The writing is quirky. And difficult. Lots of short sentences. Many kind of snarky parenthetical (like this) asides (get it?). The biggest irritant is the lack of simple, fundamental definitions - liberal, Liberal 1.0, liberal 2.0, tested betterment. On the other hand, a mostly compelling case for classic liberalism.
It's very difficult to write an unbiased history of Israel. The author tries, at least at the beginning, but tilts more and more against Israel as the book progresses.
Two examples: his first mention of Yassir Arafat on page 149, he says the goal of the PLO was “liberation of the region from Israeli control”. No, the goal of the PLO was the destruction of the state of Israel and the murder of all its Jewish inhabitants.
On page 297, describing a right-wing Israeli's summation of the situation (and while there are plenty of right-wing Israelis, there are apparently no left-or right-wing Arabs), he says “the Israeli government paid a security agent to protect the area's Jewish settlers, and Jewish children were regularly ushered to and from school by armed guards”. Well, gee, maybe the government had to protect Jewish residents (all the Jews in this book are “settlers”) and children from murderous Arab attacks? Were Israeli Jews murdering Arab children?
Too bad. The history is interesting but the bias crippling. Skip this.