Tipping My Hat to Some Bad Books

Kevin Drum of The Washington Monthly writes this post about a ridiculous list put together by Human Events, a conservative magazine: Ten Most Harmful Books of the 19th and 20th centuries. As you might guess, The Communist Manifesto, Mien Kampf, and Chairman Mao's Little Red Book lead the list, but there are some interesting others, too--such as John Dewey and Alfred Kinsey. However, what really mystifies Drum is the honorable mention list, which includes Foucault, B.F. Skinner (!?) and Darwin (twice). The list is put together by some people who have academic credentials at major universities, and Kevin wonders just who these guys think they are beating up on the likes of Darwin, et al.

But what strikes me as odd is the comments section, which I usually trust because the writers seem to be a pretty smart bunch of people. Last week, Kevin asked commentors to post their educational levels, career paths, and such to see what they were like and I was impressed. Everyone was college level, and some pretty good colleges, too. So I was surprised when, in response to Kevin's challenge to name THEIR ten most harmful books, the comment section agreed that Alcoholics Anonymous was one of them--and they said it with some vitriol, too. Here's a sample.

from Joe:

Scientology (Christian Scientists late 19th century)

The Twelve Step Program (religious psuedo-science early 20th century)
AA's big blue book (or rather the political maneuvering supporting it) is to psychology what creationism is to biology.

Anything by (or attributed to) Sun Myung Moon

from SocraticGadfly:

8. AA's "Big Book" -- thanks, Joe; count in the whole 12-Step movement, originally Calvinism under a cloak and now Calvinism fused with New Ageism

I have a peculiar fascination with AA and Twelve-Step programs, and it made me wonder: were these just poor sports or did they have a point? And what has AA done to deserve this?

I've been sniffing around meetings for a while, and I can see their point: there is a streak of icky Calvinism in AA, and especially in its Southern California, "Pacific Group" form (which seems to have brethren in Texas and the Southwest), "political manuvering" of the conservative sort does make it seem sometimes like a right-wing cult, dedicated to dressing nice and having nice cars and claiming other forms of material success as proof of one's "emotional sobriety" despite pious claims of humbly recieving gods grace. And that Blue Book=psychology, Creationism=Biology simile stuck true, too. So I guess I'll have a short cocktail and think about it for a bit.

Well, maybe not tonight.