Lipton Matthews’ review of Progressive Myths is an enticing one

Some of my favorite book reviews come from readers whose worldview aligns with a specific author, but they don’t go to bat for them 100 percent of the time. This is what jumped out at me in Lipton Matthews’ review of Michael Huemer’s book, Progressive Myths.

One reason this jumped out at me is that I caught Tom Woods’ interview with Huemer on Episode 2560 entitled Six Progressive Myths Smashed. Both Matthews’ review and Woods’ interview are great places to snag more insight before you dive into this nonfiction work.

The Libertarian Book Reviewer is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

Oftentimes, we’re hit with progressive propaganda everywhere we look, from professional sports leagues to our schools, the workplace, Big Tech (I’m not buying into Zuckerberg and Co. just yet), and even on our phones when good old Apple News (I have an iPhone) pops up.

That said, it’s tough to inject some saneness into the equation, even if many of us know that we’re being hit with a dominant ideology that’s going to wrap itself in a nice, little bow. Then, it’ll present itself as if it’s the New Ten Commandments or something along those lines, and anyone who defies it is “a horrible, hateful, backward human being” on the “wrong side of history.”

But, like Neo from The Matrix, critical thinkers know something’s not right here. The problem is, a lot of us have no counterargument when we’re hit with this propaganda from every different angle.

When academia, the local and national news, and even your workplace tell you implicit bias exists, you start to believe it. Climate change as an existential threat? You start to believe that too. We can go on and on, but luckily, Huemer did the dirty work for us. So, let’s dive into Matthews’ review of a book I just added to that mountain of what I call a TBR list.

Matthews goes into detail with progressive racial myths

The entire, “If you’re white, you’re somehow racist” quip is one I’ve never understood since there aren’t many Americans alive today who’s not descended from a group who’s been oppressed at one point or another in this nation’s history (Italians, Irish, Catholics, you get the gist).

Anyway, that’s just my take. Here’s a bulleted list of what Matthews highlighted that Huemer helped debunk:

Systemic racism

Implicit bias

Stereotype

Drug laws

Oh, and speaking of this topic, I finished listening to another episode over at the Tom Woods Show speaking about this very topic in what was an interview with Wanjiru Njoya in Episode 2595 in which she breaks down the whole “social justice” rhetoric.

Feminist Myths

This is a big one for me since I’ve literally heard firsthand accounts of ‘gender pay’ or ‘opportunity gap’ in recent years. Clearly, I was a skeptic from the get-go, and many of the accounts I heard in person seemed more entrenched in speculation. For example, “They didn’t believe I could write about (niche) because I’m a woman,” in the most melodramatic tone I’ve ever heard jumped at me the most. Anyway, here are the topics Matthews covered:

Gender pay gap

Sexual assault statistics

Speaking on the latter bullet point, this topic is clearly ultra-sensitive to many, and the numbers, as opposed to “25 percent of women are sexually assaulted during college,” Matthews is quick to point out that “he (Huemer) argues that the true figure is between 1 percent and 5 percent, based on more rigorous data.”

That said, Matthews ended the section with this wise statement:

“While this does not diminish the severity of actual sexual assaults, it punctures the progressive doctrine that false accusations are exceedingly rare.”

One of the claims I’ve personally heard here is that, somehow, those of us who don’t believe the numbers thrown in our faces undermine that sexual assault is a severe thing. That’s not the case, and Matthews showed a lot of class by including the quote.

Wealth Myths

If a progressive got nothing else out of this book, I’d love for them to at least appreciate a fact that Huemer laid out and Matthews echoed regarding US millionaires and inheritances. That number rested at around the fact that:

79 percent, in fact, did not inherit the wealth of a previous generation

This should put a lot of people at ease. Why? Well, it means one thing: Anyone can climb the ladder to wealth if they take ownership of their lives and realize that only they have the power to achieve the life they want.

Thanks for reading The Libertarian Book Reviewer! This post is public so feel free to share it.

Share

One day, I’ll add my own review of this book, and I may dedicate an entire article to this topic. Heck, I know a guy who went from, “growing up poor and knowing what real cold felt like” to “knowing what a million bucks looks like.” I should mention here that he also lives debt-free.

Yeah, it’s possible. And the best thing a progressive can do, instead of trying to cherry-pick a way to refute the number shared above, is to strive to improve their own well-being. Find market demand for something, create something around that demand, be resourceful, then sell what you created.

Pseudo-Scientific Myths

I think we all know where Huemer (and Matthews) were going with this one. It may’ve been in the news a lot lately, what with wildfires in Los Angeles and hurricanes in the Southeast. I mean, of course, I’m talking about:

Climate change

And public health

Let’s elaborate a little on that first bullet point:

I love the fact that Huemer doesn’t go as far as to deny the existence of global warming. Among many libertarians whose content I’ve read and who I’ve listened to on podcasts, every single one of them concedes that global warming itself is a thing.

But Matthews also said Huemer:

“critiques alarmist narratives that predict imminent societal collapse. Rather than reinforcing alarmist sentiments, Heumer contends that mainstream scientists such as Adam Schlosser and Michael Mann concur that the probability of climate change leading to human extinction is low.”

Not a Perfect Book

Listen, there’s never been a perfectly-written book, and it’s why I love reading some honest critiques of my own work, and that of any book that I plan on buying. Matthews pulls no punches here.

The Libertarian Book Reviewer is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

In short, he asserts that Huemer definitely could’ve done a better job with the following:

Myths Huemermentioned have already been debunked and could have instead built on what’s already been written

Like so-called racial injustice

He wrote nothing on racial disparities and income

Huemer could have elaborated more on debunking extreme climate change

He should have cited more recent sources scrutinizing the “gender pay gap”

No, not a perfect book, but a perfect review

Perfect reviews should work in two ways: They need to highlight the book’s strengths but expose their weaknesses. Matthews did that since he didn’t go wild and shout “5 stars, go buy your copy” from the rooftops.

And thank goodness, too. Instead, he gave Huemer, or someone out there, a blueprint to write a follow-up book. So, if preferably Huemer does that and further debunks these myths while adding new material, libertarians (and conservatives) have more intellectual stock to further put the myths listed above to sleep.

Okay, maybe not to sleep, since there will always exist a contingent of steadfast progressives who will hear nothing other than the talking points of those fueling their own worldview. But by providing more resourceful information on the topic, complete with sources, might I add, there will be enough evidence to at least change people’s minds.

Matthews provides plenty of those sources in his review, so the ball’s rolling.