Still the Best Hope: Why the World Needs American Values to Triumph

Dennis Prager has provided a tour de force for conservative thought. First of all, before reviewing the book that was written, it is important to debunk the reviews about the book that was not written. (For those want a review of the real book, please skip down 3 paragraphs.) The 1-star reviewer below "Shade" clearly has not even purchased, let alone read, this book. This is easily proved by his question and statement: "why won't Prager tell you that the original intention of E Pluribus Unum was to indicate that out of many states (the original thirteen) one nation could be forged (with a central, federal government)? Instead he chooses to interpret this phrase from some singular conservative perspective, insisting that his is the only true and proper interpretation." But on page 373 Prager wrote, "At first the pluribus in E Pluribus Unum referred to the thirteen original colonies - and the motto was adopted in order to help forge these many colonies into unum, one nation." This is typical of those who attack Prager. They consistently attribute things to him he did not say or simply make something up, which anyone who actually listens to or reads him knows is untrue. But truth is obviously not as high a value as smearing a thoughtful conservative who changes minds and hearts every single day. "Shade" has provided yet another example proving one of Prager's main theses in section 1 of his book - the Left would rather demonize the Right than tell the truth.One more example of Shade's distortion: "In Prager's simplistic reductio ad absurdum there are only three, that's right THREE, philosophies in all the world." Prager never even suggested these are the only three "philosophies in all the world." In fact, you only have to get to page 16, still in the introduction, to see in bold letters, "Is there a Fourth - the Chinese - Alternative?" Prager then discusses their ideology as a model but dismisses it as a viable option for global hegemony. The reviewer shows his own simplistic reductio ad abdurdum by falsely assuming that viable hegemonic ideologies are the same as any ideology. Prager does not discuss anarchy, for example, since it is not a viable hegemonic ideology. Shade also fails to provide another possible global alternative that does not fall under the three Prager deconstructs.Now for the 2-star review: "It's ironic how Prager routinely criticizes the left for its narcissism, and then he turns around and writes a book about how wonderful the U.S. empire is." At least this reviewer got half of it right - Prager does consistently point out how much better Leftists think they are than conservatives, morally, intellectually, etc. Prager wrote a 400 page book and spent only 80 on the American value system, let alone the US. The other 310 pages are not about the US, so arguing that he wrote a book about the US Empire is absurd and, as with the above, demonstrates that the reviewer did not read the book and is more interested in smearing a thoughtful conservative than in truth. One more: "Prager is often critical of the government, but doesn't take on that aspect of big government that causes so much suffering around the world, the military industrial complex." Prager discusses this on pages 49-51. He also discusses and debunks the Chris Hedges work (pointing out that those like him) castigates intolerance, but seems entirely unaware of the intolerance of his own rhetoric and positions regarding Christians in the US (see page 131). Finally, he discusses the role of the US military in that very context on pages 382-387. Here he argues that the US has been - despite it's moral blemishes which he discusses on pages 380-383 - the least oppressive, least authoritarian, and most benign world superpower in human history and has liberated, among others, the Japanese, Chinese, Germans, South Koreans, Kuwaitis, and Iraqis, respectively. The fact that Japan, Germany, and South Korea have been able to turn into such wonderful societies while US troops have continued to "occupy" suggests how different the US "Empire" has been from every single other global power in recorded history. The US also leads the world in charitable giving and is the first place people all over the world look to when natural disasters or human-inflicted evils happen. Just as those in Haiti regarding the former and Kuwait regarding the latter. A final example to prove the reviewer never read the book nor likely listened to his show: "Most people who like Prager's views aren't interested in exploring alternative views." The whole point of the book is to explore alternative views and his shortest section is on the one he advocates.The book Prager did write is about the three most viable ideological systems in the world today - what he calls Leftism, Islamism, and Americanism. He provides a wonderful appendix at the end of the book listing the American and Leftist positions to major issues such as "the state," "primary source of evil," "family ideal," "individual's income," "place of religion in America," etc. Prager's thesis is that the best hope for a better world is embodied in the American value system, which is synonymous with conservatism.Prager devotes over half of the book to Leftism, precisely defining it, articulating what the ideology contains, why it is attractive to hundreds of millions of people, and its moral record during the 20th century. Leftism for Prager is embodied in the social democratic parties of Western Europe and the Democratic Party in the US. Ultimately he concludes that Leftism and all of its satellite ideologies - feminism, environmentalism, secularism, moral relativism, etc. - morally and economically bankrupt