5.0 out of 5 stars Thoughtful and Thought-provoking

From published review:

Reviewed in the United States on July 19, 2023

At first glance, David Balog’s The Twenty Worst Americans may seem to be a simple laundry list of villainy. But this is no tirade of personal grievances; nor is it a whining screed against those who think differently than the author.

Instead, Balog has called upon his background in history writing to present the citizens whose behavior he sees as particularly heinous (Harvey Weinstein, Paul Castellano), ignorant (Phyllis Schlafly, Eddie Cicotte, Betsy DeVos), vicious (Dan White, Rupert Murdoch) or simple grifters (Henry Ford, Charles Coughlin, James A. Baker and Donald Trump). There are twenty short essays in all. Each is easy to read, pleasantly brief, but never glib or lightweight. Balog has something to say and he says it plainly.

Balog calls upon an encyclopedic knowledge of history to make his points, which he does not hide behind manipulative propaganda. No, we know where the author stands and he is transparent in his views. What surprises us is his gentle tact while discussing subjects that could infuriate readers if presented by a lesser writer.

All of which makes some of his choices that much more challenging.

Balog has personal knowledge of William Safire. As a fellow history writer, I have certainly read many of Safire’s books. Some are quite good. But his affairs—business and personal—seem to veer far from his written work. It is eye opening, and this begs the question that many of us must face sooner or later: at what point do we toss out the better work of creation because its creator was repulsive? We enjoy the distance of centuries between us and, say, a Caravaggio or Michelangelo. Those who are closer to our time strike us where we live.

There is much to take exception to, of course.

In just one example, I have published enough about the Roosevelts to have different views on FDR than Balog. This is as it should be. The moment we accept every word of any individual as inviolable, we start on the dangerous path that Balog decries in this book. Heated discussions are part of what make this kind of text interesting.

Balog occasionally digresses into information that is only tangentially related. This is when the author is at his best.

In my favorite example, in the chapter on Bill Maher, Balog provides eight fascinating pages on the physical and neurological aspects of gender, well supported by medical experts. As with his section on FDR, Balog demonstrates a rare talent for engendering discussion without badgering or patronizing.

I agree here, I disagree there; but by the time I was done, I had learned something and want to learn more. I can think of no higher compliment.