miss mimi i'll play along.. first of all i disagree that books like these have been on recommended lists.. maybe they arent right now but im 100% sure they have been... in fact i recently saw george bush's biography on the waterstones recommended list and he's a war criminal too. anyway that's a whole other post.
as i can't go and search the shelves right now I shall argue with your logic instead.. let's look at a reputable recommondation list:
So in your logic the guardian (one of the most reputable newspapers in the world) supports the shah of iran,taking lsd (elektric kool aid), oh and would you look at that.. the communist manifesto, plato AND chomsky are on there (all three of my examples from my last post that you said have never been recommended.. ALL THREE!
now don't get me wrong, i don't necessarily think those things are wrong in any way and obviously weren't written by a mass murderer like hitler. but politically they can be just as dangerous.. i love the ideas in the communist manifesto but we know they DO NOT work and that book has been the basis for many communist regimes that did things just as bad as hitler, and i LOVE chomsky but theres no doubt he promotes a radical left wing agenda bordering on the militant and has inspired anarchists the world over, and lastly i dont think i need to comment on how dangerous electric kool aids tales of adventures on lsd can be.
my point being again... any book of a political, philosophical, or sociological content will be potentially dangerous and definitely hated by many.. censorship and trying to pull the wool over your eyes like they dont exist is not the answer.
miss mimi i'll play along.. first of all i disagree that books like these have been on recommended lists.. maybe they arent right now but im 100% sure they have been... in fact i recently saw george bush's biography on the waterstones recommended list and he's a war criminal too. anyway that's a whole other post.
as i can't go and search the shelves right now I shall argue with your logic instead.. let's look at a reputable recommondation list:
The Guardian's 100 greates non fiction books:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2011/jun/14/100-greatest-non-fiction-books
So in your logic the guardian (one of the most reputable newspapers in the world) supports the shah of iran,taking lsd (elektric kool aid), oh and would you look at that.. the communist manifesto, plato AND chomsky are on there (all three of my examples from my last post that you said have never been recommended.. ALL THREE!
now don't get me wrong, i don't necessarily think those things are wrong in any way and obviously weren't written by a mass murderer like hitler. but politically they can be just as dangerous.. i love the ideas in the communist manifesto but we know they DO NOT work and that book has been the basis for many communist regimes that did things just as bad as hitler, and i LOVE chomsky but theres no doubt he promotes a radical left wing agenda bordering on the militant and has inspired anarchists the world over, and lastly i dont think i need to comment on how dangerous electric kool aids tales of adventures on lsd can be.
my point being again... any book of a political, philosophical, or sociological content will be potentially dangerous and definitely hated by many.. censorship and trying to pull the wool over your eyes like they dont exist is not the answer.