those who adhere to it. Prager contends that although its advocates use moral rhetoric and are well-intentioned, the policies they espouse produce selfishness, apathy, and, as seen in Western Europe's birth-rate, a staggering ennui. To support his case he looks not only to the obvious failures of 20th century far Left in the former Soviet Union, China, Cuba, Laos, and North Korea, but the seemingly successful cases like France, Germany, and Spain. Though he admits these are decent countries that have relatively more liberty than most of the rest of the world, their preoccupation with economic equality and state-sponsored benefits has economically and morally bankrupted an entire continent. He claims that most people in these countries do not recognize true evil - communism, Islamism, Terrorism - and instead choose to fight lesser or quasi-evils like climate change, second hand smoke, or onomastic notions of "intolerance." Prager also shows how ideas from the Left pervade our most influential institutions - the university, primary and secondary schools, many churches and other religious institutions, Hollywood, and almost all media outlets - talk radio and Fox News excluded. His deconstruction of the language that the media uses in presenting what otherwise seems like "just the news" is particularly revealing. For example, he shows how AP reports frequently choose to use terms like "sectarian violence" to describe Islamic terror while carefully avoiding the terms "Muslim, Islamic," etc. - be it violence against Christians, Jews, or fellow Muslims. They do this, Prager notes, while carefully not ascribing Islamic influences to terrorism committed by those like Nidal Hassan who screamed "Allahu Akbar," before shooting 13 innocents, was a card-carrying member of "Soldier of Allah," and raised repeated red flags about his Islamist sympathies. Finally, Prager contends that Leftism's preoccupation with having others (the state) provide for even the able-bodied citizen has, and will continue to, wear away at the fabrics of what was once a dynamic European culture. In short, they have produced a culture that stresses individual benefits but collective (and therefore no meaningful) responsibility.Next Prager analyzes Islamism, which he defines as a political form of violent Islam that is embodied in Hamas, Hezbollah, and Al Qaeda. He never seriously considers the US as possibly moving toward Islamism, but does implicitly suggest that it poses a real threat to the African continent, the Middle-East where it already dominates in many areas, and even Southern and Western Europe. He indirectly suggests that the latter could fall victim to Islamism due to their Leftist commitment to multiculturalism, inability to recognize true evil and assimilate foreigners, and their quasi-pacifism. Prager, a scholar at the Middle-East Institute at the Columbia University School of International Affairs, is critical of Islamism, but takes pains to distinguish it from other forms of peaceful Islam that are practiced peacefully throughout the world. That said, he is also careful to note that the number of peaceful adherents to Islam is irrelevant to the threat of Islamism. He cites the relatively few Nazi supporters there were in Germany in 1932 or committed communists in the Soviet Union or China as evidence to suggest that it is not the presence of a peaceful majority that matters, but the hegemonic influence of the threatening minority and the way the majority responds to that threat, that are important. For example, only 7-10% of the Islamic world supports Islamism, but that minority is still no less a threat. Finally, Prager holds out hope for the Muslim world by concluding that Islam - though it is in a low moral, intellectual, social, and economic state today, with its honor killings, intolerance of other religions, and obsession with de-legitimizing and destroying Israel - can have a bright future. He compares the medieval Christian world, which had many of the same characteristics - religious bigotry, little emphasis on liberty, etc. - to show how reformation is possible. He insists that the only way that it is possible, however, is if the Left, through organizations like CAIR, stop stymieing all criticism toward Islam and Muslims themselves unite in large numbers to condemn violence in their name. Here, as with the world in general, he believes that American Muslims hold out the best hope for Muslims elsewhere.Prager's last section, though brief, is on Americanism. Here he articulates, better than any writer I know of, the case for conservatism and American values. He insists that American values are, as inscribed on our coinage, E Pluribus Unum, In God We Trust, and, most important, Liberty. Prager contrasts these values with the Leftist values of Multiculturalism, Secularism, and Equality. Though not all Leftists disdain liberty and not all Rightists disdain equality, he carefully demonstrates where each differs. He outlines 11 total American values in addition to these three pillars, showing how reason, for example, is critically important in any culture, but is insufficient by itself. He also argues for the sanctity of human life, the distinction between animals and humans, the difference between nature and, as Jefferson would put it, Natures God, and the limits of using material wealth as the supreme value the way the Left does. Prager insists that these values are not specific to America and can be adopted by any country, using Uruguay and as an example. He draws an important distinction here - other nations may retain their own cultures while simultaneously adopting these values. Finally, Prager tackles the typical charges that Islamists and those on the Left make against America. Claims