What do you think?
Rate this book
Confronting Series #2
Confronting Evil: Assessing the Worst of the Worst
By the #1 bestselling history author in the world, Bill O'Reilly comes a dramatic confrontation with good, evil, and the worst people who ever lived.
The concept of evil is universal, ancient, and ever present today. The biblical book of Genesis clearly defines it when Cain kills his brother Abel out of jealousy. Evil is a choice to make another suffer. As long as human beings have walked, evil has been close by.
Confronting Evil by Bill O'Reilly and Josh Hammer recounts the deeds of the worst people in Genghis Khan. The Roman Emperor Caligula. Henry VIII. The collective evil of the 19th century slave traders and the 20th century robber barons. Stalin. Hitler. Mao. The Ayatollah Khomeini. Putin. The Mexican drug cartels. Collectively, these warlords, tyrants, businessmen, and criminals are directly responsible for the death and misery of hundreds of millions of people.
By telling what they did and why they did it, Confronting Evil explains the struggle between good and evil--a choice every person in the Judeo-Christian tradition is compelled to make. But many defer. We avoid the life decision. We look away. It's easier.
Prepare yourself to listen to the consequences of that inaction. As John Stuart Mill said in his inaugural address to the University of St. Andrews in 1867: “Bad men need nothing more to compass their ends, than that good men should look on and do nothing.”
"[What stands out is] Petkoff's bravura performance, the fine sound quality, and the exceptional direction and editing. Indeed, this is an impressive audiobook" — AudioFile on Hitler's Last Days
A Macmillan Audio production from St. Martin’s Press
The concept of evil is universal, ancient, and ever present today. The biblical book of Genesis clearly defines it when Cain kills his brother Abel out of jealousy. Evil is a choice to make another suffer. As long as human beings have walked, evil has been close by.
Confronting Evil by Bill O'Reilly and Josh Hammer recounts the deeds of the worst people in Genghis Khan. The Roman Emperor Caligula. Henry VIII. The collective evil of the 19th century slave traders and the 20th century robber barons. Stalin. Hitler. Mao. The Ayatollah Khomeini. Putin. The Mexican drug cartels. Collectively, these warlords, tyrants, businessmen, and criminals are directly responsible for the death and misery of hundreds of millions of people.
By telling what they did and why they did it, Confronting Evil explains the struggle between good and evil--a choice every person in the Judeo-Christian tradition is compelled to make. But many defer. We avoid the life decision. We look away. It's easier.
Prepare yourself to listen to the consequences of that inaction. As John Stuart Mill said in his inaugural address to the University of St. Andrews in 1867: “Bad men need nothing more to compass their ends, than that good men should look on and do nothing.”
"[What stands out is] Petkoff's bravura performance, the fine sound quality, and the exceptional direction and editing. Indeed, this is an impressive audiobook" — AudioFile on Hitler's Last Days
A Macmillan Audio production from St. Martin’s Press
Audible Audio
Published September 9, 2025
2051 people are currently reading
6165 people want to read
About the author
Bill O'Reilly
59 books3,444 followersBill O'Reilly's success in broadcasting and publishing is unmatched. The iconic anchor of The O'Reilly Factor led the program to the status of the highest rated cable news broadcast in the nation for sixteen consecutive years. His website BillOReilly.com is followed by millions all over the world.
In addition, he has authored an astonishing 12 number one ranked non-fiction books including the historical "Killing" series. Mr. O'Reilly currently has 17 million books in print.
Bill O'Reilly has been a broadcaster for 42 years. He has been awarded three Emmys and a number of other journalism accolades. He was a national correspondent for CBS News and ABC News as well as a reporter-anchor for WCBS-TV in New York City, among other high-profile jobs.
Mr. O'Reilly received two other Emmy nominations for the movies "Killing Kennedy" and "Killing Jesus."
He holds a history degree from Marist College, a master’s degree in Broadcast Journalism from Boston University, and another master’s degree from Harvard's John F. Kennedy School of Government.
Bill O'Reilly lives on Long Island where he was raised. His philanthropic enterprises have raised tens of millions for people in need and wounded American veterans.
http://us.macmillan.com/author/billor...
In addition, he has authored an astonishing 12 number one ranked non-fiction books including the historical "Killing" series. Mr. O'Reilly currently has 17 million books in print.
Bill O'Reilly has been a broadcaster for 42 years. He has been awarded three Emmys and a number of other journalism accolades. He was a national correspondent for CBS News and ABC News as well as a reporter-anchor for WCBS-TV in New York City, among other high-profile jobs.
Mr. O'Reilly received two other Emmy nominations for the movies "Killing Kennedy" and "Killing Jesus."
He holds a history degree from Marist College, a master’s degree in Broadcast Journalism from Boston University, and another master’s degree from Harvard's John F. Kennedy School of Government.
Bill O'Reilly lives on Long Island where he was raised. His philanthropic enterprises have raised tens of millions for people in need and wounded American veterans.
http://us.macmillan.com/author/billor...
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 241 reviews
September 29, 2025
I usually like his books but this one got political. He mentioned Nazi rhetoric in the trump election that was not related to the content other than to defend Trump.
The end of the book where he gives his own opinion in what makes people evil… made me cringe. One factor he mentions is the decline of theological belief. Hmmm… seems Ayotollah, Hitler, and “Bloody Mary were pretty sound in their theological beliefs. To say that people are evil because they lack religion is ignorant. Maybe religion is the problem. He also left out a LOT of evil doers. Where are the serial killers who rape and murder women and children? The Popes who rape little boys? The Human sex Traffickers who get arrested and mysteriously hang themself awaiting trial?
