Book Jacket Review: Liberty and Tyranny: A Conservative Manifesto
Is being the host of a radio show with five million listeners ample justification for arrogance? For rising conservative star Mark Levin, seen looming in front of an enormous American flag on the cover of his recent bestseller Liberty and Tyranny: A Conservative Manifesto, the answer seems to be unequivocally yes. At first glance of this bold front cover, Levin looks like he takes himself just a bit too seriously. As it turns out, this is a gross understatement: Levin is in fact presenting himself as a vision for America’s future.
Liberty and Tyranny was released on March 24, 2009 and enjoyed 2 weeks as the New York Times #1 bestseller. At a time considered by many to be a critical juncture in our nation’s history, its success attests to the new-found political consciousness of Americans. It also demonstrates in dramatic terms the extent to which conservative thought is still a strong continuing presence in our society despite the tide of liberalism associated with last year’s elections.
Emerging from eight years of ceaseless Bushwhacking, we may certainly find rationale for the serious tone of Levin’s volume. Tired of the cheep insults and lowbrow humor that has dominated the landscape of political commentary for too long, Levin is apparently trying to attain a more dignified level of discussion. His rather blank expression contrasts heavily from both the smug obnoxiousness of liberal commentator Al Franken as well as the sexy and inflammatory resolve of conservative Ann Coulter.
This seriousness, however, is not merely about creating a dignified or perhaps “highbrow” appeal. Its purpose, aided by the overall design of the book jacket, is to reinforce a connection between himself and the founding fathers of America that he admires. The title, “Liberty and Tyranny,” after all, reminds us of the language of John Locke, one of the earlier proponents of democracy whose conservative views of property, among other things, must make him appealing to Levin. The table of contents too, containing chapter names such as “On Liberty and Tyranny,” “On Prudence and Progress,” and “On the Constitution,” explicitly evokes the language of America’s founders. Set in a boring and out-of-date looking font, it gives the book the look and feel of the most pedantic 17th century treatise. Levin himself has roughly the same facial expression — entirely devoid of sentiment — as the famous bank-note portrait of George Washington on the dollar bill.
As strong as the antiquated demeanor of the cover is, there are other forces at work as well. As one of the chapter titles “On Faith and Founding” suggests, religion plays a key role in this book. The cover almost reads like a representation of the universe from the perspective of Christianity. Below the word “TYRANNY” at the bottom of the book are flames that suggest hell. Rising above the word “LIBERTY” are the white stars of the American flag, evoking the celestial heavens. In the middle is Levin, mediating between the two extremes and ready to propagate his vision of American society through the world.
Despite an attempt to portray himself as part of a continuing tradition of American conservative thinkers that extends well beyond any one era, the man that appears on the cover of Liberty and Tyranny is too much a product of our time. His spiffy polo shirt and gray, receding hair groomed into a neatly trimmed beard suggest an America of SUVs, golf courses and country clubs. It is an America where, vastly unlike the America of over 200 years ago, religion is used to undermine a conservative message. Ultimately, Levin’s “conservative manifesto” seems far more George Bush than Thomas Jefferson.
Whether Levin is attempting to react to the provocative and emotionally charged rhetoric of Thomas Paine’s radical treatise Common Sense of 1776, or to the caustic satire of Michael Moore’s Dude, Where’s my Country? of 2003, his seriousness seems too exaggerated. The image he is trying to create is one that is too contrived to be meaningful. If this arrogance is the result of having a wildly successful radio show, let’s hope that Levin’s new status as bestselling author doesn’t make him even more egotistical.
| Print
Read a book jacket review about another conservative man: John McCain. Or you can return home.
This is one terrific book. I happened into a copy and it completely changed my view of the world. Where have I been all these years? I can see that the reviewer does not like the font, or the cover, but can’t seem to think of anything bad to say about the book itself. Is the reviewer avoiding actually reading the book? I am glad I was open minded enough to pick it up, because now I think very differently about the state of things. What I had thought over the years was liberal progress, was actually the country being on a poorly chosen course. I hope we can get back to what made this country great. I will be going to a tea party this week, even though that is not my style. It is time to stand up for what is right. Don’t read this book if you are a liberal. It might change your mind, like it did mine!
Brian Kelstone
April 13, 2009 at 1:24 pm
Yeah, the reviewer is definitely avoiding reading the book. Guys, it’s getting tired that you constantly criticize Conservatives without even using facts. We get it, lots of people ended up not liking Bush, and I consider myself among them (more for his actions, less for his accent- since when do southern accents make us stupid?). But the thing is, Obama is in the office now! Your candidate won! Be a little respectful. I don’t know many republicans who went around crying when Obama won, but I also don’t know many Northwestern democrats who didn’t go around showing off. Please, try to be more polite.