of "American Imperialism" are presented in context with comparable global powers to demonstrate how benign (despite sometimes overstepping bounds) the US has been over the last 100 years. He also presents a particularly compelling case for why America - even if one believes it is not a net force for good in the world - is better than any non-utopian alternative; namely, China, Russia, Iran, Turkey, Western Europe, and the UN.Though Dennis Prager has few moderate ideological positions (he is as ideologically pure a conservative as exists), his presentation is as calm, fair, and clear as anyone writing today of any persuasion. All Americans should read this book. Even if one detests the Right, this is as lucid an explanation of conservative thought as exists. We owe it to ourselves to read the best of those with whom we differ. This book qualifies as the best. Thoughtful moderates and liberals - though few Leftists - will find the text to be well-reasoned and the conclusions insightful, even if they disagree on certain matters. For others, it will change the way they view the world. The book is almost 400 pages, contains 350 endnotes, and at least another 100 in-text references.

Dennis Prager is one of the more thoughtful “talk-show hosts” on radio, sustaining an audience for several decades. A conservative Jew, he consistently tries to look at the “big picture” when addressing current issues and brings to his subjects a thoughtful religious perspective. He has also written several fine books, the most recent of which is Still the Best Hope: Why the World Needs American Values to Triumph (New York: Broadside Books, c. 2012). The words in book’s title were crafted by President Abraham Lincoln in 1862 when he addressed Congress and declared that America to be “the last best hope on earth.” To Prager those words still ring true, so he wrote the to defend and promote the uniquely American trinity of values, conveniently inscribed on every coin minted in this nation: “Liberty”—the personal freedom which flourishes alongside limited government and free enterprise; “In God We Trust”—which indicates that our natural rights and moral responsibilities are God-given; and “E Pluribus Unum”—which declares Americans to be a diverse people united by principles rather than blood or ethnicity. Prager wrote this book with a sense of urgency, believing we stand at a crossroads offering us three incompatible religious and/or ideological options, devoting roughly one-third of the book to each: 1) Leftism; 2) Islamism; 3) Americanism. He explains: “The American value of ‘Liberty’ is at odds with a Sharia-based society and with the Leftist commitment to material equality; ‘E Pluribus Unum’ is at odds with the Leftist commitment to multiculturalism; and ‘In God We Trust’ conflicts with both the Leftist commitment to secularism and the Islamic ideal of a Sharia-based state” (p. 10). Though he certainly has read widely and thought deeply, Prager relies more on illustrations than scholarly studies, broad generalizations rather than meticulous documentation. This is not to discount his presentation but simply to make it clear he writes for the general public, not the academy. Leftism, emerging in the French Revolution and thenceforth fueling scores of revolutionary movements around the world, is very much a religious movement, though of a secular sort. Energized by Karl Marx, it seeks to destroy Western Christian Culture and replace it with a scientifically-based, egalitarian society. Its religious nature was evident in Hillary Clinton’s touting “the politics of meaning”—granting primacy to this-worldly concerns, continually seeking to establish a heaven-on-earth through political orchestration. It dominates organizations such as the American Civil Liberties Union and the National Organization of Women and the National Council of Churches. It rules the media (e.g. the New York Times and NBC) and most all liberal arts colleges and universities (e.g. Harvard, Columbia, UCLA and Occidental). Prager thinks “Western universities have become Left-wing seminaries” (p. 97). To soften and promote their ideological posture, Leftists usually call themselves “progressives” or “liberals” or “feminists” or “environmentalists”—much like denominations within a religion—but they share some core convictions. They seek to make America a thoroughly secular place, resembling the “social democracies” in Europe which have sought to shed their national distinctions by joining the European Union, and they want to transform America to make it more egalitarian via universal health care, a command economy, minimum wages, cradle-to-grave welfare programs, affirmative action, race-based college admission policies, etc. Importantly, Leftists oppose traditional religions and seek to suppress, if not eliminate, their presence—their free expression—in the public square. Philosophically committed to materialism, they necessarily believe: “Man has supplanted the biblical God. ‘God is man,” said Marx. And man is God,’ said Engels” (p. 38). Though some of them may “believe” in a deity of some sort, they reject “the personal, morally judging, transcendent God of the Bible” (p. 40). What they really reject is special Revelation, with its clear-cut distinctions between good and evil. To Prager, who regularly teaches classes on the Hebrew Bible, “the dividing line is belief in divine scripture. Those who believe that God is the ultimate author of their scripture (the Old and New Testaments for Christians, the Torah for Jews) are rarely Leftist. On the other hand, those Christians and Jews who believe that the Bible is entirely man-made are far more likely to adopt Leftist values” (p. 40). The Left believes, above all, in improving the world, making it a better place, creating a utopia of some sort. It thinks we should not seek to understand things as they are but to devise ways to change them, to even transform such basic things as human nature. As Robert F. Kennedy said: “There are those that look at things the way they are, and ask, ‘Why?’ I dream of things that never were, and ask, ‘Why not?’” Or we’re urged to sing along with the Beatles’ John Lennon and Imagine a perfectly peaceful world cleansed of private property and freed from greed—a world where there’s “no heaven or hell” and “everyone lives for today” (p. 69). Thinking so makes it so! As “a famous dissident joke stated: ‘In the Soviet Union the future is known; it’s the past that is always changing’” (p. 209). Good intentions, not effective actions, qualify one for membership in the “inner ring” of the self-anointed saviors. “Because the Left relies heavily on feelings and intentions,” Prager says, “wisdom and preexisting moral value systems do not count for much” (p. 77). Consequently, there is an adulation and courting of young people and their tastes (e.g. clothes, slang and music). Yet despite all their allegedly “good intentions”—despite all the propaganda circulating through the schools and media—“the Left’s moral record is among the worst of any organized group or idea in history” (p. 168). Almost everything it’s “touched has made it worse—morals, religion, art, education from elementary school to university, and the economic condition of the welfare sates it created” (p. 168). Most appalling is the number of innocents murdered by Stalin, Mao, Castro et al.—100 million, according to The Black Book of Communism. Softer versions of socialism, now evident throughout Europe and touted by presidential candidate Bernie Sanders, have established ultimately unsustainable welfare programs such as Britain’s National Health Service that slowly slide into faceless bureaucracies failing the very people they claim to serve. Though claiming to represent and care for ordinary people, “If the Left had its way, the citizens of the state would be told how to live in almost every way: what to drive and when; what lightbulbs to use; what temperature to keep their homes; what men would be permitted to say to women; what school textbooks must include; when God could be mentioned, and when not; how much of their earning people may keep; what art would be funded and what art would not; what food children could be fed; how enthusiastically to cheer girls’ sports teams; and much more. The list of Left-wing controls over our lives is ever expanding” (p. 208). Turning to Islam, which along with Leftism is devoted to the destruction of Western Civilization, Prager admits he treads through a minefield wherein charges of “Islamophobia” are routinely ignited against anyone daring to find fault with any aspect of the faith. Yet we must fully understand—and dare to critique—an ideology mixing religion and politics which has for 1400 years threatened Western Civilization. One must of course try to distinguish between Islam and Islamism—the former a faith calling individuals to certain obligations, the latter a political movement promoting world domination. There are certainly decent Muslims with whom one may establish concord, but there are also legions of fanatical Islamists supporting terrorism. In fact, we must realize that Islam has historically allowed little personal freedom (whether religious, intellectual, or economic) and approves the militant establishment and expansion of its Caliphate. Thus, according to perhaps the greatest Muslim thinker, Ibn Khaldun, Islam “demands jihad, holy war” and “Muslims are therefore enjoined to wage jihad in order to make converts to Islam” (p. 251). Islamic jihadists now seek to destroy Israel and America—primarily because they prevent “the expansion of Islamist rule” (p. 288). Though such aspirations now seem to lack the necessary economic and military strength needed to accomplish them, they must be understood in order to respond to the many acts of terrorism and aggression we now face. Prager responds to a variety of pro-Islamic arguments (e.g. the Koran contains inspiring verses; most Muslims are peace-loving; Muslim Spain enjoyed a “golden age” of religious tolerance; Muslims don’t impose Islam on conquered peoples), showing that partial truths do not validate an ideology whose negative aspects mandate its rejection. Having evaluated America’s rivals, Prager turns to defending her and her “unique values,” the first of which is liberty (“the essence of the American idea”). Millions of immigrants, from 1607 onwards, have risked everything seeking various kinds of freedom (religious, political, economic) in this land. For example: “More black Africans have immigrated to the United States voluntarily—looking for freedom and opportunity—than came to the United States involuntarily as slaves” (p. 313). Prizing liberty, many generations of Americans favored limited government because personal “liberty exists in inverse proportion to the size of the state. The bigger the government/state, the less liberty the individual has. The bigger the government, the smaller the citizen” (p. 316). As a God-given right, liberty stands rooted in the very Being of God as revealed in the Judeo-Christian Scriptures, and He is absolutely essential as the sustaining Source of all values. As John Adams insisted: “Our constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate the government of any other.” Explaining how these values earlier helped shape America, Prager provides scores of important illustrations regarding such things as individual responsibility, distinctions between good and evil, the sanctity of property, marriage and life.