The end of the book where he gives his own opinion in what makes people evil… made me cringe. One factor he mentions is the decline of theological belief. Hmmm… seems Ayotollah, Hitler, and “Bloody Mary were pretty sound in their theological beliefs. To say that people are evil because they lack religion is ignorant. Maybe religion is the problem. He also left out a LOT of evil doers. Where are the serial killers who rape and murder women and children? The Popes who rape little boys? The Human sex Traffickers who get arrested and mysteriously hang themself awaiting trial?
August 21, 2025
Special thanks to #Netgalley and MacMillan Audio for allowing me the opportunity to read this book.
Bill O’Reilly’s Confronting Evil delivers exactly what its title promises—a bold, uncompromising examination of humanity’s darkest moments and the individuals who fought against them. While some critics dismiss it as oversimplified or ideologically rigid, the book’s strength lies in its accessible storytelling and moral urgency.
Refuting the Criticisms
“One man’s morality = the book’s framework”
Far from being just O’Reilly’s personal take, the book draws on a wide range of historical sources to ground its narrative. Yes, O’Reilly’s voice is strong, but the throughline of moral judgment is consistent with how history has often been interpreted—through the lens of ethical choices and consequences. His clarity makes history engaging for readers who may otherwise find it distant or abstract.
“No nuance. Complex figures flattened.”
While O’Reilly emphasizes stark moral contrasts, this is not the same as caricature. Figures like Hitler, Stalin, and bin Laden are presented in the context of their undeniable atrocities. At the same time, O’Reilly acknowledges the flaws of leaders on the “good” side, reminding readers that moral leadership is never perfect but can still be decisive in shaping history.
“Selective storytelling and Judeo-Christian framing.”
Every historian selects and frames their material. O’Reilly’s Judeo-Christian perspective is not hidden—it’s openly declared. This framing gives coherence to his argument and reflects a worldview that has influenced Western civilization for centuries. Readers may not agree with every interpretation, but the framing offers a moral compass rather than propaganda.
“It’s giving high school debate club.”
On the contrary, the narrative structure, brisk pacing, and forceful tone are precisely what make this book work. Rather than feeling amateur, the style resembles a dynamic lecture—one that communicates urgency and passion to a wide audience.
“The tone feels smug, even about atrocities.”
O’Reilly’s tone is not smug so much as confident. He doesn’t equivocate when it comes to condemning evil, and that firmness may read as arrogance to some. But given the subject matter—genocide, mass murder, terrorism—moral hesitation would be out of place.
Final Verdict
Confronting Evil may not satisfy academic purists looking for exhaustive nuance, but it isn’t trying to. Instead, it’s a compelling, clear-cut narrative that dramatizes the eternal struggle between good and evil. For readers who want moral clarity in their history, O’Reilly delivers with conviction.
Bill O’Reilly’s Confronting Evil delivers exactly what its title promises—a bold, uncompromising examination of humanity’s darkest moments and the individuals who fought against them. While some critics dismiss it as oversimplified or ideologically rigid, the book’s strength lies in its accessible storytelling and moral urgency.
Refuting the Criticisms
“One man’s morality = the book’s framework”
Far from being just O’Reilly’s personal take, the book draws on a wide range of historical sources to ground its narrative. Yes, O’Reilly’s voice is strong, but the throughline of moral judgment is consistent with how history has often been interpreted—through the lens of ethical choices and consequences. His clarity makes history engaging for readers who may otherwise find it distant or abstract.
“No nuance. Complex figures flattened.”
While O’Reilly emphasizes stark moral contrasts, this is not the same as caricature. Figures like Hitler, Stalin, and bin Laden are presented in the context of their undeniable atrocities. At the same time, O’Reilly acknowledges the flaws of leaders on the “good” side, reminding readers that moral leadership is never perfect but can still be decisive in shaping history.
“Selective storytelling and Judeo-Christian framing.”
Every historian selects and frames their material. O’Reilly’s Judeo-Christian perspective is not hidden—it’s openly declared. This framing gives coherence to his argument and reflects a worldview that has influenced Western civilization for centuries. Readers may not agree with every interpretation, but the framing offers a moral compass rather than propaganda.
“It’s giving high school debate club.”
On the contrary, the narrative structure, brisk pacing, and forceful tone are precisely what make this book work. Rather than feeling amateur, the style resembles a dynamic lecture—one that communicates urgency and passion to a wide audience.
“The tone feels smug, even about atrocities.”
O’Reilly’s tone is not smug so much as confident. He doesn’t equivocate when it comes to condemning evil, and that firmness may read as arrogance to some. But given the subject matter—genocide, mass murder, terrorism—moral hesitation would be out of place.
Final Verdict
Confronting Evil may not satisfy academic purists looking for exhaustive nuance, but it isn’t trying to. Instead, it’s a compelling, clear-cut narrative that dramatizes the eternal struggle between good and evil. For readers who want moral clarity in their history, O’Reilly delivers with conviction.
September 5, 2025
Like most of O’Reilly’s books, “Confronting Evil” is very engaging. I usually listen to his books via audiobook because he always has good readers (and sometimes does it himself), but reading is just as engaging. This book’s feel is different than his Killing series. It is chapter after chapter of evil people with the facts of their evilness on full display. There is little analysis except to prove the point that the person is evil and how they have or have not been held to account. Yet the simple-ness of that makes the book powerful. It definitely shows that these characters are truly evil.
