What do you think?
Rate this book
Lions and Scavengers: The True Story of America
In a world split between noble Lions and destructive Scavengers, only the brave can lead the way. Acclaimed writer and conservative thought leader Ben Shapiro knows that at the heart of today’s conflicts—political, economic, and cultural—there’s a dangerous that all people are equal in ability, and that all inequality stems from oppression and exploitation.
With his signature clarity and sharp insight, Shapiro refutes that lie, emphasizing that in a free country, inequality is rooted in differences of talent and work ethic—not oppression—and that the best solution to lack of success lies in duty and virtue. Lions, like America’s founding fathers, strive for the highest good, building systems that promote freedom, prosperity, and equality of opportunity. Meanwhile, Scavengers degrade these ideals, spreading resentment and entitlement that threaten to dismantle the foundations of Western civilization.
In Lions and Scavengers, Shapiro invites you to take up the mantle of the Lion and defend the principles that shape the freedom of a fair, powerful society. With the stakes higher than ever, this book is a gripping exploration of the ongoing war between those who cherish our nation and those who seek to undermine it. The triumph of the Lions is essential for America’s continued success. It’s a rallying cry for those who refuse to bow to the Scavengers’ demands. It’s time to fight back.
With his signature clarity and sharp insight, Shapiro refutes that lie, emphasizing that in a free country, inequality is rooted in differences of talent and work ethic—not oppression—and that the best solution to lack of success lies in duty and virtue. Lions, like America’s founding fathers, strive for the highest good, building systems that promote freedom, prosperity, and equality of opportunity. Meanwhile, Scavengers degrade these ideals, spreading resentment and entitlement that threaten to dismantle the foundations of Western civilization.
In Lions and Scavengers, Shapiro invites you to take up the mantle of the Lion and defend the principles that shape the freedom of a fair, powerful society. With the stakes higher than ever, this book is a gripping exploration of the ongoing war between those who cherish our nation and those who seek to undermine it. The triumph of the Lions is essential for America’s continued success. It’s a rallying cry for those who refuse to bow to the Scavengers’ demands. It’s time to fight back.
Audio CD
Published September 2, 2025
543 people are currently reading
898 people want to read
About the author
Ben Shapiro
37 books2,516 followersBenjamin Shapiro was born in 1984 and entered UCLA at the age of 16, graduating summa cum laude and Phi Beta Kappa in June 2004 with a BA in Political Science. He graduated Harvard Law School cum laude in June 2007. Shapiro was hired by Creators Syndicate at age 17 to become the youngest nationally syndicated columnist in the U.S.
His columns are printed in major newspapers and websites including Townhall, ABCNews, WorldNet Daily, Human Events, FrontPage Mag, Family Security Matters, the Riverside Press-Enterprise and the Conservative Chronicle. His columns have also appeared in the Christian Science Monitor, Chicago Sun-Times, Orlando Sentinel, Honolulu Star-Advertiser, RealClearPolitics.com, Arizona Republic, and Claremont Review of Books, among others. He has been the subject of articles in the Wall Street Journal, the New York Times, Associated Press, and Christian Science Monitor; he has been quoted on "The Rush Limbaugh Show," "The Dr. Laura Show," at CBS News, in the New York Press, in the Washington Times, and in The American Conservative magazine, among many others.
The author of the national bestsellers, Brainwashed: How Universities Indoctrinate America's Youth (WND Books, May 2004), Porn Generation: How Social Liberalism Is Corrupting Our Future (Regnery, June 2005), and Project President: Bad Hair and Botox on the Road to the White House (Thomas Nelson, 2008), Shapiro has appeared on hundreds of radio and television shows around the nation, including "The O'Reilly Factor" (Fox News), "Fox and Friends" (Fox News), "In the Money" (CNN Financial), "DaySide with Linda Vester" (Fox News), "Scarborough Country" (MSNBC), "The Dennis Miller Show" (CNBC), "Fox News Live" (Fox News Channel), "Glenn Beck Show" (CNN), "Your World with Neil Cavuto" (Fox News) and "700 Club" (Christian Broadcasting Network), "The Laura Ingraham Show," "The Michael Medved Show," "The G. Gordon Liddy Show," "The Rusty Humphries Show," "The Lars Larson Show" (nationally syndicated), "The Larry Elder Show," The Hugh Hewitt Show," "The Dennis Prager Show," among others.
His columns are printed in major newspapers and websites including Townhall, ABCNews, WorldNet Daily, Human Events, FrontPage Mag, Family Security Matters, the Riverside Press-Enterprise and the Conservative Chronicle. His columns have also appeared in the Christian Science Monitor, Chicago Sun-Times, Orlando Sentinel, Honolulu Star-Advertiser, RealClearPolitics.com, Arizona Republic, and Claremont Review of Books, among others. He has been the subject of articles in the Wall Street Journal, the New York Times, Associated Press, and Christian Science Monitor; he has been quoted on "The Rush Limbaugh Show," "The Dr. Laura Show," at CBS News, in the New York Press, in the Washington Times, and in The American Conservative magazine, among many others.
The author of the national bestsellers, Brainwashed: How Universities Indoctrinate America's Youth (WND Books, May 2004), Porn Generation: How Social Liberalism Is Corrupting Our Future (Regnery, June 2005), and Project President: Bad Hair and Botox on the Road to the White House (Thomas Nelson, 2008), Shapiro has appeared on hundreds of radio and television shows around the nation, including "The O'Reilly Factor" (Fox News), "Fox and Friends" (Fox News), "In the Money" (CNN Financial), "DaySide with Linda Vester" (Fox News), "Scarborough Country" (MSNBC), "The Dennis Miller Show" (CNBC), "Fox News Live" (Fox News Channel), "Glenn Beck Show" (CNN), "Your World with Neil Cavuto" (Fox News) and "700 Club" (Christian Broadcasting Network), "The Laura Ingraham Show," "The Michael Medved Show," "The G. Gordon Liddy Show," "The Rusty Humphries Show," "The Lars Larson Show" (nationally syndicated), "The Larry Elder Show," The Hugh Hewitt Show," "The Dennis Prager Show," among others.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 125 reviews
September 2, 2025
This book is FANTASTIC!!!
Take it from the first and only reviewer that has ACTUALLY read the book.
Ignore the small-minded morons that just hate the person that wrote it and never took the time to read the book, take in the arguments, and refute them. They just gave 1 star because they hate Ben Shapiro; I know this because, they rated it before it had even came out.
Take it from the first and only reviewer that has ACTUALLY read the book.
Ignore the small-minded morons that just hate the person that wrote it and never took the time to read the book, take in the arguments, and refute them. They just gave 1 star because they hate Ben Shapiro; I know this because, they rated it before it had even came out.
September 24, 2025
Ben Shapiro is of my generation, but I grew up (in a political sense) listening to downloads of his radio show and reading his internet commentary and books. I sought out his work as I felt disconnected from the political views of most of my peers, especially during the heights of the Obama administration and the later Great Awokening, and he was an excellent introduction to the typical rhetorical tactics used to defend progressive and left-liberal positions. Secondarily, he was a gentle introduction to right-wing political traditions of thought, especially the synthesis of "Jerusalem & Athens" (a dynamic prominently identified by Leo Strauss as the source of Western vitality) and fusionism (i.e. the three-legged ideology that was pioneered to hold together the Christian right/social conservatives, fiscal conservatives, and anti-communist foreign interventionists). Though, I cannot be rightly understood as a social conservative (like Shapiro), I think many would place me on the American Right (Shapiro being one of the most prominent non-politicians on the American Right today) even though I identify strongly with the liberal tradition and Enlightenment thought. Although Shapiro's work is still geared for a younger or simply less politically experienced audience and increasingly his content conforms to the old Cable TV political punditry format (monologue, news commentary, interview all in 5-15 minute chunks), I still regularly check back in to see what he's doing. His latest book carried an interesting title, Lions and Scavengers, and, as the content reveals, Shapiro has taken a bit of a mythopoetic turn - perhaps an outgrowth of cross-pollination with Jordan Peterson, but likely related to some of the permeability of the old distinctions between the American Left and Right. The ideological landscape and the related political coalitions are in flux.
