What do you think?
Rate this book
Victoria: A Novel of 4th Generation War
When Captain John Rumford, USMC, stands up for the dead Marines of Iwo Jima against the forces of political correctness that have invaded his beloved Corps, he is promptly cashiered for his trouble. But upon his return to his native Maine, he discovers that even in the countryside, there is no escaping the political correctness that has spread throughout the United States of America. And when what begins as a small effort by some former Marines to help fellow Christians in Boston free themselves from the plague of crime in their neighborhoods turns into a larger resistance movement, Captain Rumford unexpectedly finds himself leading his fellow revolutionaries into combat against an ideological enemy that takes many different forms.
A Novel of 4th Generation War is a vision of an American restoration. For some it will be seen as a poignant dream, for others, a horrific nightmare. But Victoria is more than a conventional novel and involves considerably more than mere entertainment. In much the same way Atlas Shrugged was the dramatization of a particular philosophical perspective, Victoria is the dramatization of a new form of modern war that is taking shape as the state gradually loses its four-century monopoly on violence. It is a book that informs, even teaches, through example. And sometimes, the lessons are very harsh indeed.
A Novel of 4th Generation War is a vision of an American restoration. For some it will be seen as a poignant dream, for others, a horrific nightmare. But Victoria is more than a conventional novel and involves considerably more than mere entertainment. In much the same way Atlas Shrugged was the dramatization of a particular philosophical perspective, Victoria is the dramatization of a new form of modern war that is taking shape as the state gradually loses its four-century monopoly on violence. It is a book that informs, even teaches, through example. And sometimes, the lessons are very harsh indeed.
413 pages, Kindle Edition
First published November 14, 2014
30 people are currently reading
143 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 31 reviews
May 21, 2019
So I decided give this book a chance because the author (William S. Lind is his real name) seems to still be a fairly respected person in most military strategy circles for his publishing of his famous theory of 4th Generational Warfare way back in 1989, with this book supposedly being an example of how one would carry out this type of strategy. I decided "okay, worth a look". I should have know it was a bad idea when I read the description on Amazon. The reason I finished this book in just 3 days wasn't because I was in love with the book and couldn't put it down. It was because I simply wanted to get this horrendous read over with so I could write an honest review about the whole book. Apparently nobody spent much time seeing what Mr. Lind got up to after 1989 because they would have realized that this "master strategist" seems to have completely lost his mind by the time this got published. This book, unless it's some kind of super genius satire that I completely missed, shows an Author who has an absolutely horrible understanding of Modern American Culture, American Politics, American History, Current American Social and Economic Problems, American Religious beliefs and attitudes,European History, conventional Military strategy and tactics, military history and modern Military equipment I didn't think was possible. There were many times when I would just burst out laughing, roll my eyes, or actually get a migraine at some of the stupidest things the author would say through this book. The only way he'd take any of these ideas seriously is if he has simply stopped researching or keep up with any current events. Heck, I don't think he's even stepped outside of his house in the past 30 years and has just shut himself up in the thickest mental bubble possible. I suggest you get yourself comfortable before you begin reading this Review. Because I have ALOT to say about this book and the Author and almost none of it is anything positive or nice.
Okay...lets try and be nice and start with the positives. This will be really short. His protagonists references to past events in military history or their discussions of military strategy and Tactics were kinda interesting to me. I did get a little laugh about some of his points about how colleges have started doing some rather bizarre things the last few years or that some people in America may have taken political correctness a little too far in some case. Plus, I can see how small business owners can have some legitimate complaints about excessive regulation by the federal government. However, The "solution" to our Countries problems that the author proposes are absolutely insane.
Now on to The Cons. Again I'll start with the simple stuff first. For starters this book is objectively bad purely as it's skills as a literary work. The book makes almost no effort to really immerse you in the immediate surroundings or feelings of the protagonist at all. The narration is very bland and to the point That it made it feel like a computer wrote it. It does a poor job of conveying the passage of time properly and I get the sense the book was written in seperate little bits over many years because of how disjointed it all feels. The Dialogue is so horrible and 90% of characters conversations are just the authors mouth pieces bluntly stating his Alt-right/paleoconservative talking points word for word they might as well just be reading a script and staring right at you (Especially in the First ten chapters of the book). The authors main Protagonist is a gigantic Mary stew who can predict the outcomes and develop solutions to any of his problems perfectly 99% of the time. The main protagonist is also completely full of himself and wrapped up in his own moral superiority you'll constantly roll your eyes at him. His "character arc" has absolutely zero emotional weight of any kind. In fact all the authors protagonists are extremely arrogant and seem convinced that their defeat is just impossible. Some protagonists are just so silly it completely breaks the illusion of "realism" the author is trying to convey you'd think it was written on some bad fan fiction website by a 12 year old. For example, The main protagonists "mentor" is a man who at one point in the story shows up to his military command post dressed as a late Nineteenth Century Prussian Staff officer and is later discovered to have sworn absolute obedience to the descendant of the King of Prussia( I am completely serious. He is even wearing an old Picklehaube Helmet). The rest of the secondary protagonists are just bland 2d poster boys for the author to love with no interesting personality or character traits.
Antagonists in the story are even worse. They're are straw manned to such a ridiculous level that didn't even think was possible till I read this. A good example is the Female Episcopal Bishop. It turns out that, in Lind's warped reality, all churchs that allow female clergy are actually secret worshipers of pre-christian pagan gods because its a huge affront to him for a church to allow to women in a position of authority, or for women to do anything really but more on that later, they clearly are not true christians and have to just be infiltrators trying to corrupt the church. They make the most glaringly stupid political and military decisions I'd be amazing if any of them could even tie their own shoes without somehow hurting themselves.
Last of all story-wise is how Conflict and tension is handled in the book. Nearly every single problem the Protagonists are faced with is solved in the vary same chapter it is brought up in with little more than a hand wave. Sometimes problems are brought up and solved in mere paragraphs apart. Because the antagonists don't have the most basic military skills, (Or common Sense), battles are resolved near instantaneously in the book and are told in such a flat,detached way they create no tension and all the military planning the Protagonists discussed in the book becomes a complete waste . The Antagonists are essentially are just one step above walking in a straight single file line with targets painted on their chest. This of course is all done so our "Military genius" of an author...I'm sorry protagonist can feel good about himself for winning all the time. Even though the victory's are the equivalent of one Kid beating an RTS on easy-mode with a bunch of cheat codes. Now On to the crazy land of William S. Lind.
Last of all the Author's message and overall story is the most COMPLETELY INSANE thing I've ever read. So The story centers on an Ex-US marine trying to rebuild a new "Utopia" In the New England States after the collapse and break-up of the Current United States of America using his genius Fourth-Generational Warfare. What caused the complete collapse of The Worlds biggest Super Power? Why all that evil political Correctness and modern technology of Course! Don't you know political correctness is just a conspiracy by the evil "Cultural Marxists" that have infiltrated our Countries institutions just to "Destroy Western Civilization". In fact the main protagonist is not using his forth Generational Warfare tactics to save the United States, he wants to speed up our countries collapse so he can remake the country into what it's "Supposed" to be. On of his first attempts at using forth generational warfare by tar and feathering the the Governor of Maine all because he wanted to pass some law about homosexuals being allowed to work as counselors in public schools in the state. It's honestly kind of disturbing the sheer delight the writer shows when the country first collapses into chaos. Lind is another one of those Alt-right/paleoconservatives lunatics that says he loves the country, but at the same time in the book you can tell how he despises modern America and Americans and wants the whole country to be "punished" for its "betrayal" to the countries founders. He constantly mentions in the book how particularly liberal cities deserve to become ruins because how dare they have been so into political correctness! Also all that poverty caused by the countries economic collapse is good for you because all you spoiled modern Americans were lazy and your demonic electronics corrupted you! Oh and let's not forget the biggest Alt-right/paleoconservative craze today in that are protagonists are helped by russia and Our glorious savior Putin... I mean "The new Tsar". And you want to guess what started are main characters "noble Crusade" yo may ask? Why the fact that he chose to leave the US marine Corps because he couldn't handle the terrible crime of a Female US Marine Officer speaking at a ceremony for the Marine Corps.
So what then does our glorious Hero End up remaking New England into? A lose confederation of states with little to no central government or even any kind of government agency to enforce any kind of regulation because Lind hates all government regulation. A place where Women pretty much can't do anything except either take care of the house or be a school teacher because apparently Lind thinks women would be happier this way because he is completely insane. Fundamentalist Christianity is essentially the only religion that can be practiced openly in the country. Also Any christian church leader that shows the slightest hint of diverging from Our authors fundamentalist faith is given three choices: Renounce their faith as a Christian and be immediately deported, Repent and go back to his "proper" way of practicing their faith, or be publicly executed with the full support of the secular government. That Female Episcopal bishop I mentioned earlier is burned at the stake to a cheering crowd (I'm again dead serious. The book opens with the main protagonist happily recalling her public burning). Absolutely Zero Immigration is allowed except only for White Christians from other countries and usually only ones of Anglican descent. Hardly any foreign Exports are allowed because its just sensible to assume all of it is probably just some bio-weapon that will kill us all. Nobody uses any technology that wasn't developed past the year 1930, for example your not supposed to own a car that can travel over 25 miles, and apparently everyone loves it this way and lives this way voluntarily. I'll expand on this "retro-culture" later. Almost every crime from Car theft to drug possession is now punishable by death by hanging. Trials also are now completed in under 48 hours and failing a drug test is now enough evidence to be convicted and sentenced to death. The only business's allowed to develop are local 19th century level cottage industry and steam power is now the driving force behind most industry. African Americans are now only allowed to have children if they move to the countryside and take up sharecropping for Caucasians (Yes. you read that right SHARECROPPING!). All Puerto Ricans are deported from the country as well. And the insane thing is that in Lind's crazy head everybody loves this new society, even the African-Americans WANT to do share cropping because they think it will help them somehow.
