Alright, so today after getting up and eating some breakfast, I decided to continue my reading of The Story, which I was so impressed with the other night.

Was it just me, or is this just a total piece of blatent propaganda? (Not that I don't agree with much of what it says, but still...) Mabye reading in the wee hours of the night had made my brain soft, maybe my natural bias toward many of the ideas conveyed swayed me, or maybe the push-the-agenda factor was pumped up a notch after the first several chapters. I'm still not sure why I didn't see through it before.

I mean, I like libertarianism just as much as the next freedom-loving net user, but this hyperbole is outright ridiculous:

"What if there were a place, a world of no politicians? .... There, everyone was happy... everyone was wealthy, everyone was healthy, everyone had a livelihood they loved, couples were mutually, madly in love, they were all slim and sexy, and everyone was like a genius building exciting values for the world."

Give me a break! I mean, I'm all for tearing down the power structure. We all sure as hell know the government is one of the most corrupt institutions on the planet, but to claim that everything will magically turn into some sort of utopia with the disappearance of political rulers is worse than naive. It's blindness.

Oh well. Still some interesting stuff. I just can't believe I didn't see this political propaganda for what it was before. Or, like I said, maybe the author just made it less blatent in the first few chapters, hoping to draw people in before hitting them over the head with the big time dogma.

The wackiest thing is that I can't even say I disagree with many of the notions presented. I'm all for everyone taking their place as a soveriegn being. I would love to see structures which try to oppress and control others be dissolved. I even find myself nodding to many of the theories regarding dieties. (Although the over-the-top claims toward the end of chapter 5 that this was somehow a brand new, earthshaking concept raised my doubts about its credibility.)

One thing I did notice from chapter 1, but decided not to bother mentioning before, were the somewhat conservative while trying to sound progressive sexual politics and hetero-centric views presented. Maybe that's because I've been hanging out so much with the netforumers, who collectively seem to have their sensors wired at peak sensitivity to such things. (Understandable, given that Renaissance Pictures productions regularly attack such issues using both subtle and overt methods, which almost always raises a controversy.)

Anyway, I'll probably read some more of The Story, just because it has held so many ideas of interest, and it's obviously got a lot of good stuff to say, even if it does go off the deep delusional end sometimes. I just thought I better clarify, sense what I said the other night could so easily be construed as a blanket endorsement. It's always a good idea to keep the critical thinking cap on, even (and perhaps especially) when you agree with what's being said.