Shapiro opens the book by introducing his titular framing device, the central metaphor that grounds his book (which of course could have been an essay like pretty much all books of contemporary political commentary):
In Shapiro's binary formulation Lions are those who build, create, and maintain. They are the founders and bulwark of civilization, while Scavengers are those who tear down and pull away whatever they can from the vital whole. In terms of moral properties the Lions accept responsibility and value duty, excellence, and virtue, while Scavengers value the self and pleasure, aiming to organize around grievance. Politically, Lions respect social institutions, free markets, property rights, traditional values, while Scavengers are their opponents.
Shapiro doesn't over-index on his central metaphor (as is already indicated in the language itself) nor is the it another way of restating the Left versus Right divide (though, in the contemporary American context, there is certainly a rightward slant to the Lions definitionally). Shapiro concedes that in everyone's heart there is a Lion and a Scavenger, but we've left our world to be overrun by Scavengers. The possible weakness of the framing is that Shapiro doesn't really concede a socially valuable role for the Scavenger nor is he as cold-eyed in his assessment about who the Scavengers are (e.g. Trump should have received more of Shapiro's critique but Shapiro is not in an advantageous position to make that critique and on some of the most important issues to Shapiro Trump is an unquestionable ally).
Ecologically, scavengers do have a role, reducing waste and disease while promoting the cycle of nutrients in the food web. It would have made for a more interesting book if Shapiro explored more of the ways in which the virtues of the Lion can imperil civilization or simply come at too great a cost to those who truly cannot live the way Lions do. Additionally, what would society look like if there were no Scavengers. Would it really be a better place? Many on the Right, who are even more favorably disposed to Trump including during his rise to political power, would argue that Trump is the Scavenger we need to respond to the dominance of the Scavengers of the Left. In other words, we're in a Lion-less world. I think, if we're being honest about the nature of political power and the structural forces that constrain our politics with respect to the received ideal vision of a Westernized liberal republic, I think this would be a reasonable conclusion to arrive at. Some of this is implicit in Shapiro's book, but he could've brought it out from behind the subtext and make it text.
Early in the book, Shapiro includes a really striking C.S. Lewis quote:
It is apt to highlight how dependent virtue is on our subjective threshold to endure various costs. I think Shapiro's own choices speak for themselves. He's not himself in politics and is otherwise using his elite cognitive gifts and force of character to run a media business. The relative return one can expect for courage in today sociocultural environment is zilch. No success can be found in going to the mats for your authentic, old fashioned (Western) values in today's world, and, thus, the world will remain the purview of Scavengers until there is a return to a cultural system where actual norms and values can be enforced at a civilization scale. Right now, it is only in the private sphere, cloistered away, that such virtue can be cultivated. Shapiro purposefully overlooks the systematic and deterministic processes because he sees these as convenient excuses, but, at some point, the explanatory power of these forces have to be integrated into a political philosophy, otherwise that philosophy will falter when challenged by reality. Shapiro optimistically projects virtues of the private sphere into the public realm. It's a form of wish-casting against an mirror world that was either created or embraced by his opponents (and partly by the same tradition he lays claim to). Moral pluralism is a foundational pillar of liberal societies and Western societies are the most liberal societies there are.
Although it is possibly not a weakness, Shapiro's moral philosophy is based in natural law. In other words, he believes the universe is understandable; humans are made in the image of God (hence our rights proceed from our Creator); and there are objective moral duties. In today's world, it is difficult to get an overwhelming number of Americans on board even with the most bare-boned version of this. We will eventually have to come to terms on some sense of "The Good." The current state in which moral relativism proliferates will continue to catalyze social fracture especially as demographic shift. It will not be easy, but on certain things a nation must come to a broad understanding on, especially if we are to remain unified. We may be able to limp along for awhile, but we can move forward in strength if we rallied around some vision, even if it is a mythic story like Shapiro outlines.
I have more to say, but will conclude for now. This is a great book for a young person looking for some grounding in the world, but is an insufficient description of the political and cultural and moral challenges of our moment (for elite audiences).
Shapiro opens the book by introducing his titular framing device, the central metaphor that grounds his book (which of course could have been an essay like pretty much all books of contemporary political commentary):
A tension lies at the core of our being
It roils us. It churns out guts. It boils our brains.
That tension lies between two opposing forces.
Those forces beat within every man's breast. The fight for supremacy within every civilization. One must triumph, and one must fall.
The spirit of the Lion.
The spirit of the Scavenger.
In Shapiro's binary formulation Lions are those who build, create, and maintain. They are the founders and bulwark of civilization, while Scavengers are those who tear down and pull away whatever they can from the vital whole. In terms of moral properties the Lions accept responsibility and value duty, excellence, and virtue, while Scavengers value the self and pleasure, aiming to organize around grievance. Politically, Lions respect social institutions, free markets, property rights, traditional values, while Scavengers are their opponents.
Shapiro doesn't over-index on his central metaphor (as is already indicated in the language itself) nor is the it another way of restating the Left versus Right divide (though, in the contemporary American context, there is certainly a rightward slant to the Lions definitionally). Shapiro concedes that in everyone's heart there is a Lion and a Scavenger, but we've left our world to be overrun by Scavengers. The possible weakness of the framing is that Shapiro doesn't really concede a socially valuable role for the Scavenger nor is he as cold-eyed in his assessment about who the Scavengers are (e.g. Trump should have received more of Shapiro's critique but Shapiro is not in an advantageous position to make that critique and on some of the most important issues to Shapiro Trump is an unquestionable ally).
Ecologically, scavengers do have a role, reducing waste and disease while promoting the cycle of nutrients in the food web. It would have made for a more interesting book if Shapiro explored more of the ways in which the virtues of the Lion can imperil civilization or simply come at too great a cost to those who truly cannot live the way Lions do. Additionally, what would society look like if there were no Scavengers. Would it really be a better place? Many on the Right, who are even more favorably disposed to Trump including during his rise to political power, would argue that Trump is the Scavenger we need to respond to the dominance of the Scavengers of the Left. In other words, we're in a Lion-less world. I think, if we're being honest about the nature of political power and the structural forces that constrain our politics with respect to the received ideal vision of a Westernized liberal republic, I think this would be a reasonable conclusion to arrive at. Some of this is implicit in Shapiro's book, but he could've brought it out from behind the subtext and make it text.
Early in the book, Shapiro includes a really striking C.S. Lewis quote:
Courage is not simply one of the virtues, but the form of every virtue at the testing point, which mean at the point of highest reality. A chastity or honesty, or mercy, which yields to danger will be chaste or honest or merciful only on condition.
It is apt to highlight how dependent virtue is on our subjective threshold to endure various costs. I think Shapiro's own choices speak for themselves. He's not himself in politics and is otherwise using his elite cognitive gifts and force of character to run a media business. The relative return one can expect for courage in today sociocultural environment is zilch. No success can be found in going to the mats for your authentic, old fashioned (Western) values in today's world, and, thus, the world will remain the purview of Scavengers until there is a return to a cultural system where actual norms and values can be enforced at a civilization scale. Right now, it is only in the private sphere, cloistered away, that such virtue can be cultivated. Shapiro purposefully overlooks the systematic and deterministic processes because he sees these as convenient excuses, but, at some point, the explanatory power of these forces have to be integrated into a political philosophy, otherwise that philosophy will falter when challenged by reality. Shapiro optimistically projects virtues of the private sphere into the public realm. It's a form of wish-casting against an mirror world that was either created or embraced by his opponents (and partly by the same tradition he lays claim to). Moral pluralism is a foundational pillar of liberal societies and Western societies are the most liberal societies there are.
Although it is possibly not a weakness, Shapiro's moral philosophy is based in natural law. In other words, he believes the universe is understandable; humans are made in the image of God (hence our rights proceed from our Creator); and there are objective moral duties. In today's world, it is difficult to get an overwhelming number of Americans on board even with the most bare-boned version of this. We will eventually have to come to terms on some sense of "The Good." The current state in which moral relativism proliferates will continue to catalyze social fracture especially as demographic shift. It will not be easy, but on certain things a nation must come to a broad understanding on, especially if we are to remain unified. We may be able to limp along for awhile, but we can move forward in strength if we rallied around some vision, even if it is a mythic story like Shapiro outlines.
I have more to say, but will conclude for now. This is a great book for a young person looking for some grounding in the world, but is an insufficient description of the political and cultural and moral challenges of our moment (for elite audiences).
October 11, 2025
The Lions move slowly, their limbs
weary, their breath labored.
They are vulnerable.