The motivation for the book is in the afterward. It is to show that there really is evil, even if people don’t want to admit it. In addition, America has often been involved in eradicating evils. O’Reilly is advocating for confronting evils instead of trying to manipulate, downgrade, or ignore the power of these evils. Should you want to look further, he has a very organized Notes and Research section at the end of the book.
I recommend O’Reilly’s book and definitely think it’s worth your time to read.
The motivation for the book is in the afterward. It is to show that there really is evil, even if people don’t want to admit it. In addition, America has often been involved in eradicating evils. O’Reilly is advocating for confronting evils instead of trying to manipulate, downgrade, or ignore the power of these evils. Should you want to look further, he has a very organized Notes and Research section at the end of the book.
I recommend O’Reilly’s book and definitely think it’s worth your time to read.
September 22, 2025
the least researched history book of all time
October 28, 2025
Great book... like most of O’Reilly’s. I flew through it. The writing style is fast, engaging, and moral in tone, just like his Killing series. But I couldn’t tell if O’Reilly was trying to highlight the most evil men in history or simply present a sampling of evil across different eras, religions, and types of power. It feels like he was trying to do both and that’s where the structure begins to blur.
He leans heavily on modern figures and household names while ignoring men who were, by almost any standard, far more sadistic and depraved. Think serial killers. People who didn’t just cause death, but enjoyed it. There’s a big difference.
That’s one of the weaknesses of the book: simplification and selective framing. Because O’Reilly’s trying to cover such a huge span of history and make these broad moral claims, the details get flattened. The nuances... the gray areas of human behavior, contested motives, and the messy legacies are mostly brushed aside. It turns into a “good guy vs. bad guy” narrative, which is emotionally satisfying but not intellectually honest.
My biggest disagreement was with his assessment of Nathan Bedford Forrest.
While slavery itself is undeniably evil, and the Confederate cause was morally bankrupt, Forrest wasn’t altogether evil as a man. O’Reilly paints him with the same brush as monsters like Hitler and Caligula, and that’s just sloppy. Forrest fought brutally for an evil cause, yes... but the man also changed. Even though he was called the father of the KKK, the organization he founded wasn’t created as a racist death cult. It was initially meant to protect Southerners, especially returning Confederate soldiers and their families from Union retribution. Once it morphed into the hate-driven terror group we know today, Forrest left it and denounced it publicly. That’s not something you do if you’re the embodiment of evil. Was O’Reilly pandering? Posturing? Maybe. But Forrest didn’t belong in that company.
In sheer numbers, O’Reilly is right on Mao, Stalin, Hitler, and Genghis Khan... those four are the cornerstones of mass-scale, impersonal evil. I also liked that he included the drug cartels because they represent a different kind of darkness, greed and violence without ideology. But including figures like Putin, the Robber Barons, and the Ayatollah weakened the premise. Yes, they’re evil men in their own ways, but they’re not in the pantheon of the most evil men in the history of the world. Their inclusion felt like a reach to keep things “relevant” for modern readers.
Caligula and Henry VIII were interesting choices and new to me in this context. Both fit because they personify the corruption of absolute power, but then O’Reilly throws in the Robber Barons, and it just feels off. Ruthless businessmen don’t belong in the same chapter as genocidal tyrants. If he wanted variety, he could’ve drawn from history’s countless sadists and predators.... Ted Bundy, Bloody Mary, Gilles de Rais, and others who embodied personal evil, not systemic.
And that, to me, is the key point the book misses:
Evil isn’t measured only by how many people die. It’s measured by how and why they suffer. The intimate act of sadism... the pleasure of personally inflicting pain for gain or enjoyment. That is a deeper evil than detached political cruelty. There’s a difference between a man who signs orders that lead to death and one who personally revels in another human’s suffering.
Yes, Putin is evil for ordering torture or assassination. But he’d be far more evil if he took pleasure in doing it himself. That’s the purest form of darkness... not the bureaucrat of death, but the one who feeds on pain.
That’s what O’Reilly’s book never fully captures. Confronting Evil succeeds as moral storytelling, but not as moral philosophy. It raises big questions about good and evil but doesn’t wrestle with them deeply enough. Still, it’s a powerful and fast read—and worth finishing if you want to think about what makes evil recognizable in every age, even when it wears different faces.
On a positive note, it was a great book... like most of O’Reilly’s. I flew through it. It’s engaging, thought-provoking, and written in that straightforward, no-nonsense style that makes his books so readable. I really enjoyed it... it’s interesting, informative, and kept me hooked from start to finish. Even when I disagreed with some of his conclusions, I appreciated how he made complex history feel alive and accessible.
He leans heavily on modern figures and household names while ignoring men who were, by almost any standard, far more sadistic and depraved. Think serial killers. People who didn’t just cause death, but enjoyed it. There’s a big difference.
That’s one of the weaknesses of the book: simplification and selective framing. Because O’Reilly’s trying to cover such a huge span of history and make these broad moral claims, the details get flattened. The nuances... the gray areas of human behavior, contested motives, and the messy legacies are mostly brushed aside. It turns into a “good guy vs. bad guy” narrative, which is emotionally satisfying but not intellectually honest.
My biggest disagreement was with his assessment of Nathan Bedford Forrest.
