Arguing with Idiots: How to Stop Small Minds and Big Government

During the Middle Ages, it was somewhat common for religious arguments to be presented in written form. This format usually involved two characters, each with a different point of view. There would be questions or statements by one character which were refuted by the other character, who was a stand-in for the author's belief. With this book, Glenn Beck has revived an old format for a new age.

The book is divided into ten chapters, each one covering a single topic, and there are questions which are responded to by Beck's character. In addition, there are also little side comments, sometimes called "A.D.D. Moments" and sometimes direct quotes by people Beck doesn't agree with, said quotes putting those people in the worst possilbe light.

Love him or hate him (there appears to be no middle ground) Beck wirtes cogently (if often humorously) and well. He states his point of view on one subject and then moves on to another. Beck claims that he is a Libertarian rather than either a Democrat or a Rebublican, but I'm sure liberal readers (if there are any who actually finish this book) will be coinvinced that Beck is just another member of the "vast right-wing conspiracy" to quote Hillary Clinton at the beginning of the Monica fiasco. I don't know what he is, because he takes almost as many shots at the GOP as he does at the Dems, so I'll take him at his word about his party leanings.

Beck is conservative in the sense that he opposes "big government" and what he calls the "Nanny State", which is one that hovers over just about every aspect of American life. He fears that we are going into that situation, and there are enough signs around (for those who want to recognise them) that he might (just might) be correct. I'm a big believer in the policy of "wait and see" so I don't make any judgments on his theories and opinions.

The book will infuriate some (liberals) and comfort others (conservatives and libertarians) but it certainly is not a boring read. For those who publish reviews on Amazon or elsewhere, please at least read the entire book before opining. It's the only fair way to do it!

I like this book only because it presents an alternate perspective that is extremely uncommon in media today. I consider myself a classical liberal that will listen to all perspectives and parse out the propaganda from the truth if possible. I LOVE THE LUXURY OF FREE SPEECH. Trashing others because they have a different opinion without proper debate exposes a narrow mind. Arguing with personal insults and slogans is NOT proper debate. I see this in previous reviews of this book. I'm especially irked by this because I am Chinese American & I've heard from my older relatives that this was what the Maoists did in the Cultural Revolution. This is a really dangerous way to go & I wish people would refrain from such barbaric behavior.

This book does coverage on political issues and does cite references that are difficult to find in the local newspapers or national magazines. In fact I've noticed that many of the news articles in my local newspaper (e.g. from AP, etc.) will omit key facts in news coverage. In my own independent spot checks on facts, this book is much more correct than it is incorrect! It's not because Glenn Beck is such a great journalist. Its because the news media is doing such a lousy job in journalism. Even amateurs are better than 'professional' journalists with an agenda to shape the political will of their readers. There is a difference between objective journalism & suave propaganda. Readers have to work to discern the difference.

It's unfortunate that books like Arguing With Idiots is needed just to get an alternate view for a balanced perspective. It takes a lot of discipline to be well informed today. Bottom line: Buy this book.

The way in which the print version of this book was formatted for the Kindle results in a thoroughly confusing read.

I believe that the information and arguments Glenn Beck makes in this book are well researched and presented, and leave Progressives with little or no room for their specious beliefs. It is an important read for any person who is unsure to the actual truth in life and who care about our country and wants help the "idiots" in their life get onto a path of conservative enlightenment.

In the print version of this title, Mr. Beck uses various colors and formatting to present not only the main text but supplemental information in the form of graphics, cartoons, images, and special commentary under special headings such as "A.D.D. Moment," or "Celebrity Guest Idiot," to name two.

This use of various formatting allows a reader to logically progress through the book as it lays out arguments and answers in a logical format. A reader can, at his or her will, stop at the end of a argument or section, as they choose, and go back and read the extra information.

In the Kinlde edition, this is not possible and leaves the reader confused and lost. In this version these supplemental items appears as regular text which interrupts the flow of the ideas being presented, usaully with no warning to what is going on. They appear in seemingly random locations within the primary flow of the text, sometimes even interrupting a sentence or paragraph midstream, then jumping to another stream of thought, and then after reading another "Kindle page" or two, jumping back (again with no warning) to the main text. As I read this book, I would often have to stop and go back in an attempt to mentally construct what the format of the text of the book was supposed to be.

Additionally, for many of the graphics which contain textual information in addition to the illustration, it is extremely difficult to read due to the small size in which it is presented on the Kindle screen. This left me wondering whether I was missing something important in argument being made, and how relevant was the information I was missing.

