Don't buy my book

I know I'm sailing with the wind of public opinion here, but can I suggest something? Don't buy my book. It's not worth it. There are (at least) six reasons for this.
1. It's got some facts in it. Facts are bad. They create doubt. This is why so many people like talking about Iraq, Israel and Islamism. They can do so unburdened by evidence.
2. It doesn't corroborate your prejudices, whatever they are. Books and articles are only brilliant if they confirm your beliefs; no-one ever said: "There's a brilliant article by Janet Daley/Polly Toynbee/Matthew Parris, but I disagree with it." By this standard, my book's awful.
3. It can't be summed up in a few words; if it could, I'd have written a few words, wouldn't I? But best-sellers can be so summarized: God doesn't exist and if he does he's a twat; unexpected things happen; Islamists aren't very nice.
4. I don't think it's worth stating the bleedin' obvious. But the success of those books suggests this is what folk want.
5. The book's about politics. But politics is none of our business. Politics is only about what the MSM think about career politicians. Only an imbecile would pretend that real people, with ideas, should concern themselves with it.
6. If my book sells, I'll become a member of the chattering class. I'll have to go to dinner parties in North London. I dunno whether this'll be worse for me or for everyone else.
So, please, please don't buy my book. And to all those of you who haven't done so - thank you.

Comments

[Bob B]

Too late - I've already bought it. Presumably, my salvation is that I've yet not found the time to read all the books above it in the pile . .

[Peter Briffa]

Don't worry. I wasn't going to, anyway.

[MatGB]

Bbbbut. I haven't bought the book due to a state of absolute poverty at the moment, I still plan to.

Now I'm torn because you've told me not to, maybe I shouldn't bother?

[dearieme]

You're a marxist and believe in redistribution: why aren't you recommending that people steal it?

[Bob B]

"Steal"??

Expropriate, surely.

[Paul Ralley]

I promise not to buy your book,,,,, unless it comes out in paperback

[emmanuelgoldstein]

["Steal"??]

[[Expropriate, surely.]]

Liberate, surely.

Chris, I'm countersuggestible, so will purchase.

[Shuggy]

"Facts are bad."

Facts are inert.

I have to take issue with this:

"This is why so many people like talking about Iraq, Israel and Islamism. They can do so unburdened by evidence."

People can and do talk about all sorts of things without the benefit of evidence. But is there any reason to think that the average debate about Iraq, Israel and Islamism is lighter in evidence than anything else that gets discussed in the MSM or the blogosphere? I'm really not sure that these can compete with education as a topic where knowledge seems to be in inverse proportion to column inches, for example. But like education, the reason people talk about the issues you mention is because they think they're important. People might think they're more important than they are - or they might think they're important for entirely the wrong reasons. But your idea that behind the popularity and interest in these topics is the desire to have evidence-free conversations strikes me as being a little cynical, if you don't mind me saying so. If I didn't know you better, I'd worry that the book experience is making you wonder about the whole wisdom of crowds thing.

[Shuggy]

Btw, your book is the most expensive - what's that all about?

[Nick Cohen]

Oh all right then. It sounds awful.

[Chris Bertram]

is there any reason to think that the average debate about Iraq, Israel and Islamism is lighter in evidence than anything else that gets discussed in the MSM or the blogosphere?

Yes. Lots of things get discussed in the "msm" and the blogosphere, including cookery, diy, contemporary fiction, and rugby union. The people who write on those topics tend to have a reasonable grasp of the evidence. If Delia's souffle predictions were as reliable as Nick Cohen's Iraq predictions, no-one would buy her books.

[Shuggy]

Souffles vs Iraq? Two slight differences: 1) Iraq more complicated than souffles - just a tad. 2) People - yourself excepted, possibly - generally don't feel particularly strongly about souffles.

[Chris Bertram]

So you concede the point, then, Shuggy, that the average debate on Iraq etc is lighter in evidence than many things that get discussed in the MSM and the blogosphere?

As to the relative complexity of Iraq and souffles, it is indeed a great pity that many of those who "feel particularly strongly" about Iraq were led to ignore that complexity at precisely the time when attending to it would have been the smart thing to do.