While slavery itself is undeniably evil, and the Confederate cause was morally bankrupt, Forrest wasn’t altogether evil as a man. O’Reilly paints him with the same brush as monsters like Hitler and Caligula, and that’s just sloppy. Forrest fought brutally for an evil cause, yes... but the man also changed. Even though he was called the father of the KKK, the organization he founded wasn’t created as a racist death cult. It was initially meant to protect Southerners, especially returning Confederate soldiers and their families from Union retribution. Once it morphed into the hate-driven terror group we know today, Forrest left it and denounced it publicly. That’s not something you do if you’re the embodiment of evil. Was O’Reilly pandering? Posturing? Maybe. But Forrest didn’t belong in that company.
In sheer numbers, O’Reilly is right on Mao, Stalin, Hitler, and Genghis Khan... those four are the cornerstones of mass-scale, impersonal evil. I also liked that he included the drug cartels because they represent a different kind of darkness, greed and violence without ideology. But including figures like Putin, the Robber Barons, and the Ayatollah weakened the premise. Yes, they’re evil men in their own ways, but they’re not in the pantheon of the most evil men in the history of the world. Their inclusion felt like a reach to keep things “relevant” for modern readers.
Caligula and Henry VIII were interesting choices and new to me in this context. Both fit because they personify the corruption of absolute power, but then O’Reilly throws in the Robber Barons, and it just feels off. Ruthless businessmen don’t belong in the same chapter as genocidal tyrants. If he wanted variety, he could’ve drawn from history’s countless sadists and predators.... Ted Bundy, Bloody Mary, Gilles de Rais, and others who embodied personal evil, not systemic.
And that, to me, is the key point the book misses:
Evil isn’t measured only by how many people die. It’s measured by how and why they suffer. The intimate act of sadism... the pleasure of personally inflicting pain for gain or enjoyment. That is a deeper evil than detached political cruelty. There’s a difference between a man who signs orders that lead to death and one who personally revels in another human’s suffering.
Yes, Putin is evil for ordering torture or assassination. But he’d be far more evil if he took pleasure in doing it himself. That’s the purest form of darkness... not the bureaucrat of death, but the one who feeds on pain.
That’s what O’Reilly’s book never fully captures. Confronting Evil succeeds as moral storytelling, but not as moral philosophy. It raises big questions about good and evil but doesn’t wrestle with them deeply enough. Still, it’s a powerful and fast read—and worth finishing if you want to think about what makes evil recognizable in every age, even when it wears different faces.
On a positive note, it was a great book... like most of O’Reilly’s. I flew through it. It’s engaging, thought-provoking, and written in that straightforward, no-nonsense style that makes his books so readable. I really enjoyed it... it’s interesting, informative, and kept me hooked from start to finish. Even when I disagreed with some of his conclusions, I appreciated how he made complex history feel alive and accessible.
September 17, 2025
Most of it was really interesting. I’m a big fan of Bill O’Reilly despite our different political views. For me, this one got a little too political towards the end, without adding anything valuable to the narrative.
December 28, 2025
I think the next time I’m tempted to read a Bill O’Reilly book from his “Killing” series I will just read an Information Please Almanac. His latest book, “Confronting Evil” is chock full of facts. Fact, fact, fact. His subjects, the greatest mass murderers of all time, are handled by quick bios. You can readily name them; Hitler, Stalin, Mao come quickly to mind. These murderers were not content to just kill foreign enemies in war, they delighted in killing their opponents at home and, if need be, relatives. Putin is right up there too. He likes to go beyond his comfort zone and have his henchmen follow a victim to, say, London.
O’Reilly cites a few head-scratching evil-doers. Henry VIII? Definitely not a nice guy. Killed a few wives (Anne Boleyn, Catherine Howard), a few saints (St. Thomas More, St. John Fisher) and at least one advisor (Thomas Cromwell). But more evil than the 9/11 terrorists? The Robber Barons like John D. Rockefeller or Andrew Carnegie? They, at least, tried to salvage their reputations by giving away a substantial portion of their wealth. No other evil doers in the book tried to rehabilitate their images like the robber barons.
O’Reilly goes a little beyond the usual suspects and discusses the evil of the cartels who are responsible for spreading drug deaths and addictions in the United States. Not discussed though is the human trafficking that the cartels diversified in during the Biden administration who, by the way, made absolutely no attempt to stem the tide. During this surge thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, of children went missing and were unaccounted for. And amazingly, or maybe not so amazingly, the media made no attempt to cover this campaign. Now that’s evil!
Personally, I’m a walking encyclopedia of useless, incidental information. Don’t tangle with me in a bar. And certainly don’t bet against me. But all the subjects in “Confronting Evil” are written about in anecdotal form. If O’Reilly wrote about these creatures in bullet form I would be better able to gather my info in a more orderly fashion and win more bar bets. He’s written about killing Lincoln, Kennedy, Hitler, Jesus and a few others. I already had a pretty good handle on these from the Information Please Almanac. Uh, and the Bible. How about a little investigative journalism next time like “Killing Timothy McVeigh” or “Killing Jack the Ripper”? Give me a challenge the next time I walk into Dunne’s Pub, please. In bullet form.
O’Reilly cites a few head-scratching evil-doers. Henry VIII? Definitely not a nice guy. Killed a few wives (Anne Boleyn, Catherine Howard), a few saints (St. Thomas More, St. John Fisher) and at least one advisor (Thomas Cromwell). But more evil than the 9/11 terrorists? The Robber Barons like John D. Rockefeller or Andrew Carnegie? They, at least, tried to salvage their reputations by giving away a substantial portion of their wealth. No other evil doers in the book tried to rehabilitate their images like the robber barons.