Student
April 13, 2009 at 7:45 pm
P.S. I see that he just read the book jacket- I understand that that was the point- I just don’t think it’s newsworthy or even clever :)
Student
April 13, 2009 at 7:47 pm
what kind of review is this? You’re judging the book by not only its cover but the look of the author. You are a drone.You obviously didn’t read the book and are judging people’s facial expressions. Read the book you big dope and write something useful for a change. Damn libs.
Larry
April 14, 2009 at 12:12 pm
He is “The Great One”, after all. Isn’t this moron critic transparent? Not one fact in the book can be disputed.
Tim
April 15, 2009 at 2:13 pm
THE BOOK IS NOT SUPPOSED TO BE READ. THAT IS THE POINT OF THE COLUMN. BOOK JACKET REVIEW = REVIEW OF THE BOOK’S JACKET, NOT REVIEW OF CONSERVATIVE DRONE’S UNORIGINAL TREATISE TO PLEASE HIS CLEARLY DOLTISH FAN BASE.
MC
April 15, 2009 at 11:15 pm
What an amazing book this is ! The fundamental principles of liberty were never clearer to me ever before ! If only the critics actually read the book would they know that Mark is only talking about the fundamental American values, and of how it evolved, and is still applicable today and going forward…..Libs who accept such idiotic reviews are only morons to be pitied…The reviewer has accused Mark to be “arrogant” without stating any instance of it……
Shank
April 20, 2009 at 3:20 pm
This review is a prime example of the liberals’ tendency to attack a person rather than discuss the issues. I have tried to find sources that disagree with the conservative point of view and illuminate the liberal point of view to gain a fair and informed opinion. The problem is every liberal source I turn to demonstrates the tactic I have previously mentioned. It is sad that one has to resort to rhetoric about someone’s apparel rather than illustrating through intellegent review of what the disagreements are.
Jake Harrison
April 23, 2009 at 4:54 pm
Attacking people is not a liberal tendency, it’s a partisan tendency. Read the signs at those tea parties from tax day, and you’ll see that.
Sajid
April 23, 2009 at 5:01 pm
I agree with the reviewer. Why should we cling to conservative views of property? Liberalize the property laws, so that the ownership principle is destroyed, and hand over all this hack’s property to me, at which point I’ll submit it to the inferno cradling tyranny on the cover.
William P
April 24, 2009 at 10:14 am
This book is great. If you have a brain and can look at both sides of an issue without being offended, then definitely read this book. Yes the book-jacket is kind of boring and maybe it is supposed to be a throwback to the days of the Founding Fathers to provide more credibility, but so what? It’s just good marketing. And if it really does offend you that much and you really think the author is being arrogant, well just remember to not judge a book by its cover.
If you read the book you’ll see that he does have good points. Conservatism might not be “popular” at Northwestern or among young people but there are still plenty of folks here that embody conservative principles and believe in its values, even if the GOP isn’t a perfectly precise representation of conservative values (for whatever reason).
Stop hatin’
Srevan
April 27, 2009 at 1:05 am
I do not agree one bit with the reviewer. I love this book and recommend it to all who want to grab a good read and learn something new every day. I do agree with the others who said that the reviewer is criticizing the jacket of the book and not the writing itself other than the names of some of his chapters. I want to point out at one point, where he is trying to make Mark Levin seem arrogant, he’s actually contradicting himself. At one point he says that the flag and his facial expression give the book a 1700’s appeal, where at the end of the second to last paragraph, he says the cover looks more George Bush than Thomas Jefferson. Which is it?
Aaron
April 27, 2009 at 2:04 pm
“Set in a boring and out-of-date looking font, it gives the book the look and feel of the most pedantic 17th century treatise.”
“Ultimately, Levin’s “conservative manifesto” seems far more George Bush than Thomas Jefferson.”
Aaron
April 27, 2009 at 2:10 pm
Best damned review of a book jacket I’ve ever read…
bob
May 15, 2009 at 5:25 pm
I agree with most comments. I read books from both sides of thie isle and find it hard to find any that provide logical arguements rather then opinionated retoric, but this one is the exception. So I ask the revewer not to judge this book by it’s cover.