The Scavengers lurk in the shadows.
They gather in darkness.
And then they attack.
One by one, they kill off the Lions-the
Lions who are too tired to fight, too
divided to unite, too old to roar.
Soon, very soon, the Scavengers
will master the world.
Unless."
From the Introduction.
Mr. Shapiro has defined Lions as noble and the Scavengers as destructive.
The Lions are the backbone of our society; they produce; the Scavengers are those who reap but who do not sow. The Scavengers loot and pillage and tear down a society because it is not molded into what they view as a society.
The Scavengers demand that the Lions feed, house and clothe them; for the Scavengers are incapable of fending for themselves.
The Scavengers are jealous of the Lions because the Lions are successful and resourceful. The Scavengers are out to destroy the pack of Lions. To date, the Scavengers have been unsuccessful in destroying the pack.
weary, their breath labored.
They are vulnerable.
The Scavengers lurk in the shadows.
They gather in darkness.
And then they attack.
One by one, they kill off the Lions-the
Lions who are too tired to fight, too
divided to unite, too old to roar.
Soon, very soon, the Scavengers
will master the world.
Unless."
From the Introduction.
Mr. Shapiro has defined Lions as noble and the Scavengers as destructive.
The Lions are the backbone of our society; they produce; the Scavengers are those who reap but who do not sow. The Scavengers loot and pillage and tear down a society because it is not molded into what they view as a society.
The Scavengers demand that the Lions feed, house and clothe them; for the Scavengers are incapable of fending for themselves.
The Scavengers are jealous of the Lions because the Lions are successful and resourceful. The Scavengers are out to destroy the pack of Lions. To date, the Scavengers have been unsuccessful in destroying the pack.
October 12, 2025
Lions and Scavengers is a book by political commentator, Ben Shapiro. Its aim is to analyze our modern world by breaking it down into two fundamental human impulses. The metaphor chosen is that of lions and scavengers. The metaphor of the lion stands for the spirit of responsibility, innovation, and duty. The metaphor of the scavenger stands for envy, immorality, and irresponsibility.
The Good
The book is easy to read and goes straight to the point apart from the portions of the book where the author tries to be poetic in his style.
The Bad
I will trim down my disagreements into just 3 points since a detailed analysis of the book might be bigger than the book itself.
The metaphor is wrong and incomplete
The author’s choice of metaphors is strange. This is because anyone with just a simple knowledge of wildlife could have readily told him that lions also scavenge. In addition to that, some of the animals known as scavengers also hunt. So the metaphor is not neat enough for the idea he wants to communicate.
Another thing I wish to point out before going on to weightier points is that the choice of metaphors feels like something else is missing in the picture. When you have lions and scavengers, it seems what we are missing in the picture is the prey. I will come back to this point later.
The application of the metaphor is even more wrong
He applies this terrible and incomplete metaphor to pretty much anyone that disagrees with him. It is not just that all his opponents are branded scavengers and everyone on his side are lions; it is that he is truly uncharitable to any of his opponents.
A simple and stark binary
.
He writes This idea—that the presence of winners and losers in society is de facto evidence of an evil system, maintained and preserved by evil people—can be termed the Great Conspiracy Theory This is presented without nuance.
Later he continues
Now, the Great Conspiracy Theory is enervating. It suggests that no matter how hard you work, no matter how rational and well calibrated your decisions, you will fail—because the system is out to get you. And if you disagree, you are likely part of the system.
The problem with this is its utter lack of nuance. There are people who succeed due to hard work. There are those who fail despite their hard work. There are those who succeed despite their laziness. And most importantly, there are those who fail due to evil systems. The man who dies at 45 due to cancer linked to the dumping of chemical wastes in his community’s water supply might be said to have failed in his pursuit of happiness to an evil system. Besides such extreme examples, the vast majority of people do not have enough resources to purchase the legislative influence that recodes and reclassifies their assets and liabilities. The book does absolutely nothing to recognize that certain grievances can be legitimate.
Even if the metaphors and applications are appropriate, there is still the issue that in our experience these two classifications are not stagnant. Sometimes scavengers turn into lions and lions turn into scavengers. The British government would have classified the founding fathers as scavengers, but we classify them as lions. Slaveholders would have been classified as lions for bending the will of others to their will, but we see them clearly as scavengers for feasting on the possibilities of slaves. In other cases those who started as lions (tech innovators for example) can turn into scavengers when, for example, they use their financial and political clout to block unfavorable regulations, support favorable regulations that crush their competition, or force governments to give them favorable breaks
A slope so slippery and steep that it becomes a water fall
The equation of the ideas of political figures such as Kamala Harris and Sanders to the implementation of murderous regimes such as that of Stalin is a shameless act of propaganda.
Who are the real scavengers of society
Who are the real scavengers of society? Who are the looters? Sure the image that comes to mind are that of the young men and women who run into stores and steal items. What culprit comes to mind when someone on the author’s side of politics talks about looters and scavengers and envious people?
Whatever it is, I bet it doesn’t include the image of the successful CEOs who use their political influence to escape dumping toxic chemicals into a community’s water supply, or build data centers that guzzle up the clean water supply. Does the irresponsible pillaging of the environment count as scavenging? If you fire 3000 employees or raise prices in one month and then announce record profits the next month does that count as scavenging? Or is that the mark of a lion? As I commented earlier on the incompleteness of the metaphor, what the author misses is the prey that is common to both the scavengers and the lions.
The Good
The book is easy to read and goes straight to the point apart from the portions of the book where the author tries to be poetic in his style.
The Bad
I will trim down my disagreements into just 3 points since a detailed analysis of the book might be bigger than the book itself.
The metaphor is wrong and incomplete
The author’s choice of metaphors is strange. This is because anyone with just a simple knowledge of wildlife could have readily told him that lions also scavenge. In addition to that, some of the animals known as scavengers also hunt. So the metaphor is not neat enough for the idea he wants to communicate.
Another thing I wish to point out before going on to weightier points is that the choice of metaphors feels like something else is missing in the picture. When you have lions and scavengers, it seems what we are missing in the picture is the prey. I will come back to this point later.
The application of the metaphor is even more wrong
He applies this terrible and incomplete metaphor to pretty much anyone that disagrees with him. It is not just that all his opponents are branded scavengers and everyone on his side are lions; it is that he is truly uncharitable to any of his opponents.
A simple and stark binary
.
He writes This idea—that the presence of winners and losers in society is de facto evidence of an evil system, maintained and preserved by evil people—can be termed the Great Conspiracy Theory This is presented without nuance.
Later he continues
Now, the Great Conspiracy Theory is enervating. It suggests that no matter how hard you work, no matter how rational and well calibrated your decisions, you will fail—because the system is out to get you. And if you disagree, you are likely part of the system.
The problem with this is its utter lack of nuance. There are people who succeed due to hard work. There are those who fail despite their hard work. There are those who succeed despite their laziness. And most importantly, there are those who fail due to evil systems. The man who dies at 45 due to cancer linked to the dumping of chemical wastes in his community’s water supply might be said to have failed in his pursuit of happiness to an evil system. Besides such extreme examples, the vast majority of people do not have enough resources to purchase the legislative influence that recodes and reclassifies their assets and liabilities. The book does absolutely nothing to recognize that certain grievances can be legitimate.
Even if the metaphors and applications are appropriate, there is still the issue that in our experience these two classifications are not stagnant. Sometimes scavengers turn into lions and lions turn into scavengers. The British government would have classified the founding fathers as scavengers, but we classify them as lions. Slaveholders would have been classified as lions for bending the will of others to their will, but we see them clearly as scavengers for feasting on the possibilities of slaves. In other cases those who started as lions (tech innovators for example) can turn into scavengers when, for example, they use their financial and political clout to block unfavorable regulations, support favorable regulations that crush their competition, or force governments to give them favorable breaks
A slope so slippery and steep that it becomes a water fall
The equation of the ideas of political figures such as Kamala Harris and Sanders to the implementation of murderous regimes such as that of Stalin is a shameless act of propaganda.
Who are the real scavengers of society
Who are the real scavengers of society? Who are the looters? Sure the image that comes to mind are that of the young men and women who run into stores and steal items. What culprit comes to mind when someone on the author’s side of politics talks about looters and scavengers and envious people?
