Rating: 
Summary: Good one Scruton
Review: The criticisms are exaggerated. There is much truth to be gained in his account.
Rating: 
Summary: An Ignorant Bandwagon Rider
Review: This short book is seriously bad and my title reflects the feeling it was written quickly to cash in on the present enthusisam for books on 911 & Islam. The writer seems to have acquired his ideas from the prejudices of others, shows no original insights and has many glaring errors.Too many examples to list them all. Here are just three: 1.) He thinks zakat is taken at the rate of 10% of a Muslims income. ('he must pay a tenth of his goods to the zakat', p.60) It is actually one fortieth (2.5%). This is a pillar of Islam. Not knowing this is like writing about Catholicism and not knowing that the Popes robes are white. I have the first reprint, so this is not a printers error, just his stupidity. 2.) He says:'All criticism of minority cultures is censored out of public debate, and newcomers quickly conclude that it is possible to reside in a European state as an antagonist and still enjoy all the rights and priviliges that are the rewards of citizenship. This is the principle reason why efforts in Britain to recruit immigrant minorities to the police and armed forces -- in other words, to the professions that symbolise our territorial jurisdiction and its claims on us -- have met with such scant sucsess.' (p.63) Anyone who thinks minority cultures are not subject to criticism (sometimes rightly, sometimes not) in Western societies must have been living in a hole. Also, in Scrutons own country (the U.K.) minorities do join the health service, teaching, universities, civil service, etc. Perhaps the police and armed forces have a racism problem, as an undercover BBC TV 'Panorama' documentary on the British police ('The Secret Policeman') recently demonstrated and the McPherson report on the British Police stated? Not the same as some unspoken opposition to that which 'symbolise our territiorial jurisdiction'. The principal reason he suggests seems to be based on his own prejudice, nothing more. In fact, his accompanying note refers to Steven Emerson, another peddler of antiMuslim prejudice. Proof that if your sources are trash, the output will also be so. 3.) He thinks Muslims feel 'rage at the God-defying arrogance' when they encounter 'the Western city, with its open spaces and public buildings, its wide streets, its visible interiors, its visible interiors, its skyscrapers dwarfing the few religious buildings'... (p. 101) Can you imaging how Scruton got such an insight? Did he actually go round taking a poll? This book should appeal to the ignorant types who are already antiMuslim and want to read trash that agrees with their present views. There are also vents aganst feminism, multiculturalism, political correctness, and a few other isms that seem to obsess him, as well as modern architecture. So if you have prejudices on more than one level this book may be for you. Nothing is followed up, or convincingly justified, so any reasoned arguments that could rightly be made are out. I would have given it no stars if that were possible, and would advise the unprejudiced to save their money. Just time for one final poke. Scruton seems to think Le Corbusier had a big hand in designing modern Algiers. (I'll give you the 'pleasure' of finding and reading his stupidity yourself if you chose to buy this book) L.C. didn't -- his 'Obus' project (1931) and 1942 plan were both rejected. In 1955 a few of his buildings were built, including an 'aerohabitat' and a 'living bridge'. They are (in my opinion) ugly and deserve criticism, but amount to no more than a city block. Not a major impact on Algiers. Then again, any writer who can't check his facts does not deserve to have a major impact on intelligent, unbiased people either.
| 
