The second edition of On Critical Pedagogy has been updated in order to include the Trump presidency. And Trump remains a spectre, haunting this book and preventing it from meaningful analysis. Trump and other brands of politics, particularly the neoliberal variety, whatever that may mean (And apparently it means almost everything) are denounced throughout this book. But the denunciations serve as a way to preach to Giroux's choir, and the analysis lacks depth. I think part of the reason is that Giroux lacks the needed background knowledge in order to comment on numerous political issues, in addition to educational issues.
This causes the second half of the book, which really digs into neoliberalism to be much weaker than the first half.
A strength of the book, and of critical pedagogy in general is that it acknowledges the impossibility of neutrality. We all come with a viewpoint, with our own presuppositions.
"The notion of a neutral, objective education is an oxymoron. Education and pedagogy do not exist outside of relations of power, values, and politics.
In my opinion, the term critical pedagogy (CP) is a bit of a misnomer. I think critical pedagogists stretch the term pedagogy more than is helpful. CP can be more accurately thought of as a philosophy, as applying critical theory to education than as a pedagogy*.
*Giroux, along with other critical pedagogists stretch the term pedagogy to include learning outside of the classroom, but it is stretched so thin as to divorce the term from its original meaning.