Whatever it is, I bet it doesn’t include the image of the successful CEOs who use their political influence to escape dumping toxic chemicals into a community’s water supply, or build data centers that guzzle up the clean water supply. Does the irresponsible pillaging of the environment count as scavenging? If you fire 3000 employees or raise prices in one month and then announce record profits the next month does that count as scavenging? Or is that the mark of a lion? As I commented earlier on the incompleteness of the metaphor, what the author misses is the prey that is common to both the scavengers and the lions.
September 4, 2025
Excellent in every way! A tale of two worldviews. One of God and one run by Satan. One builds and protects and one deceives and destroys. One worldview leads to life the other death and destruction. Would make an excellent book for High School students to read! A must read for all Americans!
September 16, 2025
My verdict on this book in both its content and message is best exemplified by the catchy but inaccurate metaphor shown in the title and reiterated throughout the text. I nitpick this metaphor not to detract from the larger rhetorical issues in the text, but rather to emphasize the overarching issue. I give it a 3/5 in content/composition and a 1/5 for message, averaging to around 2/5 or 3.5/10. Hold onto your hats, this one's going to be a doozy.
Rather than starting with the metaphor and my problems with it, I'll start with listing what I liked about this book. For one, despite our differences, Ben is a very articulate guy regardless of your opinion on his messaging. I appreciated his articulate deconstruction of the arguments and mythmaking posed by modern soviet apologists. He describes the true horror of soviet authoritarianism with unflinching honesty, and is unequivocally correct about the inherent hypocrisy of the bolsheviks' top-down "people's revolution". I appreciate his attention to the fact that the soviet regime committed multiple genocides and countless crimes against humanity, this is an underrepresented reality that needs to be acknowledged for society to heal. I also very much liked the quote "those who 'Just Ask Questions' are not adults seeking answers, but rather children avoiding them", as it very succinctly summarizes the conspiracist mindset, which is also one we see all too often in the modern day american political discourse.
Unfortunately, this is where my praise ends. I'll begin with the literal failures of the metaphor he presents, followed by how that metaphor represents a recent shift in his argumentative strategy and how that shift sabotages the point he is trying to make both in this book and in his political commentary more broadly, and how that shift emphasizes the rhetorical flaws in his worldview.
From the very first chapter, his Lions+Scavengers metaphor falls flat. As someone at least equally interested in zoology and ecology as I am in politics, if I may use his own terms, this dichotomy he draws in American society fundamentally fails to reflect the biological reality and broader role in the ecosystem played by both lions and scavengers. What frustrates me further is that this metaphor could have been utilized in an effective way if he had gone to the effort of adequately researching it first. For one, he represents the divide between scavengers and lions as a vast immutable gap between even the most impoverished lion and the most well-meaning scavenger, despite the fact that in reality, lions are well known to engage in scavenging behavior in their natural habitat. wild lions are, in fact, known to directly steal prey that was hunted by animals more traditionally viewed as scavengers (such as hyenas), at least as much as the opposite is true. In addition to that, his unshakeable stance on never "giving in" to scavengers (lest they, in his view, inevitably lash out and bite the hand that feeds them), with the purported consequence of such behavior being society's downfall, ALSO runs directly against the ecological reality of the relationship between predator species and scavenging species. The fact that the two groups are far from mutually exclusive, the fact remains that, should scavengers be removed from an ecosystem, there would be an immediate and ecologically catastrophic buildup of waste in the environment, waste such as the remains of prey inedible to anyone save for adapted species such as hyenas. By removing the presence of scavengers I mean carnivorous species of majority scavengers, as the removal of any species that engages in scavenging would mean the effective removal of most insects and carnivorous species, the consequences of which are well know, and which speaks to the intransigent black-and-white nature of his worldview. That aside, the buildup of such waste in the environment (particularly a hot environment, such as that in which one might find lions living in the wild), would rapidly become a festering health hazard, a literal manifestation of the now-rotting foundation of very system keeping everything within it alive and in balance. Disease would spike, accelerating exponentially upon contamination of drinking water, which in turn would sharply increase the rates of mortality in the surviving population from both disease and starvation. Parasites would become a major problem (unless those too would be considered scavengers). The very soil balance would change, as the carcasses return to the ground in the form of rotting flesh, rather than in the fecal matter of secondary consuming scavengers, depriving the earth of the very nutrients needed to sustain the plant life feeding the surviving foraging herbivorous population. The environment itself would wither and die, starving the herbivores whose corpses in turn would add to the escalating ecological collapse. Then, the great dignified lions of Ben's metaphor would find themselves alone and few in number in a landscape of devastation. desolate. starving.
Even if the scavengers remain, Ben describes his mythologized lions as "bold, merciful, and also strong". The best I can say of that description is the strength aspect is accurate, though overshadowed in both physical strength and capacity for effective cooperative synergy by both hyenas and african wild dogs (among others), due to his unfortunate decision to focus the metaphor around an ecosystem containing one of the most complex, interconnected, and diverse populations of predators and apex predators. Such a setting, despite undermining his point, is at least accurate to the environment he seeks to draw allegory with, America. In context of that vast array of biodiversity, I would not list lions highly in terms of boldness or individualism when compared with species such as honey badgers, whose boldness is not contingent on both outsizing and outnumbering their opponent. Nor would they be bold compared with the crocodile, who hesitates far less when hunting the cape buffalo and does so with far greater efficiency. In terms of mercy, it's here that his blind anthropomorphism and ignorance of the natural science shines through. Such a comparison would be apt for one who's only zoological knowledge came from the time period of the Old Testament, but is embarrassingly lacking for a modern adult. Any moral judgement, mercy, cruelty, or otherwise, is inherently inapplicable to the nonhuman animal, whose actions are generally taken in service of self or group, not the broader population. Within his moral worldview, some facts that easily refute his attributions of human morality include: lion prides see the male operating as the stay-at-home parent, with the mothers venturing out to provide for the family. male lions are also documented to have sex with other male lions. male lions newly leading an existing group are also known to kill any cubs too young to defend themselves in order to induce heat in the female lions of the group, and have new cubs with his genetic material. under his comparison, this routine culling would fit under the metaphorical contentions regarding meritocracy.
Nitpicking aside, the broader focus of this book being a metaphor represents a shift from his prior expository and descriptive style of writing to a more allegorical approach to illustrating the worldview he seeks to impart to the reader. He unfortunately seems rather lacking in practice at accurately constructing and representing those metaphors, and the impact of the rhetorical message of the book suffers greatly for it, in the same way it does when he uses the approach in his other political media content of late. Ben uses overgeneralized archetypes entirely substantiated by a cherry picked selection of hot-topic current events anecdotes pulled from the headlines and history textbooks are tied together by the loosest word association, and rather than proving his point, the effect largely just shows that he's been spending too much time around Jordan Peterson. His methodology in creating these archetypes is vague and the categories themselves so broad that he must break them down into an endless litany of equally meaningless subtypes that are so numerous it's impossible for anyone to remember without flipping back to read the list again. Lions, innovators, pioneers, weavers, hunters, warriors, scavengers, lechers, and barbarians are what I can recall off the top of my head, but the colorful list of poorly defined categories is far longer in its entirety. The oversimplification followed by excessive subdivision of categories renders the already flawed metaphor entirely self-defeating in terms of proving his point, leaving it to function only as a thinly veiled strawman production mechanism.
The broader point he makes, that the "lions" are the true embodiment of western society and the "scavengers" the ever-present enemy seeking to usurp them and destroy the system entirely, hinges on his contention that the only way to prevent the aforementioned societal dissolution is to never give an inch. That claim is both harmful and objectively impossible to achieve while sustaining a functioning society. The breakdown of subcategories finds odd combinations sharing a label, for example "lechers" serves as a label applied equally to manosphere grifters, pedophiles, politicians, drag queens, queer people, and trans people. In the end the broader message is that refusing to allow the "scavenger" group, representing the left, to have their way or even be listened to, is the only way he sees to save western society. When one unmasks the metaphor, the absurdity of this theme is apparent, as the chief theme of this book is that Ben thinks the only way to have societal progress is to remove progressives from society.
so, in short, this book represents a turn by the author toward ideological absolutism, as well as a downgrade in writing quality and critical thinking skills from a pundit previously known exclusively for being articulate and facts-based in his argumentation.
final verdict? 2/5, it's a damn shame. plus one star for letting me talk about interconnectivity in ecosystems and the importance of biodiversity in continuing habitat function.