O’Reilly goes a little beyond the usual suspects and discusses the evil of the cartels who are responsible for spreading drug deaths and addictions in the United States. Not discussed though is the human trafficking that the cartels diversified in during the Biden administration who, by the way, made absolutely no attempt to stem the tide. During this surge thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, of children went missing and were unaccounted for. And amazingly, or maybe not so amazingly, the media made no attempt to cover this campaign. Now that’s evil!
Personally, I’m a walking encyclopedia of useless, incidental information. Don’t tangle with me in a bar. And certainly don’t bet against me. But all the subjects in “Confronting Evil” are written about in anecdotal form. If O’Reilly wrote about these creatures in bullet form I would be better able to gather my info in a more orderly fashion and win more bar bets. He’s written about killing Lincoln, Kennedy, Hitler, Jesus and a few others. I already had a pretty good handle on these from the Information Please Almanac. Uh, and the Bible. How about a little investigative journalism next time like “Killing Timothy McVeigh” or “Killing Jack the Ripper”? Give me a challenge the next time I walk into Dunne’s Pub, please. In bullet form.
September 29, 2025
Bill O’Reilly is someone I like. I have read most of his other books. And I began reading this one and enjoyed it — at first. But his portrayal of the Shah of Iran as a vile dictator was so off the mark that I was disappointed. His portrayal was riddled with inaccuracies and outright false information. For example, he claims, without evidence, that the Shah was responsible for the infamous Cinema Rex Fire in Abadan. The truth is that this fire was caused by agents of the Islamic Revolution as a propaganda psy-op to turn the people of Iran against the Shah, and there is plenty of evidence to back this up. There are many other such false claims in that chapter. It makes me wonder what other parts of the book are written with shoddy research and misinformation.
September 25, 2025
I enjoyed this book. it's hard to fathom how these evil people could kill so many of their own people. The depravity was crazy to read about. Burn in hell all of them!
September 4, 2025
This review is for the audio edition of this book.
This is the second book in the "Confronting" series by Bill O'Reilly. The first book was on the U. S. Presidents. This one is a 180 turn with the focus on evil and those who have pushed an evil agenda on others throughout history.
In most chapters the focus is on an individual who has committed evil acts: think Adolf Hitler, Joseph Stalin, Putin, Mao., and the Ayatollah Khomeni. There are other chapters on evil groups such as the slave traders and drug cartels.
The authors provide a brief biography of each individual or entity, giving just enough historical details to help provide a context. The chapters describe violence and torture inflicted on innocent victims.
O'Reilly has been criticized for his Judeo-Christian "sermonizing" in this book by some reviewers. That really doesn't bother me as much as the narrow definition of "evil." There is lots of evil in the world that occur every day. Human trafficking, racial and ethnic violence, bullying via social media, etc. Certainly I don't expect the author to address every form of evil, but a simple acknowledgement that these are the "worst practices" would perhaps ease some of the criticisms.
The narrator, Robert Petkoff does an excellent job as always with the interpretation of the authors words.
I want to thank the authors, Macmillan Audio, and narrator Petkoff for the opportunity to listen to an early release of this book in exchange for an objective review.
I give Confronting Evil 4 out of 5 stars.
This is the second book in the "Confronting" series by Bill O'Reilly. The first book was on the U. S. Presidents. This one is a 180 turn with the focus on evil and those who have pushed an evil agenda on others throughout history.
In most chapters the focus is on an individual who has committed evil acts: think Adolf Hitler, Joseph Stalin, Putin, Mao., and the Ayatollah Khomeni. There are other chapters on evil groups such as the slave traders and drug cartels.
The authors provide a brief biography of each individual or entity, giving just enough historical details to help provide a context. The chapters describe violence and torture inflicted on innocent victims.
O'Reilly has been criticized for his Judeo-Christian "sermonizing" in this book by some reviewers. That really doesn't bother me as much as the narrow definition of "evil." There is lots of evil in the world that occur every day. Human trafficking, racial and ethnic violence, bullying via social media, etc. Certainly I don't expect the author to address every form of evil, but a simple acknowledgement that these are the "worst practices" would perhaps ease some of the criticisms.
The narrator, Robert Petkoff does an excellent job as always with the interpretation of the authors words.
I want to thank the authors, Macmillan Audio, and narrator Petkoff for the opportunity to listen to an early release of this book in exchange for an objective review.
I give Confronting Evil 4 out of 5 stars.
September 28, 2025
Not for the weak-stomached. Pretty graphic detail of some truly evil monsters of history. From Caligula's Rome to the Putin's homicidal death gulags of post-Soviet Russia, Bill O'Reilly goes into some famous, well-known, psychopaths of old and new. Shit slaps. As always
December 11, 2025
As a former High School History teacher, Mr. O'Reilly brings a great deal of experience to his history books. 'Confronting Evil' is not an exception. Mr. O'Reilly includes among his most evil subjects are: Caligula, Genghis Khan, King Henry V111, The Slavers off the Coast of New Orleans, Nathan Bedford Forrest and the Ku Klux Klan, The Robber Barons, Joseph Stalin, Adolph Hitler, Mao Zedong, Ayatollah Khomeini, Vladimir Putin, and The Drug Cartels.
December 1, 2025
There is a tremendous amount of nastiness out there. Bill discusses 8 of them here. Another good job.
