Moore, Michael. Stupid White Men. 2002.

Pretty soon I'll be able to start a new reading list: The books critical of President Bush suppressed and even burned by their own publisher reading list.

While Fortunate Son was literally recalled and burned, the publication of Stupid White Men was delayed while the printed copies of the book were warehoused and quite nearly "pulped." After the publisher was petitioned by innumerable angry librarians, it released the book reluctantly and quietly, and the book then quietly rose to the top of many best-seller lists.

Moore's criticisms of the reigning stupidwhitemanocracy are occasionally simplistic, usually informative, and always funny. It is unsatisfying to me (though likely satisfying for others) that the champion of the displaced workers of Flint dwells on race and gender to the point that he seems to overlook class. For a man so critical of the side-effects of capitalism, he overlooks the systemic nature of economic injustice in favor of pointing fingers at those who happen to be in power and, by extension, their race and gender: white guys. In other words, he seems to take it for granted that replacing the white men currently in power with African-Americans or women, without changing the system, will lead to a fairer world, which is an easy enough point to make, since there is no evidence to the contrary, since most positions of great political or economic power (in the West) are held by white men.

But this is different than saying that most white men hold positions of great economic or political power; and overlooks the fact that all positions of great economic and political power have always been held by rich people.

But that is an admittedly whiny criticism of a great book with the power to polarize opposition to our current president-select, approval ratings or no.

The book reads like a collection of autonomous, dovetailing essays, many with helpful or amusing sidebars. For a political manifesto, it is easy to read and entertaining in a way that does not blunt its withering sharpness. It suffers from its need to be funny at times, especially the passages on Serbia and North Korea. I see this humor as part of a strategy to make convincing political arguments without guilt, using laughs as a counterpoint to anger or tears. This is a useful strategy, but, as I already agree with many of his main points, I crave more in the way of facts and research.

This is a good best-seller. The cliché says that the world has changed since September 11th (which is why this book was almost destroyed), so I look forward to Moore's next book. And movie. And, to a lesser extent, TV show.