Also Linds "Retro-Culture" and understanding of history is so horrible that it made me want to slam my head into a wall. The Author tries argue with a straight face that Race relations in the South were perfectly fine until those wicked Union Northerners tried to change things during Reconstruction.( Uh... Mr. Lind. you did learn about Jim Crow laws and lynchings in your history classes Right?). Also the Victorian Era was so much better than modern times with all the terrible drugs, and evil corporations exploiting people. (Apparently Lind never learned about the rampant Opium addiction and crime that was in Victorian slums or how back then a Factory worker had almost zero labor rights compared to now. Also please tell Lind about the crime decline that has been occurring in America since the 1990s, but I don't think he's kept up with anything since the 90s.) The Kingdom of Prussia apparently was Europe's guardian against the "evil barbarism" of the Middle East. (A quick GOOGLE SEARCH would have show Lind Prussia's military history was devoted to fighting it's fellow European Nations most of the time.) Also apparently the Prussian model for a military made a pure military system with no problems of Careerism or dogmatic approach to Military Doctrine (Prussia and it's Successor Imperial German General staff became very involved in politics and careerist because of how built-up their military was during peace time compared to other countries at the time.) Prussians also didn't waste any time with all that silly stuff like extensive contingency planning (Mr. "military history expert" you do know that the primary reason the Prussian General staff was Formed was to do things like extensive contigency planning Right?) Apparently america's absolute best time for everybody was the year 1865-1965 and Americans were far better off then than now. (Lind Must have slept through the part in his US history class were all of that Gilded age Corruption and large-scale immigration to America Happened). Apparently all that communication of information and increased interaction through the computers and the internet wasn't helpful to us and we'd all bond better if we just had 19th Century levels of communication and travel (How is making interaction more difficult going to bring us closer together Mr. Lind?). And all this is Coming from a guy who has a GRADUTE'S DEGREE IN HISTORY FROM PRINCETION UNIVERSITY! Seriously Mr. Lind either you bs'd your way to passing or you must have bribed the teacher to change your grade to fail this badly.
Last of all is the Author's understanding of military strategy, as displayed in this book, does not paint the picture of the "Military Genius". It instead shows somebody that clearly hasn't actually done any serious study of Military strategy or actually led troops into battle and just has watched alot of war movies and thinks it counts.
First off according to his own concept of fourth generational warfare the protagonists are supposed to use guerrilla warfare tactics, but we often see them use conventional maneuver warfare instead. He also seems to not even understand his own fourth generational warfare. You see one of the central points of the author's is what he calls winning the "moral level" of war in order to shift the population support in your favor by displaying moral superiority over your enemy. The book's protagonist seem to often interpret this as just killing your opponent in a very dramatic fashion and the population will simply agree with you that they deserved to die. For example there is one time where they nuke the capital city of their enemy and everybody cheers because ... that magically just makes the civilians agree with you I guess and not be absolutely horrified by such a thing. Lind's understanding of conventional tactics is even worse.
So like I said the majority of the book displays the use of tactics associated with maneuver warfare, like the German blitzkrieg of World War 2. This is Because Lind's philosophy is to treat all Prussian/German Military doctrine as absolute gospel and all military theory from other Countries is inherently inferior, regardless if actual military history would show otherwise. He doesn't even understand Prussian/German Doctrine very well. When the Protagonist begins forming his nations new army he makes a point of stating that they deliberately limit logistic and support services in it because that something only a fake "bureaucratic" general would want. "Real" strategists know that all an army needs is just "tough" infantry and nothing else to win a battle. The Germans did understand the importance of Support units in the military, why do you think they loved Panzers so much? Initiative is the absolute best trait an officer can have in The Authors army, all other traits of an officer are secondary. Yes initiative is a good trait for an officer but their have been times in war where too much initiative can can cause problems if it causes officers to not work effectively with the rest of the military. A good example in the book is when the Protagonist praises a subordinate commanders "Initiative" when he ignores a halt order from his commander and continues to advance ahead of everyone else. Of course it works out fine for him in the book, but that easily could of lead him into an ambush and gotten destroyed. Lind Seems to think that close air support or using planes to attack targets on the strategic level is lunacy because he seems to just hate the whole Air force for some stupid reason. Yes Mr. Lind like you did say in your book the strategic affects of Air Power have been somewhat exaggerated and The US Military has had times in it's history where it relied on it too much, but anybody who has studied its overall affects in conventional conflicts in the 20th century would have to be a delusional idiot to think that they can just completely dismiss the entire concepts of Close Air Support and Strategic Air Power.
He also doesn't have a clue how any US Military Tech created in last 30 years works. His book tries to argue that Soviet T-34/85s can beat an A1 Abrams tanks in battle. He also thinks that the F-16 is the absolute best Fighter in existence and can beat a F-35 in Dogfight because ... shut up. The Bradly Fighting Vehicle is complete garbage because It just is. Lind Primarily Thinks this because he was once part of a group of Military Theorists in the 1980s that were called "The Defense Reformers" who basically believe that any new military tech developed since the 1980s is just garbage created by the evil "establishment" for profit, so you should just assume that any equipment developed before the 1980s is inherently superior to all modern equipment. Mr. Lind and the "Defense Reformers" clearly have no idea the actual capabilities of modern weapons and are just using their "theories" to justify his pathological hatred of modern electronics.
He also seems to preform some pretty blatant double standards when it comes to his views on what constitutes an Atrocity/War Crime. For Example, early in the book when the Authors new Nation begins to secede from the The United States begins a bombing campaign in New England. Not Surprisingly a bombing error leads to a bombs being dropped on a New England School, which the protagonist trumpets as a horrible atrocity and to gush on how "Evil" and "souless" the air force is for preforming bombing runs. Don't get me wrong. This would be a terrible tragedy and should be taken seriously, but the protagonist seems to imply that bombing campaigns of any kind should be treated as a war crime. However, later on in the Book the Protagonist assists an allied nation in the NUCLEAR BOMBING of the Atlanta in their civil war. The protagonist is extremely happy with the thought of his enemies being destroyed in the nuclear blast, Particularly the fact the CNN headquarters is destroyed. So let me get this straight Mr.Lind when an american bomber bombs a school by accident the whole existance of the US air force should be called into question, but when you nuke an entire city its perfectly acceptable in the laws of War? Congratulations on taking double standards to a completely new level.
I Could write alot more but I'm reaching the character limit. If you wanted to find out more about the book I recommend you go to the forums on spacebattle.net because there should be a chapter by chapter review of the book that goes in extreme detail of everything wrong with the book. Also it really worries me how a crank William S. Lind can still be taken seriously by some many other Military experts. Hopefully they get their hands on this book and realize that his Theories should be left to collect dust in an abandon storage unit before it gets somebody killed.
Okay...lets try and be nice and start with the positives. This will be really short. His protagonists references to past events in military history or their discussions of military strategy and Tactics were kinda interesting to me. I did get a little laugh about some of his points about how colleges have started doing some rather bizarre things the last few years or that some people in America may have taken political correctness a little too far in some case. Plus, I can see how small business owners can have some legitimate complaints about excessive regulation by the federal government. However, The "solution" to our Countries problems that the author proposes are absolutely insane.
Now on to The Cons. Again I'll start with the simple stuff first. For starters this book is objectively bad purely as it's skills as a literary work. The book makes almost no effort to really immerse you in the immediate surroundings or feelings of the protagonist at all. The narration is very bland and to the point That it made it feel like a computer wrote it. It does a poor job of conveying the passage of time properly and I get the sense the book was written in seperate little bits over many years because of how disjointed it all feels. The Dialogue is so horrible and 90% of characters conversations are just the authors mouth pieces bluntly stating his Alt-right/paleoconservative talking points word for word they might as well just be reading a script and staring right at you (Especially in the First ten chapters of the book). The authors main Protagonist is a gigantic Mary stew who can predict the outcomes and develop solutions to any of his problems perfectly 99% of the time. The main protagonist is also completely full of himself and wrapped up in his own moral superiority you'll constantly roll your eyes at him. His "character arc" has absolutely zero emotional weight of any kind. In fact all the authors protagonists are extremely arrogant and seem convinced that their defeat is just impossible. Some protagonists are just so silly it completely breaks the illusion of "realism" the author is trying to convey you'd think it was written on some bad fan fiction website by a 12 year old. For example, The main protagonists "mentor" is a man who at one point in the story shows up to his military command post dressed as a late Nineteenth Century Prussian Staff officer and is later discovered to have sworn absolute obedience to the descendant of the King of Prussia( I am completely serious. He is even wearing an old Picklehaube Helmet). The rest of the secondary protagonists are just bland 2d poster boys for the author to love with no interesting personality or character traits.
Antagonists in the story are even worse. They're are straw manned to such a ridiculous level that didn't even think was possible till I read this. A good example is the Female Episcopal Bishop. It turns out that, in Lind's warped reality, all churchs that allow female clergy are actually secret worshipers of pre-christian pagan gods because its a huge affront to him for a church to allow to women in a position of authority, or for women to do anything really but more on that later, they clearly are not true christians and have to just be infiltrators trying to corrupt the church. They make the most glaringly stupid political and military decisions I'd be amazing if any of them could even tie their own shoes without somehow hurting themselves.
Last of all story-wise is how Conflict and tension is handled in the book. Nearly every single problem the Protagonists are faced with is solved in the vary same chapter it is brought up in with little more than a hand wave. Sometimes problems are brought up and solved in mere paragraphs apart. Because the antagonists don't have the most basic military skills, (Or common Sense), battles are resolved near instantaneously in the book and are told in such a flat,detached way they create no tension and all the military planning the Protagonists discussed in the book becomes a complete waste . The Antagonists are essentially are just one step above walking in a straight single file line with targets painted on their chest. This of course is all done so our "Military genius" of an author...I'm sorry protagonist can feel good about himself for winning all the time. Even though the victory's are the equivalent of one Kid beating an RTS on easy-mode with a bunch of cheat codes. Now On to the crazy land of William S. Lind.