I give the book: --- FOUR MINUS ---Overview: This book focuses on three subjects, discussing each: 1) Leftism, 2) Islam, and 3) the American value system. It is the author's claim that one of the three will dominate the future (most of the world, if I interpret Prager correctly), and that - over time - only the latter is sustainable, and that these three ideologies are incompatible (I believe the latter is correct). The book discusses ideas and positions. Prager claims (correctly) that Leftism is a secular religion. Because Leftism is fundamentally different from Americanism; and because only Americanism truly stands in the way of Leftism (he claims), the Left - worldwide - is anti-American. Although Leftism and Islam ideologically are enemies, Leftism and Islam are allied against Americanism. That is why the Left around the world intervenes on behalf of Islam and deems any critique of Islam as Islamophobic. Prager is a God-religious man, and his version of conservatism is the (classical) God-based American one. There are some flawed arguments in the book, mostly connected to Prager's belief that it is necessary to believe in God. While the book's two first sections (Leftism and Islam) are close to excellent, I experience serious problems with parts the latter section because of the author's tendency towards essentially placing all who do not believe in God in one and the same cubicle. So while Prager's book starts out as a much needed attack on Leftism and Islam in its present form, and a defense of American values and the Western system of liberty and democracy (to the extent liberty still exists), in the third section it more transforms into an attack on all who do not believe in a monotheistic God and in God-based moral values.Before continuing I find it correct to notice that from a European point of view, Leftism and Islam are allied against the Western world, although more so against America because of its influence and strength. I interpret Prager as discussing the - apparently - three MAJOR alternatives that exist today. That of course can be disputed. There are differences between American conservatism and both European conservatism and classical liberalism/libertarianism. I do not believe a decline in West will necesarily follow as a consequence of not believing in God (in its Judeo-Christian version), because Leftism is not the only possible - or plausible - alternative for secular individuals and societies. It seems more and more people are attracted to a moderate version of right wing libertarianism, and I believe such a system could be a sustainable alternative, giving some changes in this ideology.--------------Few Europeans will have heard of Dennis Prager, but in America he is quite famous (206 reviews on Amazon.com). Prager is a syndicated radio show host, columnist, author of several books and a public speaker. He has taught Jewish and Russian history at college level.Why would a European read Prager's book? Well, to find out more in depth how the "American Right" thinks (if one can put "the Right" in one box). In contrast to how (in box)" the (American) Left" thinks, something we are far more familiar with, since mainstream media and most universities in both US and Europe are dominated by Leftism. Which book of many? Chance enters, and since Prager's book received a lot of attention and praise in America, that was my choice.Leftism:Leftist ideology spans from democratic socialism to extreme communism. As Prager's points out, it is important to understand that Leftism is not only a value system, but a fundamental way of understanding the world. Many Leftists let their ideology direct their lives, and some are willing to kill for it. I add that the latter is exemplified by Marxist-Leninist revolutions with its political cleansing (in contrast to ethnic cleansing and racial cleansing).In my view this part of Prager's book is the best and most thorough one. Half its length covers Leftism and Leftism's moral record. I believe Prager has a correct understanding of what Leftism is, and what motivates the Left. I have held the same view about Leftism myself, now it's developed a little further. I strongly recommend this part of the book to all who wants more in depth to understand Leftism, its values, actions and psychology.An example of the religious character of Leftism is the term adopted by Hillary Clinton when she was First Lady: "the politics of meaning". Prager: "This term was highly meaningful to the Left, but meaningless to conservatives, [because] conservatives do not look to government and politics to find meaning. They look instead to their own lives." This shows the different - and dangerous - nature of Leftism. Prager's explanation is that "...with the collapse of God-based religion on much of the Left, Leftist religion has filled the meaning void." I believe it is correct that for true Leftists, a "new" secular religion fills a "meaning void", but I disagree with his claim that all humans need a religion. However, many people seem to need a religion if life is