Dangerous books
 

A certain website just listed the ten most dangerous books of the 19th and 20th centuries.

http://www.humaneventsonline.com/article.php?id=7591

I’m going to have to call “bullshit.” The top ten most dangerous books are –

1. Bill Clinton - “My Life”
With over 1000 pages between its covers, this book is a monster. The sheer mass of this tome makes it a danger to anyone who attempts to lift, tilt or handle it with out a mechanized gantry and qualified riggers.

2. Irene Kassorla – “Nice Girls do and you can too!”
This exploration of women’s intimacy and sexuality was found on our bookshelf when I was in sixth grade. I read all the dirty parts with a raging pre-teen boner before realizing that it was my MOTHER’S book. I still carry the scars from the resulting psychic, Freudian trauma

3. Hunter S. Thompson – “Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas”
This book led an entire generation of college students to slur, “Heck, Hunter Thompson ate more drugs than this, and he turned out OK. Are you just going to melt into the carpet, or are you going to pass the bong?”

4. God – “The Holy Bible/Torah/Koran”
Disagreements over the various versions of the Abrahamic religious texts have killed more people than we can count. Danger! Danger!

5. Mother Russia – “The Protocols of the Elders of Zion”
Speaking of Jews, this little piece of literary poop certainly didn’t do them any good.

6. Madonna – “Sex”
Published at the height of her popularity and non-stop appearances in my high-school masturbatory fantasies, this book was responsible for a horrifying number of paper-cuts in embarrassing places.

7. Sears – “Basic Home Improvement & Maintenance”
The number of inept homeowners tricked into projects WAY over their heads is staggering. Uncounted nail gun accidents, electrocutions, severe burns, and ladder dives are all the fault of this book.

8. Farley Mowat – “And no Birds Sang”
The harrowing first-person account of a young Canadian infantryman in World War II only serves to reinforce the dangerous myth that Canada has an army.

9. ?? – “The Tibetan Book of the Dead”
I don’t even know what this is. The title alone scares the shit out of me. It must be dangerous. Very very dangerous. Stay away from this book.

10. Charles Dickens – “Great Expectations”
The most boring book in the world. Dangerously boring. Reading, discussing or even recalling the title page of this book will cause a narcoleptic reaction, plunging the victim into a boredom-induced coma. Thisdd ;sodfjl;lkfs dhjggggggggggggggggggggg

Whoa. Sorry. Must have kinda passed out there. Hit my head on the keyboard…gotta go lie down…

Sears – “Basic Home Improvement & Maintenance”
The number of inept homeowners tricked into projects WAY over their heads is staggering. Uncounted nail gun accidents, electrocutions, severe burns, and ladder dives are all the fault of this book.

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

harry potter should be put up there. its storming the world and making kids dress up as harry. scary!

not to start debates, but I can see how the Koran would cause danger (Fundamentalist Muslims such as those who bomb and hijack planes)....but how are the Torah and Bible dangerous? Fundamentalists usually aren't violent, or shouldn't be anyway.

I hope you are inviting us to add to the list. :)

11. Mark Twain - "Huckleberry Finn" The horror is that this book has been on school library shelves for decades upon decades. Thankfully, someone discovered the "N" word and has dutifully insisted that it be dumped in the burn barrel.

There have been Jewish radical terrorists -- the Jewish Defense League, for example. And fundamentalist Christians have killed, or advocated or excused the killing, of doctors who perform abortions. Also, certain fundamentalist Christians who believe the end times are near are doing everything they can support a strong and warlike Israel, because they believe the prophecy from the Book of Revelations that Aramageddon will begin with an attack on the Holy Land. They're trying to _make_ the prophecy come true by affecting foreign policy in that part of the world.

And if you were really talking danger, I'd include both the Communist Manifesto and the U.S. Constitution (largely because so many people who worship it, don't actually understand it at all, or their own rights and responsibilities under it).

I don't want to hijack this thread, but Raptor...ever heard of the Crusades?
Back to our scheduled programming....

:)

Dang people.... take it to Politics, why doncha?

http://cheston.com/pbf/PBF050ADBookWorld.jpg
http://cheston.com/pbf/PBF050ADBookWorld.jpg

Most dangerous book I own is a leather bound edition of the dictionary..dropped it on my toe once.. god it hurt!!!!