Rather than starting with the metaphor and my problems with it, I'll start with listing what I liked about this book. For one, despite our differences, Ben is a very articulate guy regardless of your opinion on his messaging. I appreciated his articulate deconstruction of the arguments and mythmaking posed by modern soviet apologists. He describes the true horror of soviet authoritarianism with unflinching honesty, and is unequivocally correct about the inherent hypocrisy of the bolsheviks' top-down "people's revolution". I appreciate his attention to the fact that the soviet regime committed multiple genocides and countless crimes against humanity, this is an underrepresented reality that needs to be acknowledged for society to heal. I also very much liked the quote "those who 'Just Ask Questions' are not adults seeking answers, but rather children avoiding them", as it very succinctly summarizes the conspiracist mindset, which is also one we see all too often in the modern day american political discourse.
Unfortunately, this is where my praise ends. I'll begin with the literal failures of the metaphor he presents, followed by how that metaphor represents a recent shift in his argumentative strategy and how that shift sabotages the point he is trying to make both in this book and in his political commentary more broadly, and how that shift emphasizes the rhetorical flaws in his worldview.
From the very first chapter, his Lions+Scavengers metaphor falls flat. As someone at least equally interested in zoology and ecology as I am in politics, if I may use his own terms, this dichotomy he draws in American society fundamentally fails to reflect the biological reality and broader role in the ecosystem played by both lions and scavengers. What frustrates me further is that this metaphor could have been utilized in an effective way if he had gone to the effort of adequately researching it first. For one, he represents the divide between scavengers and lions as a vast immutable gap between even the most impoverished lion and the most well-meaning scavenger, despite the fact that in reality, lions are well known to engage in scavenging behavior in their natural habitat. wild lions are, in fact, known to directly steal prey that was hunted by animals more traditionally viewed as scavengers (such as hyenas), at least as much as the opposite is true. In addition to that, his unshakeable stance on never "giving in" to scavengers (lest they, in his view, inevitably lash out and bite the hand that feeds them), with the purported consequence of such behavior being society's downfall, ALSO runs directly against the ecological reality of the relationship between predator species and scavenging species. The fact that the two groups are far from mutually exclusive, the fact remains that, should scavengers be removed from an ecosystem, there would be an immediate and ecologically catastrophic buildup of waste in the environment, waste such as the remains of prey inedible to anyone save for adapted species such as hyenas. By removing the presence of scavengers I mean carnivorous species of majority scavengers, as the removal of any species that engages in scavenging would mean the effective removal of most insects and carnivorous species, the consequences of which are well know, and which speaks to the intransigent black-and-white nature of his worldview. That aside, the buildup of such waste in the environment (particularly a hot environment, such as that in which one might find lions living in the wild), would rapidly become a festering health hazard, a literal manifestation of the now-rotting foundation of very system keeping everything within it alive and in balance. Disease would spike, accelerating exponentially upon contamination of drinking water, which in turn would sharply increase the rates of mortality in the surviving population from both disease and starvation. Parasites would become a major problem (unless those too would be considered scavengers). The very soil balance would change, as the carcasses return to the ground in the form of rotting flesh, rather than in the fecal matter of secondary consuming scavengers, depriving the earth of the very nutrients needed to sustain the plant life feeding the surviving foraging herbivorous population. The environment itself would wither and die, starving the herbivores whose corpses in turn would add to the escalating ecological collapse. Then, the great dignified lions of Ben's metaphor would find themselves alone and few in number in a landscape of devastation. desolate. starving.
Even if the scavengers remain, Ben describes his mythologized lions as "bold, merciful, and also strong". The best I can say of that description is the strength aspect is accurate, though overshadowed in both physical strength and capacity for effective cooperative synergy by both hyenas and african wild dogs (among others), due to his unfortunate decision to focus the metaphor around an ecosystem containing one of the most complex, interconnected, and diverse populations of predators and apex predators. Such a setting, despite undermining his point, is at least accurate to the environment he seeks to draw allegory with, America. In context of that vast array of biodiversity, I would not list lions highly in terms of boldness or individualism when compared with species such as honey badgers, whose boldness is not contingent on both outsizing and outnumbering their opponent. Nor would they be bold compared with the crocodile, who hesitates far less when hunting the cape buffalo and does so with far greater efficiency. In terms of mercy, it's here that his blind anthropomorphism and ignorance of the natural science shines through. Such a comparison would be apt for one who's only zoological knowledge came from the time period of the Old Testament, but is embarrassingly lacking for a modern adult. Any moral judgement, mercy, cruelty, or otherwise, is inherently inapplicable to the nonhuman animal, whose actions are generally taken in service of self or group, not the broader population. Within his moral worldview, some facts that easily refute his attributions of human morality include: lion prides see the male operating as the stay-at-home parent, with the mothers venturing out to provide for the family. male lions are also documented to have sex with other male lions. male lions newly leading an existing group are also known to kill any cubs too young to defend themselves in order to induce heat in the female lions of the group, and have new cubs with his genetic material. under his comparison, this routine culling would fit under the metaphorical contentions regarding meritocracy.
Nitpicking aside, the broader focus of this book being a metaphor represents a shift from his prior expository and descriptive style of writing to a more allegorical approach to illustrating the worldview he seeks to impart to the reader. He unfortunately seems rather lacking in practice at accurately constructing and representing those metaphors, and the impact of the rhetorical message of the book suffers greatly for it, in the same way it does when he uses the approach in his other political media content of late. Ben uses overgeneralized archetypes entirely substantiated by a cherry picked selection of hot-topic current events anecdotes pulled from the headlines and history textbooks are tied together by the loosest word association, and rather than proving his point, the effect largely just shows that he's been spending too much time around Jordan Peterson. His methodology in creating these archetypes is vague and the categories themselves so broad that he must break them down into an endless litany of equally meaningless subtypes that are so numerous it's impossible for anyone to remember without flipping back to read the list again. Lions, innovators, pioneers, weavers, hunters, warriors, scavengers, lechers, and barbarians are what I can recall off the top of my head, but the colorful list of poorly defined categories is far longer in its entirety. The oversimplification followed by excessive subdivision of categories renders the already flawed metaphor entirely self-defeating in terms of proving his point, leaving it to function only as a thinly veiled strawman production mechanism.
The broader point he makes, that the "lions" are the true embodiment of western society and the "scavengers" the ever-present enemy seeking to usurp them and destroy the system entirely, hinges on his contention that the only way to prevent the aforementioned societal dissolution is to never give an inch. That claim is both harmful and objectively impossible to achieve while sustaining a functioning society. The breakdown of subcategories finds odd combinations sharing a label, for example "lechers" serves as a label applied equally to manosphere grifters, pedophiles, politicians, drag queens, queer people, and trans people. In the end the broader message is that refusing to allow the "scavenger" group, representing the left, to have their way or even be listened to, is the only way he sees to save western society. When one unmasks the metaphor, the absurdity of this theme is apparent, as the chief theme of this book is that Ben thinks the only way to have societal progress is to remove progressives from society.
so, in short, this book represents a turn by the author toward ideological absolutism, as well as a downgrade in writing quality and critical thinking skills from a pundit previously known exclusively for being articulate and facts-based in his argumentation.
final verdict? 2/5, it's a damn shame. plus one star for letting me talk about interconnectivity in ecosystems and the importance of biodiversity in continuing habitat function.
September 23, 2025
More or less classic Shapiro. He lays out his whole framework of “Lions” (builders, protectors, people who take responsibility) versus “Scavengers” (resentful, entitled, always blaming systems) and runs it through the lens of American culture, politics, and history. It’s sharp, punchy, and very easy to follow-he’s good at boiling down big ideas into a simple metaphor.
Some of the arguments feel like retreads if you’ve read his earlier stuff. Still, he clearly believes this is his most urgent work, and it reads that way-it’s more a call to action than just cultural commentary.
Overall: if you’re aligned with his worldview, it’s a rousing defense of responsibility, merit, and Western values. If you're not, you’ll probably find it reductive.
Some of the arguments feel like retreads if you’ve read his earlier stuff. Still, he clearly believes this is his most urgent work, and it reads that way-it’s more a call to action than just cultural commentary.
Overall: if you’re aligned with his worldview, it’s a rousing defense of responsibility, merit, and Western values. If you're not, you’ll probably find it reductive.