[sanbikinoraion]

"Bitter, Mike?"

As Paul & Shuggy, I'll not be buying it til it's in paperback (or some cheaper form). Which is a shame, because I'd rather like to have my prejudices confirmed...

[Shuggy]

"So you concede the point, then, Shuggy, that the average debate on Iraq etc is lighter in evidence than many things that get discussed in the MSM and the blogosphere?"

No, whatever gave you that impression?

"As to the relative complexity of Iraq and souffles, it is indeed a great pity that many of those who "feel particularly strongly" about Iraq were led to ignore that complexity at precisely the time when attending to it would have been the smart thing to do."

The reference to people feeling strongly about this was meant to apply to both opponents and supporters of the invasion of Iraq. I also said the reason people felt strongly about it was because they thought it important. One assumes you do to, hence the odd post about it on your own sneering blog. Posts about souffles, on the other hand, have been conspicuous by their absence.

P.S. Has a consideration of 'complexity' moved you to re-assess the position you took with regards to Afghanistan?

[Chris Bertram]

Rather impolite of us to shout at one another in Chris's blog area Shuggy. I'll just address the question from your PS:

I still think my conclusion was correct but, nevertheless, my thinking was certainly excessively simplistic.

(I'm rather puzzled by the way that "decents" repeatedly chuck my Afghanistan article at me when I mention Iraq. It is as if they think that consistency demands that support for one intervention requires support for another. But, obviously, that would be a very silly thing to think. BTW, as I've pointed out before, my record of Kososo for, Afghanistan for, Iraq against, is the exact opposite of Nick Cohen's.)

[James Hamilton]

"I'll have to go to dinner parties in North London." Easy to avoid: move away from (insert name of an area close to NW3)

[Matt Munro]

"This is why so many people like talking about Iraq, Israel and Islamism. They can do so unburdened by evidence."

It's also why people like talking about Global Warming (although I notice this has morphed into Climate Change recently - presumably because someone has noticed that it's getting wetter and colder, not hotter and drier), recycling, carbon footprints and whether to buy Organic/Fair Trade/Grown Locally/whatever it is this week/ food.

Society is becoming anti-scientific, facts are no longer convenient because they are seen as an obstacle to the imperative to have a public discourse about the important issues of the day - important as dictated by a very small group of millionaire media types at Islingon Dinner parties. Scientific and technological progress is being replaced by superstition, cliques and groupthink. I blame feminism.

[Shuggy]

"Rather impolite of us to shout at one another in Chris's blog area Shuggy."

I wasn't shouting, but I take your point.

"I'm rather puzzled by the way that "decents" repeatedly chuck my Afghanistan article at me when I mention Iraq"

I wouldn't know why others mention your support for the invasion of Afghanistan. I mention purely because one would have thought that complexity/acquaintance with facts would make the whole business of prediction rather unwise, regardless of what position you take. I certainly didn't mention it because I think support for one invasion necessitates support for all of them.

Btw, I think I must be the only person in the blogosphere who doesn't know what this epithet 'decent' is supposed to mean, or where it came from.

[Glenn Athey]

I'll wait until the book is available second hand on Amazon. If other bloggers are anything to go by... Tim Worstall's book (used) was down to £3 on Amazon after one month.

I think the UK generally is anti-intellectual. The intellectual tradition and place in culture is much less than in other countries. In UK culture - I constantly see people make an effort not to seem too intelligent.

I have watched French and Russian TV over the past year - much more intellectual progamme content than UK TV. They do all have crap programmes, of course, but at least there's some real intellectual stuff too.

[poonihith]

Viagra (R) can take effect in as little as 14 minutes in many men, study shows New York,-- A study of men with erectile dysfunction (
[url=http://buy-viagra-onlin.org/viagra-on-line/index.html]order viagra[/url]) found that within 14 minutes more than one third of those taking Viagra 100 mg achieved an erection that resulted in successful sexual intercourse!!!

[viagra online]

hahaha What a rhetoric twist.

[mychaelahu]

company satellite warms cycles program power cosmic efficiency