November 27, 2025
Couldn’t put it down !
December 26, 2025
Big fan of the killing series by Bill. I have most of the collection. This one was the worst. Basic history on most of these men. It could have been done so much better. The writing was still good, pulls you in like the others. But content was disappointing.
November 17, 2025
Excellent book describing these historical figures from a factual point of view, detailing their atrocities and their attitudes towards those atrocities. It is good to remember, especially as some are now glossed over and their descendants are still reaping the benefits.
November 8, 2025
An excellent book describing the atrocities of Caligula, Genghis Khan, King Henry VIII, the slavers and the robber barons of the US, Nathan Bedford Forrest, Hitler, Stalin, Mao Tse Dong, the Shah of Iran, Putin. Anyone who is a reader ought to read this book.
September 11, 2025
Fascinating!!
August 25, 2025
Thank you to NetGalley, St. Martin’s Press and Macmillan Audio for the ARC copy of this book. I am not required to write a positive review nor paid to do so. The thoughts and opinions are all my own.
The audio copy of the book was great; Josh Hammer does an excellent job in narrating this story!
This is a history lesson revealing the evil rulers around the world. Very well-written and researched. If you enjoy history, you will love it, although it is not for the faint of heart.
We may not approve of events that transpired years ago, but history is history; we cannot erase it.
This book covers the actions of some of the worst people in history: Genghis Khan, Caligula, Henry VIII, Stalin, Hitler, Mao, the Ayatollah Khomeini, Putin, and the Mexican drug cartels. Their stories reveal how some of the worst events in history took place.
Confronting Evil inspires us to rise above the struggle between good and evil, a transformative choice each of us must make in our lives.
“We had and will always have evil in our midst. The biblical book of Genesis clearly defines it when Cain kills his brother Abel out of jealousy. As long as human beings have walked, evil has been close by.”
There are always consequences for our actions: "Bad men need nothing more to compass their ends, than that good men should look on and do nothing."
The audio copy of the book was great; Josh Hammer does an excellent job in narrating this story!
This is a history lesson revealing the evil rulers around the world. Very well-written and researched. If you enjoy history, you will love it, although it is not for the faint of heart.
We may not approve of events that transpired years ago, but history is history; we cannot erase it.
This book covers the actions of some of the worst people in history: Genghis Khan, Caligula, Henry VIII, Stalin, Hitler, Mao, the Ayatollah Khomeini, Putin, and the Mexican drug cartels. Their stories reveal how some of the worst events in history took place.
Confronting Evil inspires us to rise above the struggle between good and evil, a transformative choice each of us must make in our lives.
“We had and will always have evil in our midst. The biblical book of Genesis clearly defines it when Cain kills his brother Abel out of jealousy. As long as human beings have walked, evil has been close by.”
There are always consequences for our actions: "Bad men need nothing more to compass their ends, than that good men should look on and do nothing."
September 13, 2025
Bill O’Reilly proves once again why he is America’s preeminent historian. Confronting Evil is gripping, well-documented, and—though O’Reilly is known as a right-wing voice—entirely apolitical in its presentation. His footnotes and research shine through every chapter.
I had forgotten just how cruel Henry VIII truly was until this book brought him back to life on the page. O’Reilly makes history both vivid and accessible, telling stories that stick with you long after you close the cover.
An outstanding addition to his body of work.
I had forgotten just how cruel Henry VIII truly was until this book brought him back to life on the page. O’Reilly makes history both vivid and accessible, telling stories that stick with you long after you close the cover.
An outstanding addition to his body of work.
October 22, 2025
I always enjoy O'Reilly's books. Easy to read and very informative. One standout to me in this book is how evil Vladimir Putin actually is. I always knew he was a bad guy but the depth of his depravity surprised me.
August 31, 2025
A glimpse through history at some really deposed human being and what makes them tick. Each story is brief, but compelling. It covers the modern day despots to the early beginnings of the world as we know it. Could there be more detail? Yes. However, this one allows for non academics to gain some historical perspective as well. Thanks to NetGalley for the read.
September 16, 2025
So timely and so important! This book is evidence of how evil has persisted throughout the world for centuries, and it is a call to arms for humans to peacefully act to ensure the plague of evil is eradicated.
September 30, 2025
Humans can be so evil.
It is hard to imagine this level of evil. Thank goodness for my quiet life. I know it is true though. Excellent book. Thank you Bill for writing it.and
It is hard to imagine this level of evil. Thank goodness for my quiet life. I know it is true though. Excellent book. Thank you Bill for writing it.and
October 3, 2025
Informative
Bill O'Reilly never disappoints. His books are always informative and very interesting. His love of history and the importance of keeping it honest always show in his writings.
Bill O'Reilly never disappoints. His books are always informative and very interesting. His love of history and the importance of keeping it honest always show in his writings.
September 15, 2025
How do you have one chapter on Rockefeller and the next chapter on Stalin. This is embarrassing. It’s a cheap book. Nothing new. Waste of time.
October 30, 2025
BLUF (Bottom Line Up Front)
In “Confronting Evil: Assessing the Worst of the Worst” by Bill O’Reilly (with Josh Hammer), the author argues that evil is simply harming a human without remorse, driven by one of three motives—money, power or zealotry—and invites us to confront it, rather than look away.
Executive Summary
Here’s how the book is shaped and what it claims:
- Thesis: Evil is not a fuzzy concept—it is defined as the choice to inflict harm on another human, without remorse.