oh my goodness, what is this world coming too :( that site is totally messed up

the Tibetan Book of the Dead is about the concept of dying and rebirth and concepts about life after death . . . just about as dangerous as the bible ;)

http://www.lib.virginia.edu/small/ex...d/western.html

"Translations and Interpretations of the Books of the Dead
Death in the twentieth century is at once imminent and invisible. Lulled by the false comforts of medical and technological advancement, western culture dreams that progress will domesticate once and for all death's senseless malignancy. Science has offered many solutions to life's questions, but has yet to explain, for example, the spark of new life, the mysterious workings of consciousness, or a person's fate after death. As this exhibit has hopefully demonstrated, the Tibetans possess a vibrant wealth of literature dealing with the nature of consciousness and the dying experience. For centuries Tibet has engaged in the systematic study and analysis of the human death process as a cautious and practical preparation for this inevitable event. In the past several decades, many spiritually inquisitive westerners from both Europe and the United States have turned to the wisdom of Tibet's mature religious understanding for answers to those questions that science and medicine have failed to address. In the end, there is not a single human being who is not going to die, sooner or later. It is therefore impractical, according to some opinions, not to examine the issue with the greatest concern and not to benefit from the trials and errors of ancient tradition. It is this view that has motivated many of the western studies on the Tibetan Books of the Dead, and it is in these studies that Tibet's sophisticated methods of dealing with death and dying are appropriately recognized as a skillful, compassionate, and humane response to life's certain end. "


Sweetpea

Jiminy Christmas, that's a bizarre list. The Kinsey books, Democracy and Education, Positive Philosophy, feminism, environmentalism, psychology/sociology and evolution are all harmful? I can understand disagreeing with their philosophies, but calling them harmful when there are things like The Anarchist's Cookbook out there?

And not a single vote for The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, possibly the most evil piece of literature every produced, which should be in the top 5, possibly the top book itself? Amazing.

raptor - after the crusades, check out the spanish inquisition, and also galileo

have to blame the people who interpreted it and used it as a tool for their shit

The Bible, the Torah, the Koran and the like weren't 19th and 20th century books, so they wouldn't qualify.

What a bunch of idiots, I mean Honorable Mention for "Origin of the Species" and "Descent of Man"?! What is wrong with those people at Human Events?

Their "arguments" are hilarious: "The Nazis loved Nietzsche".... wow, that really shows how evil Nietzsche was, we should burn his books... :rolleyes:

It amuses me how many people did not even follow the link :)

That site is hardcore Conservative, which would explain any book that could be interpreted as liberal. Like the Communist Manifesto and Das Kapital. (Why do conservatives have such seething rage towards communists) Also explains the Darwin books, but Silent Spring? The book that helped to stop people from spraying deadly pesticides that were killing birds, squirrels, and small dogs?

Well I guess it harmed the industry?

I think the humourous tack of this thread should have been the first clue.

HEY wait a minute... Don't... mess... with... the... Canadian Military... (BigBen? You out there?)

exactly, and to suggest that silent spring is bad. sickening that there are people like that in the world.

But the list is a big load of crap that there should be no discussion, a number of books in the list werent even released in the 19/20 century, he disses books he admits he never read. what a peice of utter dribble, a waste of precious electrons

d'OH! Good point.

I'll agree that My Life was dangerous... It was so excrutiatingly dull and so damn long winded that a person could easily have died of boredom reading it...

I'd agree with the assessment of Great Expectations... mind numbingly dull -- thank god for Cliff Notes... otherwise I never would have gotten past grade 10...

If you read, attempted to read, or at tried to get the gist every book on that list; I bet you learn more about the current American conservative movement than anything else.

Maybe instead of God's book(s), I should have included Einstein's Theory Of relativity. It wasn't a book, per se. More of a pamphlet. But it lead to nuclear weapons. I've heard they are dangerous.

that's quite a list from those fine folk at "human interest"--the commentary is staggering in its idiocy--nazis loved nietzsche?--but about what i would expect from such a motely assortment of ultra-reactionaries.

there were a couple of surprises on it--comte? dewey's educational philosophy? good lord, how dare anyone imagine that teaching students to think might be more important than "traditional character building"

it is a kind of frightening glimpse into the intellectual backwater--if you read through the "glosses" that follow each of these "dangerous books" it appears that these inhabitants of the backwater would prefer a kind of late mideval world in which god runs the show, the peasants know their place and the affluent can do as they like.
it is a bit of a shame that this list is not more widely distributed---it is exemplary in its way.

http://pages.cthome.net/andbookstoo/bookburn.jpg

When I think of dangerous books, my first thought is Loompanics Unlimited. But that's not what we are talking about here.

I saw the original list yesterday from some blog, but I can't retrace it right now. My favorite part of the listing was "And, as a bonus, the bottom of the page lists the 15 biggest douchebags of the 20th century". Follow the link to see...

Anyone here willing to argue that 1. The Communist Manifesto didn't lead to the most human death and oppression seen in human history?

Oh, Clavus you sly, toilet brush cup using devil, you. :p

Well, I see a couple of Commie books...a sex book...a nazi book...women's lib book...and a couple of books that encourage independent thinking....