Last of all the Author's message and overall story is the most COMPLETELY INSANE thing I've ever read. So The story centers on an Ex-US marine trying to rebuild a new "Utopia" In the New England States after the collapse and break-up of the Current United States of America using his genius Fourth-Generational Warfare. What caused the complete collapse of The Worlds biggest Super Power? Why all that evil political Correctness and modern technology of Course! Don't you know political correctness is just a conspiracy by the evil "Cultural Marxists" that have infiltrated our Countries institutions just to "Destroy Western Civilization". In fact the main protagonist is not using his forth Generational Warfare tactics to save the United States, he wants to speed up our countries collapse so he can remake the country into what it's "Supposed" to be. On of his first attempts at using forth generational warfare by tar and feathering the the Governor of Maine all because he wanted to pass some law about homosexuals being allowed to work as counselors in public schools in the state. It's honestly kind of disturbing the sheer delight the writer shows when the country first collapses into chaos. Lind is another one of those Alt-right/paleoconservatives lunatics that says he loves the country, but at the same time in the book you can tell how he despises modern America and Americans and wants the whole country to be "punished" for its "betrayal" to the countries founders. He constantly mentions in the book how particularly liberal cities deserve to become ruins because how dare they have been so into political correctness! Also all that poverty caused by the countries economic collapse is good for you because all you spoiled modern Americans were lazy and your demonic electronics corrupted you! Oh and let's not forget the biggest Alt-right/paleoconservative craze today in that are protagonists are helped by russia and Our glorious savior Putin... I mean "The new Tsar". And you want to guess what started are main characters "noble Crusade" yo may ask? Why the fact that he chose to leave the US marine Corps because he couldn't handle the terrible crime of a Female US Marine Officer speaking at a ceremony for the Marine Corps.
So what then does our glorious Hero End up remaking New England into? A lose confederation of states with little to no central government or even any kind of government agency to enforce any kind of regulation because Lind hates all government regulation. A place where Women pretty much can't do anything except either take care of the house or be a school teacher because apparently Lind thinks women would be happier this way because he is completely insane. Fundamentalist Christianity is essentially the only religion that can be practiced openly in the country. Also Any christian church leader that shows the slightest hint of diverging from Our authors fundamentalist faith is given three choices: Renounce their faith as a Christian and be immediately deported, Repent and go back to his "proper" way of practicing their faith, or be publicly executed with the full support of the secular government. That Female Episcopal bishop I mentioned earlier is burned at the stake to a cheering crowd (I'm again dead serious. The book opens with the main protagonist happily recalling her public burning). Absolutely Zero Immigration is allowed except only for White Christians from other countries and usually only ones of Anglican descent. Hardly any foreign Exports are allowed because its just sensible to assume all of it is probably just some bio-weapon that will kill us all. Nobody uses any technology that wasn't developed past the year 1930, for example your not supposed to own a car that can travel over 25 miles, and apparently everyone loves it this way and lives this way voluntarily. I'll expand on this "retro-culture" later. Almost every crime from Car theft to drug possession is now punishable by death by hanging. Trials also are now completed in under 48 hours and failing a drug test is now enough evidence to be convicted and sentenced to death. The only business's allowed to develop are local 19th century level cottage industry and steam power is now the driving force behind most industry. African Americans are now only allowed to have children if they move to the countryside and take up sharecropping for Caucasians (Yes. you read that right SHARECROPPING!). All Puerto Ricans are deported from the country as well. And the insane thing is that in Lind's crazy head everybody loves this new society, even the African-Americans WANT to do share cropping because they think it will help them somehow.
Also Linds "Retro-Culture" and understanding of history is so horrible that it made me want to slam my head into a wall. The Author tries argue with a straight face that Race relations in the South were perfectly fine until those wicked Union Northerners tried to change things during Reconstruction.( Uh... Mr. Lind. you did learn about Jim Crow laws and lynchings in your history classes Right?). Also the Victorian Era was so much better than modern times with all the terrible drugs, and evil corporations exploiting people. (Apparently Lind never learned about the rampant Opium addiction and crime that was in Victorian slums or how back then a Factory worker had almost zero labor rights compared to now. Also please tell Lind about the crime decline that has been occurring in America since the 1990s, but I don't think he's kept up with anything since the 90s.) The Kingdom of Prussia apparently was Europe's guardian against the "evil barbarism" of the Middle East. (A quick GOOGLE SEARCH would have show Lind Prussia's military history was devoted to fighting it's fellow European Nations most of the time.) Also apparently the Prussian model for a military made a pure military system with no problems of Careerism or dogmatic approach to Military Doctrine (Prussia and it's Successor Imperial German General staff became very involved in politics and careerist because of how built-up their military was during peace time compared to other countries at the time.) Prussians also didn't waste any time with all that silly stuff like extensive contingency planning (Mr. "military history expert" you do know that the primary reason the Prussian General staff was Formed was to do things like extensive contigency planning Right?) Apparently america's absolute best time for everybody was the year 1865-1965 and Americans were far better off then than now. (Lind Must have slept through the part in his US history class were all of that Gilded age Corruption and large-scale immigration to America Happened). Apparently all that communication of information and increased interaction through the computers and the internet wasn't helpful to us and we'd all bond better if we just had 19th Century levels of communication and travel (How is making interaction more difficult going to bring us closer together Mr. Lind?). And all this is Coming from a guy who has a GRADUTE'S DEGREE IN HISTORY FROM PRINCETION UNIVERSITY! Seriously Mr. Lind either you bs'd your way to passing or you must have bribed the teacher to change your grade to fail this badly.
Last of all is the Author's understanding of military strategy, as displayed in this book, does not paint the picture of the "Military Genius". It instead shows somebody that clearly hasn't actually done any serious study of Military strategy or actually led troops into battle and just has watched alot of war movies and thinks it counts.
First off according to his own concept of fourth generational warfare the protagonists are supposed to use guerrilla warfare tactics, but we often see them use conventional maneuver warfare instead. He also seems to not even understand his own fourth generational warfare. You see one of the central points of the author's is what he calls winning the "moral level" of war in order to shift the population support in your favor by displaying moral superiority over your enemy. The book's protagonist seem to often interpret this as just killing your opponent in a very dramatic fashion and the population will simply agree with you that they deserved to die. For example there is one time where they nuke the capital city of their enemy and everybody cheers because ... that magically just makes the civilians agree with you I guess and not be absolutely horrified by such a thing. Lind's understanding of conventional tactics is even worse.
So like I said the majority of the book displays the use of tactics associated with maneuver warfare, like the German blitzkrieg of World War 2. This is Because Lind's philosophy is to treat all Prussian/German Military doctrine as absolute gospel and all military theory from other Countries is inherently inferior, regardless if actual military history would show otherwise. He doesn't even understand Prussian/German Doctrine very well. When the Protagonist begins forming his nations new army he makes a point of stating that they deliberately limit logistic and support services in it because that something only a fake "bureaucratic" general would want. "Real" strategists know that all an army needs is just "tough" infantry and nothing else to win a battle. The Germans did understand the importance of Support units in the military, why do you think they loved Panzers so much? Initiative is the absolute best trait an officer can have in The Authors army, all other traits of an officer are secondary. Yes initiative is a good trait for an officer but their have been times in war where too much initiative can can cause problems if it causes officers to not work effectively with the rest of the military. A good example in the book is when the Protagonist praises a subordinate commanders "Initiative" when he ignores a halt order from his commander and continues to advance ahead of everyone else. Of course it works out fine for him in the book, but that easily could of lead him into an ambush and gotten destroyed. Lind Seems to think that close air support or using planes to attack targets on the strategic level is lunacy because he seems to just hate the whole Air force for some stupid reason. Yes Mr. Lind like you did say in your book the strategic affects of Air Power have been somewhat exaggerated and The US Military has had times in it's history where it relied on it too much, but anybody who has studied its overall affects in conventional conflicts in the 20th century would have to be a delusional idiot to think that they can just completely dismiss the entire concepts of Close Air Support and Strategic Air Power.
He also doesn't have a clue how any US Military Tech created in last 30 years works. His book tries to argue that Soviet T-34/85s can beat an A1 Abrams tanks in battle. He also thinks that the F-16 is the absolute best Fighter in existence and can beat a F-35 in Dogfight because ... shut up. The Bradly Fighting Vehicle is complete garbage because It just is. Lind Primarily Thinks this because he was once part of a group of Military Theorists in the 1980s that were called "The Defense Reformers" who basically believe that any new military tech developed since the 1980s is just garbage created by the evil "establishment" for profit, so you should just assume that any equipment developed before the 1980s is inherently superior to all modern equipment. Mr. Lind and the "Defense Reformers" clearly have no idea the actual capabilities of modern weapons and are just using their "theories" to justify his pathological hatred of modern electronics.
He also seems to preform some pretty blatant double standards when it comes to his views on what constitutes an Atrocity/War Crime. For Example, early in the book when the Authors new Nation begins to secede from the The United States begins a bombing campaign in New England. Not Surprisingly a bombing error leads to a bombs being dropped on a New England School, which the protagonist trumpets as a horrible atrocity and to gush on how "Evil" and "souless" the air force is for preforming bombing runs. Don't get me wrong. This would be a terrible tragedy and should be taken seriously, but the protagonist seems to imply that bombing campaigns of any kind should be treated as a war crime. However, later on in the Book the Protagonist assists an allied nation in the NUCLEAR BOMBING of the Atlanta in their civil war. The protagonist is extremely happy with the thought of his enemies being destroyed in the nuclear blast, Particularly the fact the CNN headquarters is destroyed. So let me get this straight Mr.Lind when an american bomber bombs a school by accident the whole existance of the US air force should be called into question, but when you nuke an entire city its perfectly acceptable in the laws of War? Congratulations on taking double standards to a completely new level.