October 6, 2025
Reading this book had serendipitous timing with Charlie Kirk’s assassination. I pre-ordered this months ago and flew through it. This book is steeped with examples in Ben’s life that explain the story of the Lion and the Scavenger. Ben uses these examples and the laconic words of eminent authors to prognosticate the fate of western civilization. The read is quick and simple enough, and Ben is straightforward on his hypothesis. There are those in society who help build, sustain and progress humanity (“Lions”) and there are those that claim victimhood and seek to tear down the western civilization that’s given them the freedoms that allow them to derail free markets and speech (“Scavengers”). If the Lions remain reticent, then the Scavengers will destroy western civilization.
Ben makes strong claims and backs them up with equally strong sources. The way the book is laid out gives evidence to Ben being adroit in writing. Great book, I’d recommend.
Ben makes strong claims and backs them up with equally strong sources. The way the book is laid out gives evidence to Ben being adroit in writing. Great book, I’d recommend.
November 5, 2025
To preface this review I have been listening/watching Ben Shapiro since 2018, so I am very familiar with his views, dialect, and how he views the world. I was anticipating this book whenever I first heard him announce it on his daily show and can say overall it did not disappoint.
Now was this my favorite political book ever? No. Is it timeless? I do not believe so. However the overall message may be timeless but the book requires much political context in the last 5 years to truly appreciate. Despite not being the best I do believe it is still quite good. It is clear throughout the entire book how intellectual Ben Shapiro is. He truly is just such a smart man and you can tell in his writing alone. Despite this , most of the things Ben brings up in this book Ben takes the time to explain which I see as very helpful especially for those who may not be familiar with the things in which Ben some level of expertise in.
As I mentioned earlier I do believe that the overall message of the book, the lions and the scavengers, is a much needed message. It shows two distinct groups of people in society and how they are fundamentally at odds with one another. One is that which build society and society the other is one which destroys society. In history these have always existed and the book does a pretty good job at showing historical moments where obvious lions and scavengers are at odds.
My favorite thing about this book is the very religious ties it has, although it does not require a lion to be religious a lion is only stronger through his faith and must have some sort of spiritual foundation to be a lion, as Lions believe there is purpose and good in life fundamentally. Ben ties so much back to God and even Jesus which was surprising to me because I know Ben is a devout Jew but I also know he has much respect for Christian’s/Catholics. For the first half of the book especially it felt like some sort of religious book because that first half was primarily about the lions and I thought it was the best aspect of the book and really brought me great joy to read about while also convicting me to be the best man I can in the society I live in, not just for my sake.
The book however was not perfect. One of the biggest problems I had is that it felt very repetitive. Ben goes through a few points about both the Lions and the Scavengers and I feel like the rest of the book says those points again but in a different way over and over again. By over half way through the book I just felt like I had heard most the points Ben wanted to make. This may be due to how much I listen to Ben in my free time though because I have heard him make these points many times on his show and in his speeches, so that may just be a me problem, I am not sure. The other problem I had is that well first you need a decent amount of political knowledge to understand everything Ben alludes to and talks about in this book. Not a crazy amount but you do need to be into politics more than the average person to fully experience the book. The other part is that this book is heavily right leaning. Of course I expected that going into it, I mean Ben is a conservative talk show host, so I am not surprised. However I do wish he took a more independent or center position when writing the book to speak to a wider audience because I do believe it is a great message but I can understand how from the other side it may be a book you will not pick up.
Overall great book and recommend to everyone to read especially those who lean right but anyone can pick it up and learn something from it even if it may not totally sway your political positions.
Now was this my favorite political book ever? No. Is it timeless? I do not believe so. However the overall message may be timeless but the book requires much political context in the last 5 years to truly appreciate. Despite not being the best I do believe it is still quite good. It is clear throughout the entire book how intellectual Ben Shapiro is. He truly is just such a smart man and you can tell in his writing alone. Despite this , most of the things Ben brings up in this book Ben takes the time to explain which I see as very helpful especially for those who may not be familiar with the things in which Ben some level of expertise in.
As I mentioned earlier I do believe that the overall message of the book, the lions and the scavengers, is a much needed message. It shows two distinct groups of people in society and how they are fundamentally at odds with one another. One is that which build society and society the other is one which destroys society. In history these have always existed and the book does a pretty good job at showing historical moments where obvious lions and scavengers are at odds.
My favorite thing about this book is the very religious ties it has, although it does not require a lion to be religious a lion is only stronger through his faith and must have some sort of spiritual foundation to be a lion, as Lions believe there is purpose and good in life fundamentally. Ben ties so much back to God and even Jesus which was surprising to me because I know Ben is a devout Jew but I also know he has much respect for Christian’s/Catholics. For the first half of the book especially it felt like some sort of religious book because that first half was primarily about the lions and I thought it was the best aspect of the book and really brought me great joy to read about while also convicting me to be the best man I can in the society I live in, not just for my sake.
The book however was not perfect. One of the biggest problems I had is that it felt very repetitive. Ben goes through a few points about both the Lions and the Scavengers and I feel like the rest of the book says those points again but in a different way over and over again. By over half way through the book I just felt like I had heard most the points Ben wanted to make. This may be due to how much I listen to Ben in my free time though because I have heard him make these points many times on his show and in his speeches, so that may just be a me problem, I am not sure. The other problem I had is that well first you need a decent amount of political knowledge to understand everything Ben alludes to and talks about in this book. Not a crazy amount but you do need to be into politics more than the average person to fully experience the book. The other part is that this book is heavily right leaning. Of course I expected that going into it, I mean Ben is a conservative talk show host, so I am not surprised. However I do wish he took a more independent or center position when writing the book to speak to a wider audience because I do believe it is a great message but I can understand how from the other side it may be a book you will not pick up.
Overall great book and recommend to everyone to read especially those who lean right but anyone can pick it up and learn something from it even if it may not totally sway your political positions.
October 7, 2025
It was pretty good. The lions and scavengers thing didn't always work for me and I thought he talked about Israel too much but I still liked it and value his opinions.
Want to read
August 9, 2025I'm gonna eat shit for this one
October 14, 2025
I watched Shapiro debate Sam Harris a few years ago, and he seemed reasonable enough to give the benefit of the doubt in book format. As a PSA to anybody falling into the same trap: this does have plenty of reasonable points about our cultural moment, but it's actually basically a children's book for future conservatives! In the acknowledgements is a point about how essential passion is to the work: well, this adult author might have too passionate of a relationship with the Chronicles of Narnia or the Lion King, because this is essentially an right-wing Aslan/Mufasa fanfic. Why this was deemed persuasive and essential framing for serious topics, I can't say, but I'm a bit worried that this prepubescent worldview is lurking in the background of the growing MAGA youth movement. We should put the cosplay away if we're going to actually work out our politics.
January 14, 2026
Lions and Scavengers is an excellent book for any that agree with Ben Shapiro’s world view, but it’s not likely to convert anyone on the other side. Despite the short page length, Shapiro hammers the main metaphor relentlessly with surface level arguments and examples. And from that perspective it would be hard to argue many of the points that he makes. The book feels especially timely because of events that’ve happened in the short time after it was written and released (Charlie Kirk, Bondi mass shooting, Mamdani, Tucker Carlson, Rob Reiner, Minnesota Day Care Fraud, etc).
The idea of Scavengers certainly feels fitting to me. In America, which is in the title of the book, the vast majority of people would be considered wealthy elsewhere in the world and for most of history. You have people who became rich off the American system insisting that it’s unfair, needs to be radically changed, and needs to be torn down. You have millionaires who think they are moral while the people making slightly more than them are not. It’s the Lions that I struggle with more. It seems to me that many standard every day people fall into neither category. And many of the Lions Shapiro may be thinking of (say, Elon, Trump, or the Founding Fathers) could certainly take actions that fall into both categories.
Gen Z and Millennials too often feel aggrieved in a world they felt never gave them a fair chance. Plenty of them are Scavengers, refusing to make changes necessary for them to live a more successful life, blaming others for their failures and predicaments. While he does briefly say not everyone is afforded the same opportunities, one thing Shapiro doesn’t ponder much in the book is what if some aren’t given a fair shake? Are they then justified in being a Scavenger? To give one example - a new article called The Lost Generation by Jacob Savage goes over how DEI policies in the 2010s effectively wiped out a generation of young white men from many industries (Hollywood, journalism, academia). Shapiro himself highlighted the article elsewhere and definitely agreed with it. But what about those who lost out from circumstances out of their control? Shapiro never hits on gray areas within this framing he set up, and it would have been nice to hear him elaborate on how those with less opportunity or legit grievances can overcome the hands they’ve been dealt.