- Motivations: O’Reilly identifies three primary fuels for evil deeds: money, power, and zealotry (ideological fervor).
- Structure / Approach: The book uses a series of historical case-studies (from ancient and modern times) of notorious figures and regimes—Caligula, Genghis Khan, 19th-century slave traders, the Nazi regime, etc.—to illustrate how evil manifests repeatedly across time.
- Moral call to action: The authors argue that recognizing evil—and resisting its normalization—is a responsibility of “good” people; failure to act enables evil to spread.
- Intended audience and tone: A wide-readership nonfiction work, accessible rather than purely academic; framed in journalistic/historical narrative style, with moral commentary.
Review
As someone immersed in learning psychology and instructional design, I found this book to engage a rich vein: the notion that humans (and institutions) learn patterns—sometimes destructive ones—and that we need mechanisms (feedback, reflection, moral scaffolding) to redirect them. The author’s crisp definition of evil (“harming a human without remorse”) grabbed me—it cuts through a lot of philosophical fog and gives a concrete target for both analysis and pedagogy. That clarity is a strength. But identifying evil is much easier than proposing a solution to combat it, like a campaign to “see something, say something.” I look to religion for answers to these moral and ethical questions. (The Book of Mormon is especially helpful regarding how to address evil.)
In my own work, I often emphasize how learners internalize not just skills but values and heuristics: how do we embed “see something, say something” into organizational culture? O’Reilly’s book speaks to that: when evil becomes tolerated, when the feedback loops of society fail to sanction, then evil is allowed to step in and the destructive patterns proliferate. The case-studies strengthen that argument: by showing how agents fueled by money (mercantile slavery), power (dictatorship) or zealotry (ideological extremism) overcame the safeguards of their societies.
However—and this is where my instructional-designer lens raised a flag—the book sometimes leans into sweeping moral binaries (good vs. evil), which simplifies in a way that may limit deep learning. In instructional design we aim for nuance: how did system failures, bystander effects, discipline breakdowns contribute? O’Reilly mentions these but often returns to the individual moral failure, which is fair but incomplete. For someone designing a learning intervention about ethics, I'd want more on how structures enabled the evil—not just who and why. For example, what were the institutional logs, culture cues, reward systems that failed?
Another point: while the motive frame (money/power/zealotry) is tight and helpful, human behavior is frequently more tangled—hybrids of motives, system pressures, identity dynamics. The book gives many vivid examples, which I appreciated (even the darker ones: slave traders converting humans to “things,” yet I found myself wishing for deeper integration of psychological theory (cognitive dissonance, groupthink, moral disengagement) which I draw on in my work. In short: great for awareness, less so for deeper mechanism.
On the emotional / reflective side: I was moved by its invitation to moral vigilance. As someone driven by the value of growth, the idea that “good men must not look on” (quoting John Stuart Mill) echoes the importance of scaffolding not just knowledge but courageous action. The book reminded me: we seldom teach “how to act when you see evil” in a structured way; many learning programs stop at “recognize it.” O’Reilly’s framing nudges toward “what do you do?” which is generative for me.
So: I’d recommend this book for instructional designers, organizational leaders, ethicists, or any learner-focused professional who seeks a readable, morally centered historical overview of destructive human behaviour. But I’d pair it with more depth on systems and psychology to round out the design-relevance.
TL;DR
⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐ (4 out of 5) — I’ll take away the crisp framing: evil = harming without remorse, driven by money/power/zealotry. I’ll apply this in designing learning modules that aim to detect systemic vulnerabilities (not just bad actors). If you’re someone who cares about ethics, leadership, historical patterns of cruelty, and how to build moral awareness in learners, this is a good pick.
Similar Reads
- The Better Angels of Our Nature by Steven Pinker — a data-driven look at violence across time and what makes it decline (complements O’Reilly’s narrative of evil).
- Worse Than War by Daniel Jonah Goldhagen — a rigorous investigation of genocide and eliminationist violence (for more depth on systems).
- The Road to Freedom by Václav Havel — a philosophic reflection on moral responsibility in political life (for the individual/structural bridge).
Authorship Note: This review was co-authored using a time-saving GPT I built to help structure and refine my thoughts.
In “Confronting Evil: Assessing the Worst of the Worst” by Bill O’Reilly (with Josh Hammer), the author argues that evil is simply harming a human without remorse, driven by one of three motives—money, power or zealotry—and invites us to confront it, rather than look away.
Executive Summary
Here’s how the book is shaped and what it claims:
- Thesis: Evil is not a fuzzy concept—it is defined as the choice to inflict harm on another human, without remorse.
- Motivations: O’Reilly identifies three primary fuels for evil deeds: money, power, and zealotry (ideological fervor).
- Structure / Approach: The book uses a series of historical case-studies (from ancient and modern times) of notorious figures and regimes—Caligula, Genghis Khan, 19th-century slave traders, the Nazi regime, etc.—to illustrate how evil manifests repeatedly across time.
- Moral call to action: The authors argue that recognizing evil—and resisting its normalization—is a responsibility of “good” people; failure to act enables evil to spread.
- Intended audience and tone: A wide-readership nonfiction work, accessible rather than purely academic; framed in journalistic/historical narrative style, with moral commentary.