I Could write alot more but I'm reaching the character limit. If you wanted to find out more about the book I recommend you go to the forums on spacebattle.net because there should be a chapter by chapter review of the book that goes in extreme detail of everything wrong with the book. Also it really worries me how a crank William S. Lind can still be taken seriously by some many other Military experts. Hopefully they get their hands on this book and realize that his Theories should be left to collect dust in an abandon storage unit before it gets somebody killed.
started_finish_later
May 27, 2015junk to run away as fast from as possible
(the lampooning of political correctness run amok is funny, but the musings about how women were so much happier staying home and running the household - a task so hard and noble that men accorded it the highest appreciation - and how black people - as told by black characters of the book of course - were so much better under segregation when everyone knew his or her place are such simplistic nonsense that annoys me to no end - this book aspires to be the extreme right wing wet dream but sadly the author lacks the talent and one should try J. Ringo's Ghost series or t. Kratman Caliphate or the first Carera novels for much better such)
(the lampooning of political correctness run amok is funny, but the musings about how women were so much happier staying home and running the household - a task so hard and noble that men accorded it the highest appreciation - and how black people - as told by black characters of the book of course - were so much better under segregation when everyone knew his or her place are such simplistic nonsense that annoys me to no end - this book aspires to be the extreme right wing wet dream but sadly the author lacks the talent and one should try J. Ringo's Ghost series or t. Kratman Caliphate or the first Carera novels for much better such)
June 16, 2017
The author seems to have bitten full on Russian Propaganda of US Mil Tech and Russia/US relations.
Also, the author makes very sweeping assumptions of groups of people based on region, race, religion, that are really hard to get around as they are over the top to be mild.
Also, the author makes very sweeping assumptions of groups of people based on region, race, religion, that are really hard to get around as they are over the top to be mild.
November 13, 2016
A tale on several levels - post apocalyptic restoration, a level of military concepts, a religious level, and philosophical lessons.
It is important to remember this tale is fiction. But that the precepts and values are not.
If you culturally trend to PC and/or leftist value structures, or if you are anti-faith, then you will resent this book.
Good fun read!
It is important to remember this tale is fiction. But that the precepts and values are not.
If you culturally trend to PC and/or leftist value structures, or if you are anti-faith, then you will resent this book.
Good fun read!
February 11, 2019
I think some of you will really find this one interesting. It is an introduction to the concepts of 4th generation warfare in the form of a novel written about future America. America undergoes a political, cultural, and economic collapse. The novel is one man's account of the efforts to rebuild the country using "retroculture."
One caution. The characters in the book are attempting to re-create the culture of the Victorian period through 1950's America. The characters use language, racial/ethnic slurs, and very harsh generalizations that were common during this era. The language wouldn't be considered acceptable speech in modern culture.
The use of these slurs is so common that it cannot be happenstance. I think the author is trying to give us a not so subtle warning that while some aspects of our past history are more desirable than our current situation, wholesale adoption of the ways of the past also means accepting the less desirable aspects of our history as well.
I'm going to give this one a good rating, not because of exceptional writing style or great character development (those are both slightly lacking) but because the book made me think of some possibilities I had never considered. I am apolitical and am far from the extreme right-wing who might truly embrace all of the author's concepts of "the ideal," but I found that characters in the book (on all sides of the political and cultural spectrum) presented ideas that caused me to think deeply about some important issues.
One caution. The characters in the book are attempting to re-create the culture of the Victorian period through 1950's America. The characters use language, racial/ethnic slurs, and very harsh generalizations that were common during this era. The language wouldn't be considered acceptable speech in modern culture.
The use of these slurs is so common that it cannot be happenstance. I think the author is trying to give us a not so subtle warning that while some aspects of our past history are more desirable than our current situation, wholesale adoption of the ways of the past also means accepting the less desirable aspects of our history as well.
I'm going to give this one a good rating, not because of exceptional writing style or great character development (those are both slightly lacking) but because the book made me think of some possibilities I had never considered. I am apolitical and am far from the extreme right-wing who might truly embrace all of the author's concepts of "the ideal," but I found that characters in the book (on all sides of the political and cultural spectrum) presented ideas that caused me to think deeply about some important issues.
November 14, 2018
Victoria is the great American novel for the 21st century.
It may also be our maximum probability scenario unless the Trump administration can reverse the trend to multiculturalism - already devastating Europe.
William Lind (here writing under the pseudonym Thomas Hobbes) is echoing the warning of one of the great historians of the 20th century, Samuel Huntington, who wrote:
"...Nation states will remain the most powerful actors in world affairs, but the principal conflicts of global politics will occur between nations and groups of different civilizations. The clash of civilizations will dominate global politics."
Anyone who hasn't already read Victoria should hurry up and get it now. The closing chapter, #35, has a memorable recommendation for what to do with Atlanta, Georgia, if the current Democrat gubernatorial candidate manages to worm her way by hook or by crook into the governor's mansion. I bet that if that happens you'll start compulsively checking prevailing winds :)
It may also be our maximum probability scenario unless the Trump administration can reverse the trend to multiculturalism - already devastating Europe.
William Lind (here writing under the pseudonym Thomas Hobbes) is echoing the warning of one of the great historians of the 20th century, Samuel Huntington, who wrote:
"...Nation states will remain the most powerful actors in world affairs, but the principal conflicts of global politics will occur between nations and groups of different civilizations. The clash of civilizations will dominate global politics."
Anyone who hasn't already read Victoria should hurry up and get it now. The closing chapter, #35, has a memorable recommendation for what to do with Atlanta, Georgia, if the current Democrat gubernatorial candidate manages to worm her way by hook or by crook into the governor's mansion. I bet that if that happens you'll start compulsively checking prevailing winds :)
February 14, 2021
So if you like a book that has homosexual homicide, minorities being shipped against their will, the age-old fake conspiracy about the Jews, racism and nativism ahoy, women being put back into babymakers (and where frigging marital rape is okay), then you'll like this book! Fortunately, anyone with a brain and a heart would hate this.
I'm a Christian through and through. I've been educated in Christian schools since I was young. And no, if you do follow Jesus' teaching, then you don't ever hate. You even have to love those who hate you. Love your enemies so to speak. The bible has its opinions on the LGBTQ and womanhood, but seriously, if they don't screw with you, then don't screw with them. God didn't create this world for one color or religion.
Also, yeah, I'm not even leftist. Anyone who's not a leftist can hate on this book. Because this book is an affront to humanity. Anyone who actually unironically likes this book has no compassion or empathy. ALSO, there's the horrible grammar and spelling errors like the typical they're, their, and there.
I'm a Christian through and through. I've been educated in Christian schools since I was young. And no, if you do follow Jesus' teaching, then you don't ever hate. You even have to love those who hate you. Love your enemies so to speak. The bible has its opinions on the LGBTQ and womanhood, but seriously, if they don't screw with you, then don't screw with them. God didn't create this world for one color or religion.
Also, yeah, I'm not even leftist. Anyone who's not a leftist can hate on this book. Because this book is an affront to humanity. Anyone who actually unironically likes this book has no compassion or empathy. ALSO, there's the horrible grammar and spelling errors like the typical they're, their, and there.
November 14, 2016
This book is depressing, bleak and rather squalid. Its critiques of political correctness can be quite amusing in parts, and its deliberation in how the USA could collapse in the context of a more unstable near-future are fascinating to think about. However, the way William S. Lind author goes about it is distasteful.
This book is a bleakly depressing book on how the USA falls apart a few years from now along different irreconcilable identity lines. Much violence ensues, with the odd spot of ethnic cleansing, genetically engineering superbugs, positive allusions to Prussian social and military culture, all wrapped around the concept of Fourth-Generation Warfare.
Lind can write. However, so could many eugenicists and racists from last century, who he sometimes seems to be channeling.
His style draws you in to begin with, but then his political views start to come through in a much more obvious way as the story progresses. He apparently supports ethnic cleansing, self-segregation along racial line, thinks it would have been better if the South had won the Civil War and that Reconstruction was a huge mistake, that women should be back in the kitchen and nothing else, and that we should all live in the world of Retroculture, or basically go back in time to before the 1960's.
Added to these already pretty unsavoury views (to put it mildly) Lind obviously has a real bugbear with the modern world of academia and the professors who inhabit the positions of teaching and the dispensing of knowledge through the lens of "cultural-Marxism". There is a particularly gruesome scene, gratuitous in its violence and disturbing in its support for religiously motivated massacres, when the teaching staff of the reestablished Dartmouth, Harvard and Yale are massacred for spreading the rot of cultural-Marxism (aided by UNESCO just because) once again through the minds of the young, even with all the experience of the collapse of the USA. The men who kill them are dressed as Crusaders, are followed by monks singing the Dies Irae, and all watched over by a priest and newly appointed governor of Maine who has the aforementioned love affair wth Prussia.
While I have my own issues with the way modern academia is more about credentials than education and seems to be confining itself to narrower and narrower fields of study hemmed in by dogmatic identity politics, this solution seems rather extreme, no?
Having done some further research on Lind, it seems that he is an arch-conservative of the Paleocon stripe, and has had some dealings with Holocaust deniers and other unsavoury types. One gets the impression that the voice of the protagonist who narrates the story has echoes of Lind's own beliefs on everything from government, religion, education and race relations.
In sum, I suppose my real issue with this book is not so much the subject matter of the collapse of the USA and what happens as a result, but the way in which Lind approaches the subject, and how he seems to revel in his depictions of the various events, and in the way he describes different racial groups. I can't repeat some of the ways he described black Americans for example, because if I did, Goodreads would ban me.
Again, the subject matter could be interesting if handled in a different way. This does not mean it should be any less grim, because it's a grim subject. However, there are certain aspects already alluded to that could have been handled in a different way so as to avoid condoning or supporting them.