The idea of Scavengers certainly feels fitting to me. In America, which is in the title of the book, the vast majority of people would be considered wealthy elsewhere in the world and for most of history. You have people who became rich off the American system insisting that it’s unfair, needs to be radically changed, and needs to be torn down. You have millionaires who think they are moral while the people making slightly more than them are not. It’s the Lions that I struggle with more. It seems to me that many standard every day people fall into neither category. And many of the Lions Shapiro may be thinking of (say, Elon, Trump, or the Founding Fathers) could certainly take actions that fall into both categories.
Gen Z and Millennials too often feel aggrieved in a world they felt never gave them a fair chance. Plenty of them are Scavengers, refusing to make changes necessary for them to live a more successful life, blaming others for their failures and predicaments. While he does briefly say not everyone is afforded the same opportunities, one thing Shapiro doesn’t ponder much in the book is what if some aren’t given a fair shake? Are they then justified in being a Scavenger? To give one example - a new article called The Lost Generation by Jacob Savage goes over how DEI policies in the 2010s effectively wiped out a generation of young white men from many industries (Hollywood, journalism, academia). Shapiro himself highlighted the article elsewhere and definitely agreed with it. But what about those who lost out from circumstances out of their control? Shapiro never hits on gray areas within this framing he set up, and it would have been nice to hear him elaborate on how those with less opportunity or legit grievances can overcome the hands they’ve been dealt.
January 11, 2026
I love listening to Ben's travels and experiences with those he encounters around the world and in his day to day life. Everything around him (and us) feeds into this metaphor of lions (those who build, create, and maintain; the founders and bulwark of civilization) and scavengers (those who tear down and pull away whatever they can from the vital whole). Put into a way that was current and well-structured. I found it approachable and easy (enough) to read.
December 29, 2025
While I agree with most of what Ben says here, I think that any project that attempts to frame such a historically and morally complex issue in binary terms is ultimately doomed to oversimplify and fall short.
November 14, 2025
I generally agree to the end of what he’s saying, but the arguments and logic to get there were at best anecdotal and at worst dishonest.
September 26, 2025
I disagree with Ben Shapiro on an enormous number of issues, but I still enjoy listening to him on occasion discussing, debating, and arguing important topics. I have tremendous respect for his intellect and thoughts, in spite of my disagreements.
Which makes this book all the more disappointing. While I normally find Shapiro erudite and well referenced in his speeches and discussions, that's not the case here.
The premise of this book is the world is split into two kinds of actors: Lions, who build and create, and Scavengers, who destroy and tear down. Individuals are not binary—you "wake up each day" and decide how you will act—nor are groups, as he explicitly points to both left-wing and right wing Scavengers (his Lions all tend to be right wing—I cannot recall any left wing ones in the book, although it's possible I'm forgetting).
Unfortunately, Shapiro fails to defend his case. He provides anecdotes of specific "Lions" and "Scavengers," but his analysis has two major failings. The first is that the anecdotes are just that: one off cases. He does not make the case—nor even try—to show that these are tied more systemically into a broader system. He asserts that (e.g. Bernie Sanders to Marxism), but he doesn't make a principled argument as to why it is.
Secondly, in many of the cases, his argument seems to be tied strictly to people he doesn't like, and he makes a one-sided attack on them as "Scavengers" without exploring any possibility of why they might see themselves as Lions. And ironically, while he might be correct in many of these cases, he does himself a disservice by not showing any empathy, and it comes across as simply a lack of understanding. For example, he accuses "the sexual revolution" as being a form of Scavengers, but he simply points to some of the downsides and poor outcomes (e.g. low birthrates) and doesn't explain his reasoning.
I will also mention that Shapiro falls into one of my least favorite traps, consistently resorting to ad hominem attacks. I understand that he does not like these people, but the name calling is completely unnecessary, uncouth, and takes away from his actual points. In many cases, these feel like his on "grievance based" system.
Which makes this book all the more disappointing. While I normally find Shapiro erudite and well referenced in his speeches and discussions, that's not the case here.
The premise of this book is the world is split into two kinds of actors: Lions, who build and create, and Scavengers, who destroy and tear down. Individuals are not binary—you "wake up each day" and decide how you will act—nor are groups, as he explicitly points to both left-wing and right wing Scavengers (his Lions all tend to be right wing—I cannot recall any left wing ones in the book, although it's possible I'm forgetting).
Unfortunately, Shapiro fails to defend his case. He provides anecdotes of specific "Lions" and "Scavengers," but his analysis has two major failings. The first is that the anecdotes are just that: one off cases. He does not make the case—nor even try—to show that these are tied more systemically into a broader system. He asserts that (e.g. Bernie Sanders to Marxism), but he doesn't make a principled argument as to why it is.
Secondly, in many of the cases, his argument seems to be tied strictly to people he doesn't like, and he makes a one-sided attack on them as "Scavengers" without exploring any possibility of why they might see themselves as Lions. And ironically, while he might be correct in many of these cases, he does himself a disservice by not showing any empathy, and it comes across as simply a lack of understanding. For example, he accuses "the sexual revolution" as being a form of Scavengers, but he simply points to some of the downsides and poor outcomes (e.g. low birthrates) and doesn't explain his reasoning.
I will also mention that Shapiro falls into one of my least favorite traps, consistently resorting to ad hominem attacks. I understand that he does not like these people, but the name calling is completely unnecessary, uncouth, and takes away from his actual points. In many cases, these feel like his on "grievance based" system.
September 13, 2025
Ben Shapiro is a thoughtful writer and pundit from the conservative side. In this book he argues that society is divided into groups called LIONS and SCAVENGERS. The lions operate with a fixed set of principles which try to advance freedom and private property. They also believe deeply in a world which has fixed principles. Scavengers operate from a single principle of envy. The matrix is elaborated with a number of other character types - but the basic concept is simple. I. think it reflects a lot of the issues we face as a nation at this point.
November 20, 2025
Once again Ben Shapiro hits a home run with his newest book “Lions and Scavengers, the True Story of America.” There are few political thinkers that can explain so concisely the turmoil of modern times and the subsequent fraying of Western Civilization. In this book, he defines those who create stable societies and successful civilizations, as opposed to those who seek to demolish them. Lions are the builders and sustainers, while Scavengers are simply leaches and destroyers. Unfortunately, today’s America is experiencing an epic clash of Lions verses Scavengers. While the book’s title features the United States, and his focus is most certainly on our country, Mr. Shapiro also takes us on his international travels to other Western countries such as the United Kingdom, Israel, and Argentina, to give examples of the tensions between their own Lions and Scavengers. He also spends time illustrating the damage Scavengers inflicted on 20th century Russia. Shapiro crystallizes the principle three philosophies of Lions (which he dubs The Pride) as 1) a belief that the universe is logical, understandable, and governed by a Divine master plan; 2) humans are made in the image of God, are creative beings, and have autonomous agency to make choices; and 3) humans have true and meaningful moral duties derived from God, the dictates of reason, and civilizational traditions. On the other hand, Scavengers (dubbed The Pack) are ruled by three subversive, even savage beliefs: 1) the universe is purposeless and meaningless, and all civilizational morals are merely guises for power grabs by the establishment; 2) your personal failures are a result of an imagined corrupt power system of which you are always a victim; and 3) destruction and violence are the only proper response to these imagined malevolent power structures. Throughout his book, Ben Shapiro provides accurate and detailed examples of Lions and Scavengers in both America’s past and present history. His accounts of our modern day Scavengers are disturbing and ominous. Supporting our Lions is not only a moral duty, it is of upmost importance to the very survival of civil society. Frankly, the book ends in a cliffhanger. While there are signs that America Lions are awakening, Ben Shapiro warns that Scavengers NEVER give up their disruptive craving for control by eliminating all Lions across the land.