to have meaning. So if a higher education or some "cultural development" for many leaves a God-based religion out of the question, a secular religion can "step in" and fill the "meaning void" for those experiencing one. Realistically, this is a correct description of true Leftists. For we should consider that one of the most essential characteristics of Leftism (After Marx) is the need to have Utopia created here on Earth, now! Prager states: "Politics becomes the vehicle to achieving this... For the Left politics is a way to transform the world; for conservatives, politics is primarily a way to stop the Left from doing so."This shows the fundamental difference between not only Leftism and conservatism, but between Leftist and non-Leftist political ideologies in general (Nazism is contrary to Prager's belief essentially a Leftist ideology). True Leftists (there are many of them!) are never, ever going to leave you in peace to live your life as you yourself considers best. As long as you "shut up" and let Leftists continue to infiltrate media, schools, universities, and civil institutions, and conquer the government without interfering, they will not notice you specifically. But if you become political active against them or successfully raise your voice in the media against them, in order to stop them in their scheme to create their version of society, using the people as guinea pigs, they will, well, come after you.This leads to a subject discussed in Prager's book: How the Left continuously and viciously demonize any opposition to their plans "for a better society", and constantly twist everything opponents say against Leftwing action and policy. Prager's book is filled with examples of how media persons and Leftist politicians, even university professors, treat opponents and especially conservatives. In almost every case he offers solid references that readers can check out themselves. Europeans of age will recall Leftist behavior and agitation in Europe in the 1970s and 1980s. Furious and virulent Leftism is active in America today, and I'm shocked by some of the examples Prager offers.Now, pointing to abuse of truth, reason and language alone is not enough to make a book interesting. Prager's book is interesting because he "connects the dots". Mostly he offers intellectually satisfying explanations of why Leftism must be as it is. Why Leftism cannot accept opposition. Why they constantly are "at war" with society. To give just one example: To conservatives (and libertarians) the highest political value is liberty. Liberty demands, to be feasible, the in practice smallest possible state (government). For the Left, however, material equality is the highest political value; even the highest moral value. Therefore, when it really comes down to it, liberty is not held in high esteem by the political Left, as Prager excellently demonstrates. Why? Because demanding liberty is 'to throw a wrench in the machine' that will create material equality. And since a fundamental aspect of Leftism (connected to utopianism) is intention-based wishful thinking, Leftists subconsciously believe most humans indulge in intention-based wishful thinking. So for the Left the "conservative cry", in Prager's words, "for liberty is little more than a cover for preserving economic inequality." So how can the Left not be at war with "the Right"? Left-wingers believe they "know for certain" that conservatives are human beings with bad intentions, that they are evil (even though they accuse conservatives for believing in such concepts as "good" and "evil").IslamReading Prager has also confirmed my own understanding of what Islam - Islamism - is, and the danger it represents. Prager is careful when it comes to morally assessing religions, but "dares" it anyway Fortunately, because, as Prager eloquently puts it: "How could a book purporting to evaluate competing ideas for humanity's improvement not evaluate Islam, an intensely proselytizing religion with over a billion adherents? And how could one of the world's most popular doctrines - one that offers itself as incomparably superior to all other ways of life, secular or religious - not expect to be evaluated?"The amount of violence that historically has been, and today is, committed in the name of Islam makes an assessment of Islam necessary. Again Prager offers a lot of examples of both Islamist attitudes and actions, supported and explained further with the use of Suras from the Koran. It cannot be plausible denied that Islam, as it is understood and practiced today in most of the Islamic world, is a serious problem for peace and prosperity throughout large parts of the world.The American value systemThe American value system, Prager says, is the trinity of Liberty, In God We Trust, and E Pluribus Unum. The latter means "out of many, one" - out of many cultures, immigrants from all over the world, one unity - a country, a people with an identity, has formed. This, Prager holds, is unique in the world, and he is probably right. If Prager is correct in stating what