Nathan J. Robinson

I was a bit disappointed by this. Robinson's articles are usually effective because he genuinely engages with the work of the people he opposes. I agree with the approach that says you should argue against the strongest possible version of an argument rather than scoring cheap points.

While there were several useful portions of this book, the main idea seemed to be that you should be a socialist because it's the cool team with all the cool people having fun. Which, fine, but if you're not a socialist and you're doing your homework by reading up on the other side (ostensibly the target market for the book), being told that you're wrong because you're uncool is unlikely to sway you.

The material to make a focused and sustained case for socialism to a skeptic is present in the book, but it's not organised to efficiently make that case.… (lisätietoja)

Responding to the Right, by Nathan J Robinson, is an attempt to collect and organize responses to some of the more common conservative "arguments."

I listened to the audio version but also checked an ebook copy to check on citations. The audiobook was engaging and Robinson, who also narrated, expressed his arguments well.

Many of the conservative "arguments" are not so much arguments (though they do love to argue, or rather, yell repeatedly their little catchphrases) as they are soundbites they learned from their handlers. So when responding to the few who might actually engage in dialogue there often isn't time to lay out every nuance of a rebuttal. That doesn't mean we don't need to know more than just what we're going to say. By gaining a detailed and broad understanding, we can select the parts that speak more directly to that person's actual concern. For instance, not every person opposed to choice when it comes to abortion has the same reason. Countering someone who has, from their perspective, a religious argument with science about what forms when is not going to help much, it isn't where their opposition is focused. So more detailed knowledge is necessary in order to actually debate the same issue with someone. If the detail here bothers you, then you are really just looking for your own catchphrases to yell back at theirs.

By the way, if nuanced ideas confuse you, don't bother reading this. Don't confuse the societal concept of white privilege with some idea that every white person is privileged. There is a difference. Every white person is the beneficiary of white privilege even if their life is not one of privilege. Same idea with Black Lives Matter. It does not mean ONLY Black lives matter, it emphasizes, because Black lives have historically been discounted as disposable, that they do matter. This isn't rocket science, unless you agree with the idea of Black lives being disposable.

Also, if anyone tosses out some asinine comment about this just being opinion and with insufficient research, ignore the bigot, they didn't read the book. If anything, it is almost over researched if the notes and acknowledgements are any indication.

I would recommend this to readers who want to engage those on the right who are open to actual dialogue. You will come away with enough information to then respond to that person's actual concern. If you just want to be given a few short phrases to say in response to their phrases without considering whether or not it fits, well, this might seem like too much detail or too much like having to learn something for you.

Reviewed from a copy made available by the publisher via NetGalley.… (lisätietoja)