By all means read it and see for yourself, but don't expect to come out of it feeling very hopeful or having a great sense of cheerfulness.
This book is a bleakly depressing book on how the USA falls apart a few years from now along different irreconcilable identity lines. Much violence ensues, with the odd spot of ethnic cleansing, genetically engineering superbugs, positive allusions to Prussian social and military culture, all wrapped around the concept of Fourth-Generation Warfare.
Lind can write. However, so could many eugenicists and racists from last century, who he sometimes seems to be channeling.
His style draws you in to begin with, but then his political views start to come through in a much more obvious way as the story progresses. He apparently supports ethnic cleansing, self-segregation along racial line, thinks it would have been better if the South had won the Civil War and that Reconstruction was a huge mistake, that women should be back in the kitchen and nothing else, and that we should all live in the world of Retroculture, or basically go back in time to before the 1960's.
Added to these already pretty unsavoury views (to put it mildly) Lind obviously has a real bugbear with the modern world of academia and the professors who inhabit the positions of teaching and the dispensing of knowledge through the lens of "cultural-Marxism". There is a particularly gruesome scene, gratuitous in its violence and disturbing in its support for religiously motivated massacres, when the teaching staff of the reestablished Dartmouth, Harvard and Yale are massacred for spreading the rot of cultural-Marxism (aided by UNESCO just because) once again through the minds of the young, even with all the experience of the collapse of the USA. The men who kill them are dressed as Crusaders, are followed by monks singing the Dies Irae, and all watched over by a priest and newly appointed governor of Maine who has the aforementioned love affair wth Prussia.
While I have my own issues with the way modern academia is more about credentials than education and seems to be confining itself to narrower and narrower fields of study hemmed in by dogmatic identity politics, this solution seems rather extreme, no?
Having done some further research on Lind, it seems that he is an arch-conservative of the Paleocon stripe, and has had some dealings with Holocaust deniers and other unsavoury types. One gets the impression that the voice of the protagonist who narrates the story has echoes of Lind's own beliefs on everything from government, religion, education and race relations.
In sum, I suppose my real issue with this book is not so much the subject matter of the collapse of the USA and what happens as a result, but the way in which Lind approaches the subject, and how he seems to revel in his depictions of the various events, and in the way he describes different racial groups. I can't repeat some of the ways he described black Americans for example, because if I did, Goodreads would ban me.
Again, the subject matter could be interesting if handled in a different way. This does not mean it should be any less grim, because it's a grim subject. However, there are certain aspects already alluded to that could have been handled in a different way so as to avoid condoning or supporting them.
By all means read it and see for yourself, but don't expect to come out of it feeling very hopeful or having a great sense of cheerfulness.
February 28, 2021
When you look at a book in Goodreads it will almost always give you some books that are on lists with that book. One that popped up with Victoria is The Turner Diaries. It is appropriate that a notorious racist standard bearer should be associated with Victoria. The author is just as demented a racist as the author of The Turner Diaries, he is just not as talented a writer. He is every bit s sick an individual though. Cackling at the thought of nuking Atlanta. His "friends" toasting the burning of a female minister for the crime of... being a woman!
If there was negative rating this book would get it.
If there was negative rating this book would get it.
January 4, 2018
“Victoria: a novel of Fourth Generation War” is a political and military thriller written by the Paleoconservative military theorist William S. Lind, although for whatever reason, Lind chose to grace the cover with the pseudonym “Thomas Hobbes”.
The timeline of the novel runs from the year 2016 to the year 2072, following the exploits of Captain John Rumford, a captain in the United States Marine Corps who is forced into an early retirement after an incident of political correctness lands him in hot water. In this world, the increasing tide of political correctness in government, media, and everyday life causes a fracturing of the United States, causing a second American Civil War between a PC dominated, authoritarian government and Libertarian-leaning revolutionaries across the nation. In Maine, Rumford and his comrades use the tactics of 4th Generation Warfare to wage a successful campaign against the federal government, eventually winning the war and forming the Northern Confederation, comprised of the former states of Maine, Vermont, New Hampshire, Upstate New York, Connecticut, Massachusetts, and eventually the Canadian provinces of New Brunswick and Quebec. After the defeat of the federal government, the plot follows Rumford and his efforts to assist revolutionaries across the former United States in defeating other threats, such as a Muslim invasion of Boston, Southern Leftists, Radical Environmentalists in Cascadia, Armed Feminists in California, and Mexican pirates.
Lind is a great writer, as crazy and humorous as a lot of the plot’s enemies sound, the book is quite the page-turner. As much as I enjoyed the book, I have two major criticisms. First, I felt that Lind really should have shortened both the length and the plot, as the later enemies were quite stale in comparison to the initial set of rogues. Secondly, a lot of the dialog among the characters was pure cringe, especially from the SJW types.
Overall, I found Victoria to be an enjoyable read. I consider it to fall into the category of edutainment. As you learn a lot about Lind’s concepts of Fourth Generation Warfare, Retro culture, and Paleo-Libertarian political philosophy.
The timeline of the novel runs from the year 2016 to the year 2072, following the exploits of Captain John Rumford, a captain in the United States Marine Corps who is forced into an early retirement after an incident of political correctness lands him in hot water. In this world, the increasing tide of political correctness in government, media, and everyday life causes a fracturing of the United States, causing a second American Civil War between a PC dominated, authoritarian government and Libertarian-leaning revolutionaries across the nation. In Maine, Rumford and his comrades use the tactics of 4th Generation Warfare to wage a successful campaign against the federal government, eventually winning the war and forming the Northern Confederation, comprised of the former states of Maine, Vermont, New Hampshire, Upstate New York, Connecticut, Massachusetts, and eventually the Canadian provinces of New Brunswick and Quebec. After the defeat of the federal government, the plot follows Rumford and his efforts to assist revolutionaries across the former United States in defeating other threats, such as a Muslim invasion of Boston, Southern Leftists, Radical Environmentalists in Cascadia, Armed Feminists in California, and Mexican pirates.
Lind is a great writer, as crazy and humorous as a lot of the plot’s enemies sound, the book is quite the page-turner. As much as I enjoyed the book, I have two major criticisms. First, I felt that Lind really should have shortened both the length and the plot, as the later enemies were quite stale in comparison to the initial set of rogues. Secondly, a lot of the dialog among the characters was pure cringe, especially from the SJW types.
Overall, I found Victoria to be an enjoyable read. I consider it to fall into the category of edutainment. As you learn a lot about Lind’s concepts of Fourth Generation Warfare, Retro culture, and Paleo-Libertarian political philosophy.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
May 17, 2021
I wanted to like this book, which I read after reviewing Lind's "Fourth Generation War." But it was bad on every level. Bad plot, bad writing, bad analysis of history, bad analysis of human nature, bad everything. Sure, I'd like to see society remade, and yes, it's true that to get there no doubt all sorts of Very Bad Things are going to have to happen. But I like to be realistic about mankind, and this book just isn't. Too bad.
November 2, 2020
I don't think I've encountered anything so deep in its combination of pure bigotry, misogyny, fundamentalist insanity mixed with such utter and total ignorance and arrogance in my thirty-one years of living in one of the most bigoted, fundamentalist, and ignorant regions of America.
February 15, 2021
book is racist, anyone that gave it more than 1 star is racist.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CLdEq...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CLdEq...
June 23, 2015
Hmmm. I found this novel because of an ambivalent review about it left on one of the blogs I read, and I was curious, so I read the free sample online, and decided I was curious enough about where this future world was going to see it through. And it was a very interesting read. And not for the faint of heart or the easily offended. (The author appears to be making an effort to upset as many PC sensibilities as possible.)
As I was reading, I found that I was spending most of my time reading the book trying to figure out why the author had such foreign ideas about how the world should work. His extreme animus against women and minorities and other darlings of the multicultural PC movement I understand to some extent, but can't really empathize with. He was particularly hard on women in the military, and derisive about computers, all things internet and electronic, and seemed to think that if we just reversed the Information Age all things would revert to some sort of halcyon past utopia where people knew how to live as communities and make things with their hands, and we all could live our lives the way they should be. (With women in their right place at home and out of the workplace. And a return of racial segregation, since that's such a happy way for everyone to live. ??!?!!!?)
To me, it read as a SoCon's ultimate fantasy about a future world, complete with a collapse of the decadent and degenerate current order. And more than that, like the political fantasy of a man from the early Boomer generation, who's deeply suspicious of technology in general and resentful of change. (the few mentions of computers are negative, even when they and their "pencil-necked nerd" operators save the day)
For the book itself... it's a bit light on plot, other than unrolling what happens as the future of the author's world continues. The new world order for the USA starts in Maine with the protagonist, and eventually produces the collapse of the United States and the emergence of several new political entities. The protagonist gets things in hand in his own part of the world (New England), then travels around to the South, the Pacific Northwest, and eventually California (and a couple other shorter trips along the way), dealing with the wars that are igniting in those places.
I think that the first part of the book -- the early stuff in New England -- feels fairly true to the character of that place. (Although I admit to a healthy skepticism about any anti-Establishment movement getting started in that part of the country, but then, I'm a Westerner.) But the trips to the rest of the former USA increasingly strain credulity to the point of being farce.
The war itself is depicted as starting with a number of clever and non-violent measures that were fun to consider. Once things got violent, though, it became less plausible (no matter how annoying a group of political bullies are, it is off-putting to stage a mass murder of them. Most authors at least have the bully-group bringing it on themselves by firing the first shots). And I can't see the population wholeheartedly approving nuking an American city, even one that had descended into violence and chaos. The "prophet" character who's venerated by the protagonist throughout the book seemed, in general, mostly weird and creepy. Not really someone you'd want to put in charge of a country...
So, I'd have to say that I wholeheartedly disagree with the idea that the future could progress in this manner, but at the same time, I kind of enjoyed reading the story all the way through -- perhaps as a reminder that there are people in the world who really do think this way. And maybe as a reminder that we're all blinded by our biases; maybe the tech and freedom heavy future that I imagine would seem equally implausible to someone coming from a different perspective.
