly. It did not sit right and it made me angry, so there you go.
Does no one else find it funny I DNFed a book about hatred? Because, through the rage I feel, it is a bit ironic. I did not like, perhaps even *gasp* hated, this book on hatred.
This was written in the years immediately after 9/11, and it shows. It really shows. And, it pissed me off to no end, even in the few pages I got into this book. That was the most egregious thing that was wrong with this book, in my opinion. I could find a niggle about there not being any citations, let alone a bibliography, in this. There were footnotes, yes, but what nonfiction book has no bibliography and citations? None that are credible. So, that threw it out the window for me. There was no way this book would get more than three stars with that. Then, there was my issue with him making the assumption that we're stupid enough to not understand the difference between bias and prejudice. Even before I knew the word bias or truly understood what prejudice was, I knew there was a difference. It was just absurd to think that an adult, or even a teenager, would not know that difference. We feel the difference. Perhaps I'm overgeneralizing that myself, but that's my problem.
Now, my main problem, again was just how he talked about terrorism. I am so glad I didn't get further into the book, when he starts talking about cultures of hatred, or that would have really set me off.
Because of such usage [of the word hatred (aka using it for little things, not big things)], most readers will assume that they have experienced hatred, but I know they have not. We are not one with the terrorists. We do not experience that which they feel, nor are we likely to do that which they do.
or
The 9/11 bombings brought home to Americans, in particular, the awareness that understanding hatred is no longer a theoretical problem. We have been treated to pictures of jubilant Arab crowds cavorting in the streets and shouting their delight at the tragic deaths in the United States as a consequence of the World Trade Center massacres. Their palpable hatred of us leaps off the screen, affronting our senses.
I'm calling a Trump with both those quotes.
1. Look at those who support Trump. Most of them are rampant racists who hate Mexicans and Muslims. Mexicans for "taking our jobs", and Muslims for terrorizing us. I'm pretty sure that they would not feel that extreme hatred towards people if we hadn't gone through 9/11. I was just six when it happened, so I only know a post-9/11 world. But, sorry. We hate. We hate a lot. We hate anything different than us.
2. Show me those pictures. Let me see them, then I'll slightly reconsider it. (No citation or proof that these even exist, so who fucking knows, man.) Trump claimed to see about the same thing, except I think he talked about seeing them on the streets in America celebrating.
To me, Gaylin wasn't helping solve the problem of hatred, he was perpetuating it by reinforcing the idea of what all terrorists are. They are bad, I do think that. But... it just didn't sit right with me. I can't explain it properly. It did not sit right and it made me angry, so there you go.
More...