Basically everybody here is rating the book based on their personal ideologies and how those ideologies conflict with or are supported by this book.

These people are pretty piss-poor examples of a good reviewer.

The manifesto presents an interesting set of ideas that, as we all know, did not translate too well in their actual practice. Politics are an interesting thing where there's an infinite number of problems any person can pick out of a political ideology, and there's probably a full essay dedicated to each part of an ideology and picking it apart.

Nobody's really right. You either read the damn book or don't comment on it.