Anyway, it's worth a read if you like alternate history (is that the right term? "speculative history of the future" seems a bit unwieldy).
As I was reading, I found that I was spending most of my time reading the book trying to figure out why the author had such foreign ideas about how the world should work. His extreme animus against women and minorities and other darlings of the multicultural PC movement I understand to some extent, but can't really empathize with. He was particularly hard on women in the military, and derisive about computers, all things internet and electronic, and seemed to think that if we just reversed the Information Age all things would revert to some sort of halcyon past utopia where people knew how to live as communities and make things with their hands, and we all could live our lives the way they should be. (With women in their right place at home and out of the workplace. And a return of racial segregation, since that's such a happy way for everyone to live. ??!?!!!?)
To me, it read as a SoCon's ultimate fantasy about a future world, complete with a collapse of the decadent and degenerate current order. And more than that, like the political fantasy of a man from the early Boomer generation, who's deeply suspicious of technology in general and resentful of change. (the few mentions of computers are negative, even when they and their "pencil-necked nerd" operators save the day)
For the book itself... it's a bit light on plot, other than unrolling what happens as the future of the author's world continues. The new world order for the USA starts in Maine with the protagonist, and eventually produces the collapse of the United States and the emergence of several new political entities. The protagonist gets things in hand in his own part of the world (New England), then travels around to the South, the Pacific Northwest, and eventually California (and a couple other shorter trips along the way), dealing with the wars that are igniting in those places.
I think that the first part of the book -- the early stuff in New England -- feels fairly true to the character of that place. (Although I admit to a healthy skepticism about any anti-Establishment movement getting started in that part of the country, but then, I'm a Westerner.) But the trips to the rest of the former USA increasingly strain credulity to the point of being farce.
The war itself is depicted as starting with a number of clever and non-violent measures that were fun to consider. Once things got violent, though, it became less plausible (no matter how annoying a group of political bullies are, it is off-putting to stage a mass murder of them. Most authors at least have the bully-group bringing it on themselves by firing the first shots). And I can't see the population wholeheartedly approving nuking an American city, even one that had descended into violence and chaos. The "prophet" character who's venerated by the protagonist throughout the book seemed, in general, mostly weird and creepy. Not really someone you'd want to put in charge of a country...
So, I'd have to say that I wholeheartedly disagree with the idea that the future could progress in this manner, but at the same time, I kind of enjoyed reading the story all the way through -- perhaps as a reminder that there are people in the world who really do think this way. And maybe as a reminder that we're all blinded by our biases; maybe the tech and freedom heavy future that I imagine would seem equally implausible to someone coming from a different perspective.
Anyway, it's worth a read if you like alternate history (is that the right term? "speculative history of the future" seems a bit unwieldy).
November 5, 2016
Enjoyable "Prepper Porn" with some flaws
A very thoughtful read about the cultural and economic breakdown of the Republic leading to chaos, starvation, war, and rebirth. Where I believe the rebirth falls short is the slavish devotion to "Retroculture" as part of the solution. Certainly Lind points out that our arts and entertainment wasteland has broken down culture for sure...but does technology automatically begat a wasteland? Not everything was better in Victorian times. After all, I'm reading his novel on an IPad, Kindle, and Android Kindle App. Had I been properly "retro", I would have never heard of, nor procured a paper version. Also, would it really be a good thing to burn heretics again? The prospect of death for disagreeing chills me. Still, a worthy read.
A very thoughtful read about the cultural and economic breakdown of the Republic leading to chaos, starvation, war, and rebirth. Where I believe the rebirth falls short is the slavish devotion to "Retroculture" as part of the solution. Certainly Lind points out that our arts and entertainment wasteland has broken down culture for sure...but does technology automatically begat a wasteland? Not everything was better in Victorian times. After all, I'm reading his novel on an IPad, Kindle, and Android Kindle App. Had I been properly "retro", I would have never heard of, nor procured a paper version. Also, would it really be a good thing to burn heretics again? The prospect of death for disagreeing chills me. Still, a worthy read.
August 31, 2023
Who could have predicted the world of 2023
I read this when it first came out. It is a decent, readable "what if" future history. This remains true despite that the America in which it is set recedes into the past. The hopefulness of this sort of story comes from the dream of a future recovery which seems ever more unlikely or further away. I doubt the author ever imagined in his scenarios of bio-egineered flus that Western governments would conspire to violate half a century of epidemiolgy and all norms of medical ethics. In imagining the decadance of American churches he'd not concieved they could preach the trafficking of children to chemical and even physical castration. Surprisingly poignant for a book of this type, it held up better than I imagined.
I read this when it first came out. It is a decent, readable "what if" future history. This remains true despite that the America in which it is set recedes into the past. The hopefulness of this sort of story comes from the dream of a future recovery which seems ever more unlikely or further away. I doubt the author ever imagined in his scenarios of bio-egineered flus that Western governments would conspire to violate half a century of epidemiolgy and all norms of medical ethics. In imagining the decadance of American churches he'd not concieved they could preach the trafficking of children to chemical and even physical castration. Surprisingly poignant for a book of this type, it held up better than I imagined.
May 22, 2016
Too much deus ex machina, but ...
I don't read a great deal of fiction, but I admire the author's columns on military strategy and foreign policy, particularly his comments about what he calls "fourth-generation war." So a novel about fourth generation war seemed irresistible.
As I read, however, the most refreshing and illuminating thing about this book was how forthrightly the author rejects our current cant and self-delusion. I can take or leave his label of "cultural Marxism," but there clearly has been a lot of transvaluation of values going on in my 67 years and even an unrealistic novel about the decades-long work of reversing all that was fascinating to read.
I don't read a great deal of fiction, but I admire the author's columns on military strategy and foreign policy, particularly his comments about what he calls "fourth-generation war." So a novel about fourth generation war seemed irresistible.
As I read, however, the most refreshing and illuminating thing about this book was how forthrightly the author rejects our current cant and self-delusion. I can take or leave his label of "cultural Marxism," but there clearly has been a lot of transvaluation of values going on in my 67 years and even an unrealistic novel about the decades-long work of reversing all that was fascinating to read.
March 29, 2022
a book that the weak minded will want to 'ban' for 'racism/sexism' and whatever other isms are popular in the media at the current moment.
This is a fiction book about a possible post-apocalyptic future. The funny thing the weak minded don't get is that their knee-jerk reactions to ideas such as these will likely bring on the type of future that this book talks/warns about.
Interesting and relevant read.
This is a fiction book about a possible post-apocalyptic future. The funny thing the weak minded don't get is that their knee-jerk reactions to ideas such as these will likely bring on the type of future that this book talks/warns about.
Interesting and relevant read.
October 8, 2021
A wonderful hope for our future
I was skeptical of the book at first, but as I read it I saw my own hopes and fears outlined in every chapter. I came to feel that I knew the characters, I cheered their victories and wept at their losses. I heartily recommend this book to every lover of history, tradition, and the art of war.
I was skeptical of the book at first, but as I read it I saw my own hopes and fears outlined in every chapter. I came to feel that I knew the characters, I cheered their victories and wept at their losses. I heartily recommend this book to every lover of history, tradition, and the art of war.
December 31, 2014
Open mind
Hear is a book that has a lot of opinion that are look down at. if you can not sit back and think about what the book is about you will not be able to read this book if you can think about the situation then it is a fascinating read
Hear is a book that has a lot of opinion that are look down at. if you can not sit back and think about what the book is about you will not be able to read this book if you can think about the situation then it is a fascinating read
December 16, 2025
Authorial self-agrandizement & self-indulgence.
The author, William Lind, was a long-time Washington DC fixture, serving on senatorial staffs, various think-tanks and such, with a focus on military affairs. When the end of the Cold War created a widespread sense of being unmoored, he enjoyed a brief period in the limelight as an advocate of a new generation of warfare (the "fourth generation" of the book's title). This period ended when the 1991 Persian Gulf conflict demonstrated that the fundamentals of military operations had not changed. Lind sank back into obscurity, and clearly, bitterness. In 1995 he published a short piece of speculative fiction of a near future which was very much the outline for "Victoria" The piece was permeated with his hatred of the Federal Government (for which he'd worked so long), and dreams of its destruction. This piece was published 11 days after another Federal Government-hater, Tim McVeigh, put his own beliefs into action in Oklahoma City. Many right-wingers critical of the government recoiled from that horrific act of terrorist violence, but not Lind. Nearly 20 years later, the same ideas, now much embellished, were put into book form.
The scenario presented in this book is a pile of affronts to reality and logic. Early on, the narrator states that in this near-future (now recent past) America, only heterosexual, white, law-abiding men get sent to prison. A look at the demographics of any prison system in the U.S. ever would show otherwise, but this is the author's world, not the one real people actually live in. The US President (a Republican, no less!) invites the Mexican army to occupy the southern border states. The narrator supposedly delves deeply into classical literature, but his "understanding" of the works he cites is laughable to anyone at all familiar with them. Drinking alcohol at a meeting is a supposed to be a great way to generate good ideas. The narrator insists that people who promote such causes such as environmental protection or equal opportunities for women are only interested in power, but those who promote monarchy, theocracy, patriarchy and autocracy are not. Anyone with a kid's chemistry set can whip up deadly biological agents. A model society can best be built on pervasive corporal punishment for children and capital punishment for adults. Abuse of power exists only on the other side, however draconian the narrator's side gets (such as hanging a guy in an overnight legal proceeding for getting involved in nonsensical and hopeless coup attempt).
