Full disclosure: I'm an independent who voted for Obama (and Kerry). I grew up in a conservative Northeastern suburb, and currently live in Berkeley, CA. I consider myself liberal on social issues, and pretty conservative on fiscal issues. I'm a member of the Sierra Club, and believe global warming is a serious threat, which means that Mark Steyn thinks I'm an idiot (and told me so many times during the course of this book). But by gum, I read America Alone cover to cover, because I love my Republican father, and he wanted me to read it so much that he had a copy mailed straight to my door.
So color me surprised when I actually found the book--mostly--quite eye-opening, persuasive, and even enjoyable, however often I may have found myself in strong disagreement with Steyn's overall worldview. He can be extremely funny, and not just when he's mocking me and my friends. He makes some very compelling arguments about the demographic growth of the Muslim world, its general susceptibility to an extremist version of Islam, and the need for the West to be culturally confident in the face of it. I don't know enough about Europe to be able to put his arguments in context (most of his concern is with demographic trends there), and I'd be curious to read some other viewpoints. But on the face of it, I put down the book pretty well persuaded by his core arguments.
I have to say, however, I think it's unfortunate that Steyn, a National Review columnist who writes as 'The Happy Warrior,' was clearly aiming this book at his usual NR audience. He peppers his prose with numerous, mocking take-downs of people and ideas he doesn't like--liberals, progressives, securalists, environmentalists (especially Al Gore--my God, he *hates* Al Gore), multiculturalism, gay marriage, etc.--and often without much, if any, relevance to his arguments. That's fine if you're preaching to the choir; you'll get a lot of Amens, you'll fire up the faithful. But if you're serious about disseminating your arguments, don't you want to persuade as many people as possible? And if you spend much of your book insulting approximately 50% of the populace, how do you expect them to get past the preface? I think it's a lost opportunity.
Furthermore, I'm amazed there's seemingly no dissonance for Steyn when he spills so much ink lambasting environmentalism and then writes, as item #8 on his list of solutions to the Islamic problem, "Cease bankrolling unreformable oil dictatorships by a long-overdue transformation of the energy industry." Has it occurred to the Happy Warrior that he may have common cause with some of his enemies? If we're looking to forestall a global hot war, maybe we could start by diffusing the culture war here at home. I don't think it's serving us well, but Steyn appears to celebrate it.
In a similar vein, Steyn characterizes France's opposition to the Iraq war as "a sign of weakness" to the Arab population, one of many places where he equates strength with force. Yet forty pages later he writes, refreshingly, "An army is only one weapon a civilization wields, and the weapon of last resort, too." OK. I know he's not too keen on French leadership, but can't he even consider the possibility that those who opposed the invasion of Iraq didn't do so out of weakness, but out of a conviction that other weapons at our disposal might actually be more effective? Steyn seems primarily concerned in this book with re-establishing cultural strength, integrity, and assertiveness. And although 8 of his 10 solutions to the Islamic problem could be characterized as the use of "soft power" (a term I'm sure he hates), nearly everything else he writes underscores this equivalence of strength and force. He spends a lot of time warning against looking weak (which, of course, only emboldens our enemies) and not so much time exploring what can--and has--happened when we wield our power unwisely.
So, you see, I take issue with some things. But again: I found much to admire here. Though I find his excoriation of multiculturalism to be extreme, I really take to heart the idea that we needn't apologize for our culture and its values, nor compromise them unthinkingly. And I take seriously his argument that the welfare state can dangerously erode our capacity for self-reliance. Along the way, I had some good laughs, and my political skin got a little thicker. I guess you could say I learned some stuff. And so, in the end, I'd consider it a highly worthwhile experience.