For Love of Country: Common Sense 2.0
Ratings1
Average rating4
15
Ratings1
Average rating4
In 1776, Thomas Paine anonymously produced Common Sense, a pamphlet advocating for colonial independence from Great Britain. If Paine’s revolutionary words had been revealed to the British authorities prior to their publication in the colonies, his writings most certainly would have resulted in his death. Paine insisted that British rule was directly responsible for nearly every problem in colonial society. Paine’s political views and his fellow revolutionaries’ actions led to the formation of a more perfect union. Today, that union is under attack.
Like Paine, Norman W. Holden is unabashed in his calling for renewed independence and a national uprising. For Love of Country: Common Sense 2.0 will strike at the nerve that troubles most all Americans. Sickened by our national complacency and polarization, a widening political divide, and our wayward government, Holden’s editorial and ultimate diagnosis for America may be a hard pill to swallow. With freedom at risk, Americans have little choice but to accept this cure.
Reviews with the most likes.
Reads Like General Francis Hummel or Frank Castle Monologue Yet Also Contains Points Far Right/ GOP Won't Like. This is designed to be a new version of the pamphlet Common Sense by Thomas Paine that was so influential in Revolutionary America and which clocks in at around 70 pages, depending on exact modern edition. Yet Holden repeatedly claims that he is actively not seeking to incite violence - perhaps in an attempt to stave off any legal claims - even as the book maintains a revolutionary fervor throughout its short 91 pages. While admittedly this is written from a solidly right-side-of-the-aisle perspective, there are in fact several points throughout where Holden goes "off script" for that side and genuinely advocates what are at minimum more centrist positions. Ultimately, this is an intriguing treatise that will at minimum help its opponents better understand the actual mentality of the "other side", and the only objective fault here is the absolute lack of any actual bibliography. Recommended.
Originally posted at bookanon.com.
