Dak
mentat
I would imagine the goal of a book like this would be to figure out a way through and how to get people to talk to each other. If so, what'd you think of the solutions presented? Is the book realistic/pragmatic?
I mean, it's pragmatic and/or realistic in the sense that there's explicit recognition that there are at least three different general approaches ("Liberal", "Conservative", and "Libertarian") to politics, at least in the west anyway, and that these three approaches have different terms for similar things and place weight differently on different issues. The problem I have with the book is more meta, which is to say that it is most likely an exercise in preaching to the choir, eg most likely more libertarian leaning persons. I doubt staunch US Democrats or Republicans (that is to say, party hardliners and/or unthinking voters) are going to give two shits about understanding the differences or even themselves for that matter. It's not a lengthy read whatsoever, so getting people to read it wouldn't necessarily be difficulty due to density, but I wouldn't expect it to be helpful to the persons it would actually be potentially helpful for.