Unless this edition is reformatted into a "Kindle friendly" format, or you have no other option but to access to this book using the Kindle, I would avoid this version of the book and go through the trouble of getting the print version.

Read the book and then review it, people. If you want to slam the author, then go somewhere else. For a lightning rod like Beck, I think the book is thought provoking, funny, and on point. Controversial? Certainly. Dull? No, sir. His section on Capitalism is quite interesting. Some of the Koolaid drinkers at both ends of the bar should be able to learn from the book's history even though both camps can find fault with Beck's "facts" and certainly his opinions. We should all be proud that people at neither political extreme disappear in the middle of the night and Beck is proud of our intricate societal fabric. Hey, is this a great country, or what?

... and proceed straight to the review (though some editor ought to have vetoed that dustjacket). It is, to start off with a positive point, entertainingly polemical to read. However, it is ultimately a depressing and on occasion wrong book. The treatment of handgun control in England is, for instance, fraught with spin. The sad history of American gun violence speaks for itself, and frankly nothing needs to be added to the horrible statistics. Little need also be added to the debate on the true construction of the American constitution on this point, which has already been much ventilated in more learned textbooks. Suffice to say, like any text, both sides have to the debate have found a way to make the constitution (whether interpreted literally, or as a living instrument) fit their preferred case. Such interpretational language games have, however, obscured the real question, which is in this case simply whether it is desirable from a social point of view to place large numbers of powerful guns into the hands of so many people. In short, the interpretation arguments are fig-leaves to hide personal choices. Equally ludicrous was the treatment of the National Health Service in the recent debate about reform of medical provision in the US. But never mind that.

What this book does - quite clearly - is show what the symptoms of the illness are which presently ravage American politics.

The first problem is the retreat to extremism in American policital discourse - which, to be clear, includes both left and right - which is disturbing, and on occasion calls to mind the ideological struggles in Europe of the 1930s (which, of course, the mocking cover chillingly evokes). America is presently caught in an age of extremes, at least as far as the rhetoric is concerned. It is, frankly, mind-boggling that a politician can be abused as a "communist" and a "fascist" at the same time. This belies a total lack of understanding of either term. Use of such divisive labels obscures the fact that the various factions in America in fact share much common ground, and share the same values on any number of issues. This need to present an "us v them" society and to treat politics as if it were a football match with two implacably opposed teams, might sell books, but in truth it only divides and weakens the country. Is that what you want?

The second problem is the co-opting of religious arguments to try and resolve political issues. The American consitution - the product of intelligent enlightment minds - carefully separates the political from the spiritual, and with good reason. Invoking God is merely an attempt to avoid clear and critical thinking and to abrogate personal responsibility for one's own choices; it is the ultimate retreat of the intellectually lazy. It also provides an unfortunate comparsion with the sorts of theocratic regimes abroad of which the United States - and the majority of the rest of the world - is rightly critical. There is no opposition between religion and politics, but they are not, and must not be, identical.

The third problem is parochialism. The US remains a super-power. It is still associated with the qualities of tolerance and opportunity, and the US remains one of the most diverse countries in the world (even if its diversity is sometimes as imperfect as it is anywhere else). Yet the political discussion - if we wish to dignify what sometimes is little more than name-calling with that label - rarely transcends the playground and rarely looks beyond the tip of its own nose. The Coulters and Frankens, the Foxes and the MSNBCs, all share a terrible burden for that. America is a global player, not that one would think that from its printed and broadcast press. This obsession with meaningless detail (whether we should call someone in public office a "Czar", who wore a flag pin and who didn't, what a group of unqualified but syndicated people said on an obviously partisan news channel discussion) is the worst kind of trivialisation of political debate. The fact is that most of today's American politicians and alleged "thinkers" will never produce the Federalist Papers, and lack the wit to write Common Sense or Walden.

There is an irony in the fact that the author of "arguing with idiots" apparently takes the view that his audience are incapable of formulating their own arguments, and must be provided with a script they can stick to. This achieves the remarkable result of insulting both those for and those against him, and tells you all you need to know about this kind of book. These authors have made their money. They have had their fun. It is time to wake up. The vice of books like this is that they create the impression that your neighbour is your hated enemy, that your family members with whom you disagree are "idiots". They are not. They just don't share all of your views. The vituperative language of these books stifles and stunts debate and the exchange of ideas. The sooner America is roused from this illness, the better it will be for America, and the world at large. I fear many who read this book will simply pour the "thoughts" of Beck, and others left and right, into the political void in their heads.