I can't imagine why the hardcore conservative (thanks, Slavakion) and his party, which has been largely co-opted by Christian fundamentalists would think that these books are "dangerous." :rolleyes:

Sure there are some seriously dangerous books out there (Gilda mentioned two nice examples), but they have Commies to stomp out, sex to demonize and everyone hates Nazi's, right?

A short sighted and stunted list from short sighted and stunted minds.

That really says all you need to know right there. All secret code words and phrases used in the last 10 years (it's what I'm familiar with) to denounce the damned Democrat.

On a side note...God forbid we actually teach our children to think and come to their own conclusions rather than expecting the mindless recitation and regurgitation of facts from a mindless automaton.

I need to go scrub my brain.

The Count of Monte Christo - I was so into this one, and I'm such a book addict, that I attempted to read it on a shelf just outside the shower while I bathed. Ended up slipping and smacking my head on the faucet.

ustwo: help me figure this out:

what---exactly--in the communist manifesto has resulted in:
i am not interested in the usual rightwing nonsense about how marx lead to stalin--a claim so idiotic that it is sometimes hard to know where to start with it. read the manifesto and tell me *exactly* where you find anything like a logic leading toward your presumed outcome?

do begin this, you would have to actually read the manifesto and maybe then investigate something of the history of the workers' movement/left from the 1860s through the late 1920s.

i would imagine that you have done neither, but perhaps i am wrong, so please, explain the logic of your position and give specific supports for it.

as for relative deaths:
gee, i suppose that depends upon who is counting, doesn't it?

for example, the rush of european countries to set up colonies in africa was arguably a result of pressures for raw materials created by shifts in the scale of regions of capitalist production. so the entirety of the colonial period in africa--that of direct physical domination--which gets underway after 1870--is a result of capitalism.
colonialism, and all its brutality, could get chocked up to capitalism.
how many deaths?
who is counting?

or you could think about the working class and poor folk who died as a result of the unfolding of the logic of the capitalist social order even in europe and america--not to mention more recent versions of similar processes exported for your greater consumer convenience here in the metropole....how many? well no-one really knows because no-one counts--this is a benefit of having and retaining political power--you get to shape how problems are understood, count those features that you like, refuse to count those which you dont.

as for deaths that resulted from direct repression--you might think about the labor wars in the united states from the late 19th century through the period following world war 2. better not to do that.

you might also wonder about the relationship between world war 1 and levels of capitalist overproduction in weapons, etc. for example.

it is really unclear to me that you have a leg to stand on, ustwo, in terms of this argument, but please, go ahead and provide your demonstration. i'd be happy to read it, even if i disagree.

3. Hunter S. Thompson – “Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas”
This book led an entire generation of college students to slur, “Heck, Hunter Thompson ate more drugs than this, and he turned out OK. Are you just going to melt into the carpet, or are you going to pass the bong?”

RIP HST...if it was what Dr Gonzo wanted, so be. and i doubt that the college kids actually read the book...prolly watched the movie. now THAT says something right there. don't boycott a man who wanted his own ashed blown out of a circus cannon! this guy deserves to admired.

or, lets set the start to the late 1400's to mid 1500's when the economic conquest and colonialization of North America began with Christopher Columbus, John Cabot & Jacques Cartier.

Please, the Bible (or perhaps religion as a whole) is 'responsible' for a hell of a lot more deaths and hundreds more years of oppresion than communism.

Ya know, I was just trying to be silly in the face of some totally asinine far-right BS. But if some of y'all want to drag this into the political sewer then let me state right here that the Bible and its related books have inspired more killing than any other books, including Commie pinko books. Besides the Crusades and Inquisition, you have countless battles between Catholics & Protestants, Protestants and other Protestants, Sunnis and Shiites, Jews and Muslims, Muslims and infidels of various stripes, the Church-run near-genocides of Latin and South America a la Cortez and friends, etc. etc.

"Lost the body, but saved the soul"

http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/COM.FIG1.GIF

http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/COM.ART.HTM

Bible is the worst eh?

:hmm:

In what will be my last politcal statement on the matter, I think I should point out how the humor-challenged Mr. Ustwo arrived at his myopic conclusion. He looked at a century of death, while those he refutes looked at thousands of years.

If Ustwo went to school in Kansas, it is entirely possible that he was taught that the world is but 100 years old, hence the confusion. If this is the case, I am terribly, terribly sorry.

Clavus, any chance of bringing your intended humor back to this topic? I tried, to no avail. :(

Was that list supposed to be serious? Or am I the only one who got the joke?

maybe this will help

http://www.mightywombat.com/toons/cooking.gif

note I said Fundamentalists. Catholics included (and still do) a lot of extra traditions and beliefs, and even added a whole section (the Apocrapha, sp?) to it. IMO, Catholics aren't Fundamentalists, and therefore they don't count towards destruction caused by the Bible.