Even setting aside these absurdities, the book's internal logic doesn't work, either. The narrator states that the newly imprisoned are "homosexually gang raped". By whom? The other straight, white, law-abiding men that make up the whole of the inmate population? Oh, and the "law-abiding" moniker includes those who shoot people that annoy them. After an incredibly successful (in both senses of the term) effort to mobilize the population of Boston against a corrupt legal system, the protagonist abruptly gives up on such tactics in favor of secession and violent revolution. The Mexican army, invited into the US, is so inept that angry armed civilians on the U.S. side chase them all the way back to Mexico City, but these same inept Mexicans are somehow able to seize and hold southern California. The author, speaking through one of his two stand-in characters, chides those who would "goad" 10% of the population into war with the other 90%, while he himself is busily goading .5% of the population into war with other 99.5%. His ideal society is one in which everyone voluntarily lives at a late 19th/early 20th- century level of technology, yet can also make fantastic (read: implausible) technical inventions. And "voluntarily" means that those who don't want to live that way are ostracized and harassed into submission. The narrator praises direct democracy, and also feels fine defying the will of the people when the mood strikes him. The narrator also concocts a "perfect" blueprint for successful revolution against the "cultural marxists", and others successfully follow it, but their revolution somehow subsequently fails for no apparent reason other than that the meandering plot requires it.
This book is sometimes compared to the "The Turner Diaries", and there are a lot of similarities. Both are first-person narratives by an authorial mouthpiece describing a (then) near-future America in which the problems of the day in which it was written have multiplied exponentially, and decent (i.e. white) people are freely victimized by criminals (i.e. nonwhite people). In "Turner" this situation is the doing of the "jews", in "Victoria", the "Cultural Marxists" are behind it (which is basically the same idea, whether or not the author cares to admit that). In both, the narrator/"hero" helps form a revolutionary counter-movement. Both have an unremittingly hateful view of their chosen opposition, especially the Federal government; any character who disagrees with the author's views does so out of sheer malice and a desire to harm others. Both advocate violent revolution and merciless destruction of those opponents. In both, the opponents talk and behave absurdly and self-destructively, since the hate-driven authors can't concoct a winning argument or strategy against anyone but a straw man or total incompetent.
The future world spun in "Victoria" is surprisingly unimaginative; all sorts of societies from the distant past suddenly re-emerge, including Czarist Russia, Imperial Japan, the Confederate States of America, the Aztec empire, and the Barbary states of north Africa. Things that were prominent (however briefly) in the mid-1990's are front-and-center in this "future" world; the author is truly stuck in the past as he imagines the future, or just too lazy to update his original outline. One pathetic passage has a character declare that the "wrong lessons" were taken from the Gulf War, in a passage set 46 years after that event. Give it a rest! The author's descriptive powers are very bland; people, landscapes, homes, pretty much everything gets short shrift so far as descriptions go. The one thing that is described in detail reliably is food. The author is a glutton by his own admission, and that really shows. Character names are another oddity, as any antagonist is given a ridiculous name, such as "Holland P. Frylass" or "Cloaca Devlin". Anyone on the narrator's side has a conventional-sounding name, and if someone on the other side has a regular name, that's a giveaway that they'll change sides soon.
This book is non-stop moral relativism; that is, no deed is intrinsically good or bad - who does the deed is what matters. Assassination, biological warfare, fast summary execution for minor offenses, demolishing an entire city out of spite, forcing populations to relocate, selling recalcitrant captives into slavery in the Middle East - all these are condemned when opponents do them and just fine when the narrator's side does. The author's lack of a moral compass is perhaps best displayed when he encounters a representative of the nazi government that has taken over Wisconsin. After admiring the guy's resourcefulness and fortitude, the author states he "doesn't like" Nazis. Why's that? Because of their propensity to try and exterminate whole peoples out of racial hatred? No, per the narrator, everyone does that. What makes the nazis offensive to him is that he imagines they'd make him exercise and get into shape. So, kill whole populations and he's fine with that, but threaten his gluttonous, indolent lifestyle and you're looking for a fight. Egad. The author also dismisses Donald Trump as an offensive celebrity, and now is a big fan. What changed? Not Trump.
If you want a much more detailed demolition of this book, the website "Spacebattles" has some great pages where various contributors take the book apart almost line-by-line, highlighting the absurdities, contractions, factual errors, glaring misinterpretations, and various other flaws. This whole book is an absurd, inconsistent fantasy in which the author projects himself into a heroic role as both a super-competent military and political leader (through his two stand-ins and multiple mouthpieces) and slaps together a world ridiculous and malleable enough for that to happen.
The author, William Lind, was a long-time Washington DC fixture, serving on senatorial staffs, various think-tanks and such, with a focus on military affairs. When the end of the Cold War created a widespread sense of being unmoored, he enjoyed a brief period in the limelight as an advocate of a new generation of warfare (the "fourth generation" of the book's title). This period ended when the 1991 Persian Gulf conflict demonstrated that the fundamentals of military operations had not changed. Lind sank back into obscurity, and clearly, bitterness. In 1995 he published a short piece of speculative fiction of a near future which was very much the outline for "Victoria" The piece was permeated with his hatred of the Federal Government (for which he'd worked so long), and dreams of its destruction. This piece was published 11 days after another Federal Government-hater, Tim McVeigh, put his own beliefs into action in Oklahoma City. Many right-wingers critical of the government recoiled from that horrific act of terrorist violence, but not Lind. Nearly 20 years later, the same ideas, now much embellished, were put into book form.
The scenario presented in this book is a pile of affronts to reality and logic. Early on, the narrator states that in this near-future (now recent past) America, only heterosexual, white, law-abiding men get sent to prison. A look at the demographics of any prison system in the U.S. ever would show otherwise, but this is the author's world, not the one real people actually live in. The US President (a Republican, no less!) invites the Mexican army to occupy the southern border states. The narrator supposedly delves deeply into classical literature, but his "understanding" of the works he cites is laughable to anyone at all familiar with them. Drinking alcohol at a meeting is a supposed to be a great way to generate good ideas. The narrator insists that people who promote such causes such as environmental protection or equal opportunities for women are only interested in power, but those who promote monarchy, theocracy, patriarchy and autocracy are not. Anyone with a kid's chemistry set can whip up deadly biological agents. A model society can best be built on pervasive corporal punishment for children and capital punishment for adults. Abuse of power exists only on the other side, however draconian the narrator's side gets (such as hanging a guy in an overnight legal proceeding for getting involved in nonsensical and hopeless coup attempt).
Even setting aside these absurdities, the book's internal logic doesn't work, either. The narrator states that the newly imprisoned are "homosexually gang raped". By whom? The other straight, white, law-abiding men that make up the whole of the inmate population? Oh, and the "law-abiding" moniker includes those who shoot people that annoy them. After an incredibly successful (in both senses of the term) effort to mobilize the population of Boston against a corrupt legal system, the protagonist abruptly gives up on such tactics in favor of secession and violent revolution. The Mexican army, invited into the US, is so inept that angry armed civilians on the U.S. side chase them all the way back to Mexico City, but these same inept Mexicans are somehow able to seize and hold southern California. The author, speaking through one of his two stand-in characters, chides those who would "goad" 10% of the population into war with the other 90%, while he himself is busily goading .5% of the population into war with other 99.5%. His ideal society is one in which everyone voluntarily lives at a late 19th/early 20th- century level of technology, yet can also make fantastic (read: implausible) technical inventions. And "voluntarily" means that those who don't want to live that way are ostracized and harassed into submission. The narrator praises direct democracy, and also feels fine defying the will of the people when the mood strikes him. The narrator also concocts a "perfect" blueprint for successful revolution against the "cultural marxists", and others successfully follow it, but their revolution somehow subsequently fails for no apparent reason other than that the meandering plot requires it.
This book is sometimes compared to the "The Turner Diaries", and there are a lot of similarities. Both are first-person narratives by an authorial mouthpiece describing a (then) near-future America in which the problems of the day in which it was written have multiplied exponentially, and decent (i.e. white) people are freely victimized by criminals (i.e. nonwhite people). In "Turner" this situation is the doing of the "jews", in "Victoria", the "Cultural Marxists" are behind it (which is basically the same idea, whether or not the author cares to admit that). In both, the narrator/"hero" helps form a revolutionary counter-movement. Both have an unremittingly hateful view of their chosen opposition, especially the Federal government; any character who disagrees with the author's views does so out of sheer malice and a desire to harm others. Both advocate violent revolution and merciless destruction of those opponents. In both, the opponents talk and behave absurdly and self-destructively, since the hate-driven authors can't concoct a winning argument or strategy against anyone but a straw man or total incompetent.
The future world spun in "Victoria" is surprisingly unimaginative; all sorts of societies from the distant past suddenly re-emerge, including Czarist Russia, Imperial Japan, the Confederate States of America, the Aztec empire, and the Barbary states of north Africa. Things that were prominent (however briefly) in the mid-1990's are front-and-center in this "future" world; the author is truly stuck in the past as he imagines the future, or just too lazy to update his original outline. One pathetic passage has a character declare that the "wrong lessons" were taken from the Gulf War, in a passage set 46 years after that event. Give it a rest! The author's descriptive powers are very bland; people, landscapes, homes, pretty much everything gets short shrift so far as descriptions go. The one thing that is described in detail reliably is food. The author is a glutton by his own admission, and that really shows. Character names are another oddity, as any antagonist is given a ridiculous name, such as "Holland P. Frylass" or "Cloaca Devlin". Anyone on the narrator's side has a conventional-sounding name, and if someone on the other side has a regular name, that's a giveaway that they'll change sides soon.
This book is non-stop moral relativism; that is, no deed is intrinsically good or bad - who does the deed is what matters. Assassination, biological warfare, fast summary execution for minor offenses, demolishing an entire city out of spite, forcing populations to relocate, selling recalcitrant captives into slavery in the Middle East - all these are condemned when opponents do them and just fine when the narrator's side does. The author's lack of a moral compass is perhaps best displayed when he encounters a representative of the nazi government that has taken over Wisconsin. After admiring the guy's resourcefulness and fortitude, the author states he "doesn't like" Nazis. Why's that? Because of their propensity to try and exterminate whole peoples out of racial hatred? No, per the narrator, everyone does that. What makes the nazis offensive to him is that he imagines they'd make him exercise and get into shape. So, kill whole populations and he's fine with that, but threaten his gluttonous, indolent lifestyle and you're looking for a fight. Egad. The author also dismisses Donald Trump as an offensive celebrity, and now is a big fan. What changed? Not Trump.
