to me it seemed not to be structured enough and lacked a bit of focus. additionally i quite disagreed with what seemed to be the basic judgement, but it is hard to figure out what that would be. the authors do acknowledge some parts of PC, and dismiss others as fake, generalizing a bit and failing to cite counterarguments. i did venture deeper into the whole topic, that is a plus, but not sure weither the book made me do it by leaving out parts i would have liked to see included