December 16, 2025
this book genuinely sucked. ive never considered a book a waste of time to read, but this was certainly close. many of the reviews (positive and negative) do not comment on the actual substance of the book so im going to do that here.
the book was riddled with distracting typos throughout. the carelessness with which the book was put together was mind boggling. punctuation missing at various points and complete misspellings of words making several sentences entirely incomprehensible. the prose is equally awful. reads like shapiro is delivering a speech. few paragraphs and many lines that are single sentences intended to deliver a point but do the opposite: because these sentences stand alone, it’s hard to glean a coherent narrative.
besides typos, shapiro name-drops complex philosophies (existential nihilism, resigned determinism) without explaining any of these terms or why he is dismissing them.
some of the comparisons of people to lions / scavengers included in the book come across as hilariously lacking in nuance. the dichotomy is presented as strictly black and white. to the extent that "lions" or "scavengers" actually exist, i think most would agree that few persons always exemplify lion characteristics or always exemplify scavenger characteristics. the book fails to acknowledge this possibility and instead comes across as those who are lions are destined to be lions forever while those who are scavengers are destined to be scavengers with no possibility of salvation.
shapiro condemns conspiracy theorists while bolstering his own: that scavengers have hid for centuries in the west, planning and waiting for the perfect moment to tear it apart. he goes so far as to say that scavengers, when given the chance, will certainly murder lions. such a claim is much more complex, much more banal, and claiming such a thing as though it is fact is dangerously idiotic.
the book was riddled with distracting typos throughout. the carelessness with which the book was put together was mind boggling. punctuation missing at various points and complete misspellings of words making several sentences entirely incomprehensible. the prose is equally awful. reads like shapiro is delivering a speech. few paragraphs and many lines that are single sentences intended to deliver a point but do the opposite: because these sentences stand alone, it’s hard to glean a coherent narrative.
besides typos, shapiro name-drops complex philosophies (existential nihilism, resigned determinism) without explaining any of these terms or why he is dismissing them.
some of the comparisons of people to lions / scavengers included in the book come across as hilariously lacking in nuance. the dichotomy is presented as strictly black and white. to the extent that "lions" or "scavengers" actually exist, i think most would agree that few persons always exemplify lion characteristics or always exemplify scavenger characteristics. the book fails to acknowledge this possibility and instead comes across as those who are lions are destined to be lions forever while those who are scavengers are destined to be scavengers with no possibility of salvation.
shapiro condemns conspiracy theorists while bolstering his own: that scavengers have hid for centuries in the west, planning and waiting for the perfect moment to tear it apart. he goes so far as to say that scavengers, when given the chance, will certainly murder lions. such a claim is much more complex, much more banal, and claiming such a thing as though it is fact is dangerously idiotic.
October 8, 2025
In this insightful and thought-provoking examination of the current state of Western civilization, Ben Shapiro introduces the dichotomy of Lions and Scavengers. Lions, like the nation’s founding fathers, are driven by a spirit of success, responsibility, and duty. Lions believe that the universe was constructed by a set of discernible rules, and they embrace their own agency and moral duty. Lions come in many forms—the Hunter forges new paths and crafts new solutions; the Warrior is steadfast in defending his family and culture; the Weaver is dedicated to the construction and maintenance of the social fabric—and together these Lions form a pride who constructs a system of rules that protect individual rights and foster public virtue.
Lions stand in stark contrast to the Scavengers, who are driven by the impulse to escape their own failures and shortcomings by blaming others. Scavengers, who believe there is a Great Conspiracy out to get them, also come in many forms—the Looter, who claims the work of others as his birthright; the Lecher, who believes his alienation from society is the fault of an unfair system; and the Barbarian, who believes that all of his maladies can be laid at the feet of Western colonizers—and these Scavengers form a Pack that exists to overthrow the existing order.
Shapiro illustrates these opposing types through examples from history and the present day, sharing memorable stories and anecdotes alongside quotes and ideas from the greatest minds in history. This all leads into his invitation to readers to take up the mantle of the Lion to defend the principles that shape a free and fruitful society.
Lions and Scavengers is a little more personal than Shapiro’s other books, and I was not surprised to hear that he originally wrote this for himself as a way of working out his own understanding of what he was witnessing in contemporary politics and various world movements. Like all of Shaprio’s books, this one is dense but also brilliant. Shapiro is one of the sharpest thinkers of our time, and while I’m not entirely certain that I understand or agree with every aspect of his proposed Lion/Scavenger framework, I am fascinated by this new way of looking at our society. It’s a timely read with immense staying power, and probably worth a reread on Kindle or in print.
My Rating: 4 Stars // Book Format: Audiobook
Lions stand in stark contrast to the Scavengers, who are driven by the impulse to escape their own failures and shortcomings by blaming others. Scavengers, who believe there is a Great Conspiracy out to get them, also come in many forms—the Looter, who claims the work of others as his birthright; the Lecher, who believes his alienation from society is the fault of an unfair system; and the Barbarian, who believes that all of his maladies can be laid at the feet of Western colonizers—and these Scavengers form a Pack that exists to overthrow the existing order.
Shapiro illustrates these opposing types through examples from history and the present day, sharing memorable stories and anecdotes alongside quotes and ideas from the greatest minds in history. This all leads into his invitation to readers to take up the mantle of the Lion to defend the principles that shape a free and fruitful society.
Lions and Scavengers is a little more personal than Shapiro’s other books, and I was not surprised to hear that he originally wrote this for himself as a way of working out his own understanding of what he was witnessing in contemporary politics and various world movements. Like all of Shaprio’s books, this one is dense but also brilliant. Shapiro is one of the sharpest thinkers of our time, and while I’m not entirely certain that I understand or agree with every aspect of his proposed Lion/Scavenger framework, I am fascinated by this new way of looking at our society. It’s a timely read with immense staying power, and probably worth a reread on Kindle or in print.
My Rating: 4 Stars // Book Format: Audiobook
October 9, 2025
Although this is a really terrific read, and full of truth, it’s a shame that such a book is even needed. What should be common sense to anyone with a brain unfortunately won’t be read by most of the people who need to read it. It’s an excellent summary of how western civilization is being destroyed by the radical Left, and how the Left is getting away with it. They are Marxists and most of the rest of us are guilty of pandering to them. That’s about it.
Audiobook, read by the author. I had to slow it down to 0.8x speed 😆
Audiobook, read by the author. I had to slow it down to 0.8x speed 😆
October 9, 2025
Lions and Scavengers is a perfect book for the moment we are living in.
Western Civilization is under grave duress, it is facing the threat of extinction. The scavengers seem to have had the upper hand for the past few decades.
But the lions are awakening.
Western Civilization is under grave duress, it is facing the threat of extinction. The scavengers seem to have had the upper hand for the past few decades.
But the lions are awakening.
October 16, 2025
Ben is actually a very good writer. This was the first book I read of his. Overall his points are well taken and valid although I disagree with some of his religious assertions. Certainly worth a read.
January 11, 2026
Another stellar book from Ben Shapiro, a true force in the conservative movement. We must embrace our inner lions and stand up against the scavengers. This book couldn’t have been more timely.
October 4, 2025
Ben is an incredibly smart guy, and I read him because although I disagree with a lot of what he says, I think it’s helpful to understand different perspectives. The first 2/3 of this book I thought was very interesting, but the last third jumped the shark a little bit with the lion analogy. Still, I’m glad that I read it and I would recommend it.
October 12, 2025
This book is not what I was expecting.
I thought it would be another wokeism-is-bad, facts-don’t-care-about-your-feelings, blah blah.
But it was really good. It was short, honest, and somehow… hopeful?
I can’t believe Ben Shapiro made me cry with the way he talked about marriage.
I thought it would be another wokeism-is-bad, facts-don’t-care-about-your-feelings, blah blah.
But it was really good. It was short, honest, and somehow… hopeful?
I can’t believe Ben Shapiro made me cry with the way he talked about marriage.
September 27, 2025
Refreshing truths!
What a refreshing work in support of biblical values and foundational truths. Thank You, Mr. Shapiro. I will join the millions of other lions and ROAR!!!
What a refreshing work in support of biblical values and foundational truths. Thank You, Mr. Shapiro. I will join the millions of other lions and ROAR!!!
September 25, 2025
His Best Book Yet!!!
I could tell from the first how much of himself Shapiro put into this book. It not only had so much great information, as all of his books do, but so much heart. It truly describes what is going on in our country now. A very important read.
I could tell from the first how much of himself Shapiro put into this book. It not only had so much great information, as all of his books do, but so much heart. It truly describes what is going on in our country now. A very important read.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 125 reviews