the American value system is, one must at least to some extent conclude that 'liberal (Democratic Party) America' no longer represents the American value system. But I leave that problem to Americans, and only mention is for readers to reflect upon.The major part the book's final section treats the 'In God we trust' part of "the American value system" (50 of 90 pages). Although interesting, for me this part of Prager's book mainly consists of unsubstantiated assertions, because it claims that only if moral values are God-given are moral values "objective". The problem here is Prager's assertion that "secular moral values" can be nothing more than personal preferences, thus leading to moral relativism. Prager seems to claim that all of us in time will end up as moral relativists unless we believe in God. Well, I certainly don't believe this is happening to me, and I don't believe in God (as an agnostic I neither deny the existence of God). Now, moral relativism constitutes an essential part of Prager's argument against Leftism, and I believe most non-Leftists are against moral relativism. I certainly argue against this absurd Leftist hypothesis.I believe Prager is mistaken. It is not so that not believing in God must lead to moral relativism. Essential knowledge: Cultural neo-Marxists put together the hypothesis of moral relativism with the specific aim of destroying Western capitalist societies from within. The aim was moral deterioration and a breakdown in belief in capitalism. They did this because they discovered that empirical findings refuted essential parts of Marxist theory, namely historical (dialectic) materialism. They realized that the working class in industrialized countries would not start the long hoped for proletarian revolution Marx had promised (hypothesized). So they had to come up with an alternative scheme. Cultural relativism is part that that evil plan. So when Prager essentially spreads "the same rumor", although from very different motives (or beliefs), those who simply don't believe in God, receives the same message from two different and mutually exclusive parts of society. The terrible result could be an increased belief in cultural relativism.Finally: All Prager says about liberty is correct and well, but unsatisfactory from the point of view of a political philosopher. Too little space is dedicated to liberty, and instead of giving a clear definition of liberty, Prager is satisfied with applying liberty to different areas of life in the form of a list (political, religious, free speech, etc.). He does have important things to say, though, like this, which you should mind: The bigger that state, the smaller the citizen. I also have to mention that in this last section of his book, Prager too often resort to cherry-picking to prove his point. That is a drawback for the book.

The USA is a country of extremes (there is extreme religion and an extreme counter culture), so that people tend to see things in terms of black and white. There is one the one hand extreme prudery and on the other extreme salaciousness. Prager is also a man of extremes. He seems to suggest that we have to accept his Right-wing version in toto. He also omits to point out that most of the elements of American counter culture (such as political correctness, gender neutral language, obscene language in films, and pornography) are recent imports from the USA into Europe. Much of British society, for instance, relies on compromise, but these recent American imports have upset this balance. He also neglects to say that what has had such a positive impact on American society is not so much the US constitution (influenced by deism and the French Revolution) but religious revivals (meaning not evangelistic services, but an exceptional and powerful movement of the Spirit of God).

An absolutely spectacular book, that is radiating with knowledge and wisdom. Mr Prager, very elegantly explains the belief and dangers of Leftist and Islamic values, and why they, in their current incarnation, do not compare to American values.He perfectly explains why the world needs American values in order to truly triumph.

Si quieres entender las consecuencias negativas que tienen la izquierda y los islamistas sobre los ciudadanos libres y las razones que han hecho a los Estados Unidos la potencia que es en la actualidad, deben de leer este libro.Dennis no es políticamente correcto, llama a las cosas por su nombre, lo cual hace su lectura una experiencia refrescante.

Mr. Prager erläutert in diesem Buch ausführlich (manchmal generalisierend, aber niemals falsch), die Wichtigkeit der liberalen und konservativen amerikanischen Grundwerte für eine funktionierende Gesellschaft.Wer sich politisch stark links sieht und nicht bereit ist, anderen mit offenem Ohr zu lauschen, der wird dieses Buch nicht leiden können. Wer aber auf der Suche nach Weisheit und Antworten (z.B. auf die Frage, warum Sozialismus wie der Europäische nicht die beste Idee ist) ist, für den kann "still the best hope" nur empfohlen werden.Mit besten Grüßen.