Rich Hirth
June 30, 2009 at 2:34 pm
This idiot didn’t even read the book! His entire review was about the jacket cover and the table of contents. There isn’t one comment about the book’s actual contents! Zalman Kelber, YOU ARE ONE OF THE MINDLESS DRONES THAT THIS BOOK IS WARNS US OF! You don’t have anything substantive to write about this book, because there is nothing within the book covers that you can refute! Join the rest of us in the real world, why don’t you? This is an excellent book, written before the election of Barrack Obama! The main theme of this book is that government is a nessecary evil at best, and at worst it is an all powerful juggernaut preying on YOU, which are its means of support. Atrocities are rarely if ever commited by individuals, but historically, attrocities are committed by governments the world over. GOD BLESS AMERICA!
Jasen
August 5, 2009 at 9:55 am
To everyone out there who says they read/liked the book: Just out of curiosity, do you agree with Levin’s statement that what makes us superior to animals is property (which if you have owned more than one of any type of animals of the same species you can say is inherently false), the fact that between 1/4th and 1/3rd of his citations are from editorials and blogs, or his rants where he accuses Hispanic people of all being criminals, sexual deviants who get pregnant at the drop of a hat, and bring all manner of disease into this country?
Also, how do you respond to his assertion that America was founded by Christians? Last time I checked, Thomas Paine (infamous for writing Common Sense) wrote not one, but *TWO* papers blasting the church. In addition, to his final pamplet called “Agrarian Justice” where he advocated an inheritance tax, a social security system, and an amount of money to be paid out to everyone upon reaching maturity (Don’t believe me? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agrarian_Justice).
Also, Thomas Jefferson infamously said that “Religion retreats before Science like witches at daylight” and he, along with Madison, both went on an escapade to cut off all public funding to churches in Virginia.
Then there’s the infamous Treaty of Tripolee, signed by George Washington and approved by all the Founding Fathers alive at the time, that states in its very beginnings “America is not a Christian Nation”.
On top of that, can you reconcile Levin’s erronous statements in regards to “Christians being the most tolerant people of them all” only to go on and demonize atheists and Muslims?
In addition to that, what about his speech on how the consititution must be obeyed completely and totally, followed by his trumpeting of states opposing the constitution in the matter of slavery?
As for his opinions on FDR and claiming that “rapid industrialization ended the depression”, then I am to presume that all those tanks, planes, missiles, bullets, etc et al that the government bought during that time didn’t have anything to do with it? Also, might I point out that most of his citations were from the Hoover Institute who, surprise surprise, says that it was FDR who prolonged the depression and attempts to exonerate Herbert Hoover? (If tables were turned and there was someone quoting some kind of Roosevelt Institute saying that FDR saved us from the depression and Hoover deepend/caused it, would you be apt to believe them?)
Then there are the statistics he shows, which has unemployment during Roosevelt’s presidency steadily decreasing, along with the statement that “Every government job created destroyed half a private sector job” (Might I point out by simple mathematics that’s not at all a bad situation?)
Also, how about his statement that “Science is a dead end”, while not recongizing the fact that if it wasn’t for science things like the radio, the printing press, etc. would not be around, meaning he couldn’t spread his message?
Or how about his criticism of Obama’s speech about how in a globalized society, events all over the world affect us, while at the same time he trumpets George Bush’s invasion of Iraq as a stroke of brilliance?
Then there is his terminology, re-labeling liberals statists, proudly proclaiming Republicans as Federalists, then going on in a few chapters later to bash Federalists of America’s beginnings.
And, forgive me for making this statement because I know it will offend you greatly, but judging by your support of the Free Market I presume you very much approve of the drug trade going on throughout the world then and would not like it to be stomped out? After all, the drug trade is the only truly free market out there. Laissez-faire specifically states for there to be no rules and there are certainly no rules in that.
Also, after reading this book, I was both surprised and extremely, unbelievably sickened to see that Levin opposed the Rights of the Child and the Convention on All Forms of Discrimination Against Women. So he’s all for child labor/prostitution? He’s also for rape, enslavement, gang rape, and the general brutalization of women as well? There are some things so sickening that the idea of banning them in the harshest terms in writing should not even be given a second thought. Of course, he’s ignoring the fact that they’re *CONVENTIONS* as opposed to *INTERNATIONL LAWS* (unfortunantely). And then there’s his false statement that we’ve agreed to the Kyoto Protocols (they have yet to be signed).
How do you also reconcile his comment that he felt President Regan’s General Amnesty of illegal immigrants to be a good idea, yet he feels the need for their immediate expulsion?
And what about his statement urging people to indoctrinate their children and grandchildren? If he is such a proponent of free choice, then would he really want that to happen? After all, you’re not giving children much of a choice there. In fact, it’s being downright oppressive and tyrannical I would say.
A Student Who Read the God-Awful Thing
September 15, 2009 at 4:42 pm