The Madness of Crowds
Douglas Murray's second book and it's a bit of a mess. His first, 'The Strange Death of Europe', was much better researched and much more coherently structured, but this one feels like a rant masquerading as an essay.
First up, it's not about crowds at all. I assumed it would be about how mobs form and how they operate, the way people's individuality melts away when they are part of a mob as a demonstrable, observable phenomenon. But it's actually about how he doesn't like 'SJW' identity politics, how such politics are divisive, and how he doesn't agree with a lot of the foundational dogmas of such politics. Which is all fine for the most part. 'SJW' politics are rife with internal contradictions and unanswered questions. But why then call a book highlighting those contradictions 'The Madness of Crowds' if it isn't focusing on how crowd mentality influences and is influenced by such ideas?
Second, his research is incredibly sloppy and inconsistent. Most of the examples he brings up are movies and music videos. Other times he mentions the Google image search results for certain terms. Some subjects he appears to have almost no understanding of whatsoever. For example, he outright misunderstands what 'toxic masculinity' actually means and erects strawman arguments to paint it as a hostile concept, and his entire chapter on trans people is full of misunderstandings and false equivalences.
Third, there's only the barest idea of structure to his arguments. He covers four major issues (gay people, women, race, and trans people) but within each chapter there isn't really a clear through-line of thought. It's as though he meanders from point to point, almost as they come to mind, and he uses anecdotes and detailed descriptions of Niki Minaj videos and David Letterman interviews to pad things out. The result is that I don't really know what he expects me to take away from what he's said. It feels like he's just complaining, not presenting an argument or counter-point.
Fourth, he doesn't really say anything. He complains a lot about how such ideas and activism is divisive, and he identifies plenty of the internal contradictions, many of them irreconcilable, that make 'SJW' style identity politics vulnerable to scrutiny or application, but he also never actually finishes his thoughts a lot of the time. Like when he explains in detail how searching for terms like 'white couples' on Google returns more images of black and mixed-race couples than white ones he goes as far as to suggest that "something" more than a machine learning algorithm must be going on, but he never takes that next step to suggest what. Why not, Douglas? Why bring it up if you aren't going to just say it? Why does he bring up racial IQ differentials only to then not say anything about them? The wider point of 'people aren't created equal' is fine but why is IQ the thing he specifically brings up, only to then leave the point dangling?
The book does raise some good and interesting points about how the dogmas of the radical left simply don't make sense and how the competing interests of the associated groups lead inevitably to internal conflict and contradiction, but it's mired in a juvenile rant about things Murray doesn't like or simply doesn't understand. A critical examination of the radical left's idealogical contradictions would be worthwhile, not least of all because it could help strengthen the radical left by exposing and helping correct idealogical inconsistencies and highlighting ideas that have become dogma and thus unchallengeable. But this book is not that. It's not a terrible thing to read if you pay attention to when Murray has a point as opposed to when he doesn't, but this is a major step down for him.