Review
As someone immersed in learning psychology and instructional design, I found this book to engage a rich vein: the notion that humans (and institutions) learn patterns—sometimes destructive ones—and that we need mechanisms (feedback, reflection, moral scaffolding) to redirect them. The author’s crisp definition of evil (“harming a human without remorse”) grabbed me—it cuts through a lot of philosophical fog and gives a concrete target for both analysis and pedagogy. That clarity is a strength. But identifying evil is much easier than proposing a solution to combat it, like a campaign to “see something, say something.” I look to religion for answers to these moral and ethical questions. (The Book of Mormon is especially helpful regarding how to address evil.)
In my own work, I often emphasize how learners internalize not just skills but values and heuristics: how do we embed “see something, say something” into organizational culture? O’Reilly’s book speaks to that: when evil becomes tolerated, when the feedback loops of society fail to sanction, then evil is allowed to step in and the destructive patterns proliferate. The case-studies strengthen that argument: by showing how agents fueled by money (mercantile slavery), power (dictatorship) or zealotry (ideological extremism) overcame the safeguards of their societies.
However—and this is where my instructional-designer lens raised a flag—the book sometimes leans into sweeping moral binaries (good vs. evil), which simplifies in a way that may limit deep learning. In instructional design we aim for nuance: how did system failures, bystander effects, discipline breakdowns contribute? O’Reilly mentions these but often returns to the individual moral failure, which is fair but incomplete. For someone designing a learning intervention about ethics, I'd want more on how structures enabled the evil—not just who and why. For example, what were the institutional logs, culture cues, reward systems that failed?
Another point: while the motive frame (money/power/zealotry) is tight and helpful, human behavior is frequently more tangled—hybrids of motives, system pressures, identity dynamics. The book gives many vivid examples, which I appreciated (even the darker ones: slave traders converting humans to “things,” yet I found myself wishing for deeper integration of psychological theory (cognitive dissonance, groupthink, moral disengagement) which I draw on in my work. In short: great for awareness, less so for deeper mechanism.
On the emotional / reflective side: I was moved by its invitation to moral vigilance. As someone driven by the value of growth, the idea that “good men must not look on” (quoting John Stuart Mill) echoes the importance of scaffolding not just knowledge but courageous action. The book reminded me: we seldom teach “how to act when you see evil” in a structured way; many learning programs stop at “recognize it.” O’Reilly’s framing nudges toward “what do you do?” which is generative for me.
So: I’d recommend this book for instructional designers, organizational leaders, ethicists, or any learner-focused professional who seeks a readable, morally centered historical overview of destructive human behaviour. But I’d pair it with more depth on systems and psychology to round out the design-relevance.
TL;DR
⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐ (4 out of 5) — I’ll take away the crisp framing: evil = harming without remorse, driven by money/power/zealotry. I’ll apply this in designing learning modules that aim to detect systemic vulnerabilities (not just bad actors). If you’re someone who cares about ethics, leadership, historical patterns of cruelty, and how to build moral awareness in learners, this is a good pick.
Similar Reads
- The Better Angels of Our Nature by Steven Pinker — a data-driven look at violence across time and what makes it decline (complements O’Reilly’s narrative of evil).
- Worse Than War by Daniel Jonah Goldhagen — a rigorous investigation of genocide and eliminationist violence (for more depth on systems).
- The Road to Freedom by Václav Havel — a philosophic reflection on moral responsibility in political life (for the individual/structural bridge).
Authorship Note: This review was co-authored using a time-saving GPT I built to help structure and refine my thoughts.
November 29, 2025
Very readable and accessible for those of us who don't love reading history. It is not a how-to for confronting evil; rather, it presents profiles of men across centuries who commit evil acts. I was able to draw out the commonalities in all of them which helps in defining and recognizing evil, which I think is the point. l would not call this a comprehensive list of evildoers - hardly - and there are some interesting choices here, like the Robber Barons, who we don't usually compare to Hitler. Makes for interesting thinking, though.
December 21, 2025
Genghis Khan, King Henry VIII, Stalin, Hitler, Khomeini, Joaquin Guzman … O’Reilly & Hammer give their readers the backgrounds & results of histories most evil men. The depths that man will go to gain power & wealth is only surpassed by the lengths they will go to keep them.
Perfect blend of facts & pace. Highly informative without getting into the weeds.
Excellent. Highly recommend.
“The victims of evil behavior are countless. Yet, some folks still do not believe in the concept. Often, those in the secular-progressive precincts object to moral judgments. There’s always an excuse. That’s called relativism.” (401)
“Destructive people must be confronted or the suffering of innocents will grow, as history clearly demonstrates.” (402)
“The decline of theological belief and the embrace of selfish behavior have elevated evil to a level never before seen on earth. As people reject a higher power that implores justice and compassion, it becomes easier to ignore moral boundaries.” (402)
Perfect blend of facts & pace. Highly informative without getting into the weeds.
Excellent. Highly recommend.
“The victims of evil behavior are countless. Yet, some folks still do not believe in the concept. Often, those in the secular-progressive precincts object to moral judgments. There’s always an excuse. That’s called relativism.” (401)
“Destructive people must be confronted or the suffering of innocents will grow, as history clearly demonstrates.” (402)
“The decline of theological belief and the embrace of selfish behavior have elevated evil to a level never before seen on earth. As people reject a higher power that implores justice and compassion, it becomes easier to ignore moral boundaries.” (402)
January 7, 2026
I like how the book was set up, each chapter focusing on a different evil. What I dislike is that it is clear the author writes with bias. The way the author talks about current politics in this book where he, in my opinion, makes it clear where he stands politically. This I tend to dislike when I am reading a historical book because that means his bias definitely influenced his take on various historical facts.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 241 reviews