If you want a much more detailed demolition of this book, the website "Spacebattles" has some great pages where various contributors take the book apart almost line-by-line, highlighting the absurdities, contractions, factual errors, glaring misinterpretations, and various other flaws. This whole book is an absurd, inconsistent fantasy in which the author projects himself into a heroic role as both a super-competent military and political leader (through his two stand-ins and multiple mouthpieces) and slaps together a world ridiculous and malleable enough for that to happen.
January 23, 2022
Many people that leave one star reviews on this book do so while comparing it to the Turner Diaries. That comparison is grossly inaccurate. The Turner Diaries is a novel about American Nazis that pursue their goals through acts of terror and crime; Victoria is the tale of American Christians that band together to protect themselves from a collapsing (at first spiritually and then literally) society. That being said: the book has many flaws. Primary among them is that of ideological symmetry. The author makes assumptions throughout the story about how groups align ideologically. (For example the Christians generally all agree on a Course of Action with very little conflict) This may have been done purposefully for the sake of the story but it is an error throughout. Another error exists in the dialogue. This exists among many characters but is especially prevalent among the Antagonist characters. The authors writing of the antagonists make them look like caricatures of what are in real life, very dangerous and very smart individuals.
The author's area of expertise is evident in the writing but it contrasts strongly with the other topics. His grasp of operational strategy and economics in his invented scenario is good but his understanding of social interactions and the attitude of the average American is lacking. His novel is marketed as a novel about 4th generation warfare. In real life we have moved past that now to 5th generation warfare. A war in which battles are fought online, in boardrooms and in schools. While he anticipated many of today's issues, namely seasonal riots, inflation and bureaucracy, he failed to correctly predict the role that pharmaceutical companies, technology and non-Islamic globalists would play. Overall an easy read that handles the collapse of the Union from a pseudo-military perspective. It should not be taken too seriously but should force the reader to ask themselves: "What does an ideal nation look like?"
The author's area of expertise is evident in the writing but it contrasts strongly with the other topics. His grasp of operational strategy and economics in his invented scenario is good but his understanding of social interactions and the attitude of the average American is lacking. His novel is marketed as a novel about 4th generation warfare. In real life we have moved past that now to 5th generation warfare. A war in which battles are fought online, in boardrooms and in schools. While he anticipated many of today's issues, namely seasonal riots, inflation and bureaucracy, he failed to correctly predict the role that pharmaceutical companies, technology and non-Islamic globalists would play. Overall an easy read that handles the collapse of the Union from a pseudo-military perspective. It should not be taken too seriously but should force the reader to ask themselves: "What does an ideal nation look like?"
June 1, 2020
This is what a Classical Conservative utopia looks like; unabashedly sexist and religiously intolerant, and somewhat racist. This is unlike Neocon's vision since neocons are essentially Liberals.
In the not too distant future, a Marine Captain forced to resign, begins to become involve with Retro Culture, groups of people who not only reenact early times, but live full time as if they were in that era. For example, the 1940's people listen to radios but won't watch television or use personal computers. Their families are patriarchal, women are mothers and homemakers. Children play outdoors and obey their parents.
Shortly afterwards, he is contacted by a black retired Marine to come up with plans to fight crime in the Hood. Society breaks down further and Maine, Vermont, New Hampshire, and Massachusetts break off from the United States. The new republic protects itself by engaging 4th Generation Warfare, which is essentially asymmetrical warfare.
I won't go over all the many mini wars that the new republic (later called Victoria) wins easily due to the fact that the good guys always adapt to new situations and the bad guys never do (essentially a variation of straight shooters always win cuz straight shooters shoot straight). But I will address a few themes of the book.
First, the White Savoir plot rang false. Black communities could easily overcome crime IF they wanted to. But the black communities have always had an ambivalent attitudes towards crime. They don't want to be victims crime but they enjoy the benefits (cheap stolen goods, free spending criminals) and think of the bounty of criminal activity as "due" them. Some reading the preceding words will call me racist but asked any big city cop if this is not true.
Second, arguments against feminisms that rely on women being incapable of doing things have always failed. This is because women can do anything if they put their minds to it. The only argument that works against feminism is that society would be better if they largely confined themselves to their traditional roles of wives and mothers, which is a Classical Conservative argument.
Third, Hobbes may be comforted by the notion that though New Englanders vote for left wingers, they really are conservatives at heart. Sorry, as a New Englander, I cannot indulge in that fantasy.
In the not too distant future, a Marine Captain forced to resign, begins to become involve with Retro Culture, groups of people who not only reenact early times, but live full time as if they were in that era. For example, the 1940's people listen to radios but won't watch television or use personal computers. Their families are patriarchal, women are mothers and homemakers. Children play outdoors and obey their parents.
Shortly afterwards, he is contacted by a black retired Marine to come up with plans to fight crime in the Hood. Society breaks down further and Maine, Vermont, New Hampshire, and Massachusetts break off from the United States. The new republic protects itself by engaging 4th Generation Warfare, which is essentially asymmetrical warfare.
I won't go over all the many mini wars that the new republic (later called Victoria) wins easily due to the fact that the good guys always adapt to new situations and the bad guys never do (essentially a variation of straight shooters always win cuz straight shooters shoot straight). But I will address a few themes of the book.
First, the White Savoir plot rang false. Black communities could easily overcome crime IF they wanted to. But the black communities have always had an ambivalent attitudes towards crime. They don't want to be victims crime but they enjoy the benefits (cheap stolen goods, free spending criminals) and think of the bounty of criminal activity as "due" them. Some reading the preceding words will call me racist but asked any big city cop if this is not true.
Second, arguments against feminisms that rely on women being incapable of doing things have always failed. This is because women can do anything if they put their minds to it. The only argument that works against feminism is that society would be better if they largely confined themselves to their traditional roles of wives and mothers, which is a Classical Conservative argument.
Third, Hobbes may be comforted by the notion that though New Englanders vote for left wingers, they really are conservatives at heart. Sorry, as a New Englander, I cannot indulge in that fantasy.
June 3, 2025
Victoria is a story written by an armchair enthusiast of war, about an idealised version of himself who easily kills degenerates while still indulging in all his favourite treats in the smoking room or at the diner. Everything works out because apparently the silent majority of small town New England who in our world vote the Democrats with Ba'ath Party margins secretly agree with him and everyone who disagrees with his way of thinking is stupid, lazy and cowardly and so will collapse in the face of the first stratagem that comes to his lead-addled mind.
This Day of the Rope ass power fantasy will only appeal to you if you're as evil and intellectually lazy as the author, and it brings me great joy to know that the world desired by everyone who gave this five stars is never coming about. Die mad, losers.
This Day of the Rope ass power fantasy will only appeal to you if you're as evil and intellectually lazy as the author, and it brings me great joy to know that the world desired by everyone who gave this five stars is never coming about. Die mad, losers.
Read
January 5, 2021A fantasy that could come true
What if modernity collapsed and civilization sprang up young again and fresh from the ruin, like a forest springing new from the ashes of a great fire? This book tries to think through the collapse and its aftermath. A tad optimistic perhaps but fun.
What if modernity collapsed and civilization sprang up young again and fresh from the ruin, like a forest springing new from the ashes of a great fire? This book tries to think through the collapse and its aftermath. A tad optimistic perhaps but fun.
January 20, 2025
Ngl really tempted to write a book from the pov of a non nuts member of the weirdass reactionary new england wondering how the most liberal region of the country is now essentially a russian puppeted iranian theocracy
May 31, 2021
Irkçıdan ziyade kadın düşmanı, dar bir perspektiften bakan kitap.
June 26, 2025
Really?!?
January 4, 2017
What to think of this book? After reading it, I've come to the conclusion it is more a pamflet than a novel. Its story is not particulary well written, the characters one dimensional.
I cannot fathom if Lind (using the nom de guerre Thomas Hobbes) is serious on all the political and lifestyle examples he is writing about, or that there is a tongue in cheek somewhere in his writing.
If serious, he is painting a dangerous society where liberal thinkers are in grave danger, a society that is as unforgiving to those not following its political and sociological lead as that of the Marxist intellectuals he is describing.
The mass murder of its enemies has traces of Lenin and Stalin (to name a few Marxists) in their ideological zeal.
Reading the book as a sign of the times (Trump coming into office in 20 days, elections in France and the Netherlands in early 2017), it is however a thought provoking read.
I cannot fathom if Lind (using the nom de guerre Thomas Hobbes) is serious on all the political and lifestyle examples he is writing about, or that there is a tongue in cheek somewhere in his writing.
If serious, he is painting a dangerous society where liberal thinkers are in grave danger, a society that is as unforgiving to those not following its political and sociological lead as that of the Marxist intellectuals he is describing.
The mass murder of its enemies has traces of Lenin and Stalin (to name a few Marxists) in their ideological zeal.
Reading the book as a sign of the times (Trump coming into office in 20 days, elections in France and the Netherlands in early 2017), it is however a thought provoking read.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
September 16, 2016
This is a reactionary screed masquerading as a post-Collapse novel, penned by alt-right ideologue Thomas Hobbes. The heroes of Hobbes's story cosplay Prussian aristocrats and Constantinian legionnaires, refer to African-Americans as "orcs" (and assume that the "good ones" all want to go back to the farm), and massacre college professors. I suspect the author did much of his writing one-handed. I'd say it's nearly as bad as the Left Behind novels, but Hobbes knows his way around a sentence and has one or two original ideas, so he gets the extra star.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 31 reviews