Drew Westen’s book, “The Political Brain,” is illuminating and engaging. The author is an expert in the human mind, and has devoted his book to relating his understanding of the brain to the world of politics.
Westen talks about what people really look at when they evaluate politicians and candidates. He backs up his assertions with many studies and experiments, clearly laying out exactly how the human mind works when it attempts to “decide” who to vote for.
I learned a great amount about the human mind reading the book. When I look back and evaluate campaigns or candidates, I can now see exactly where they went wrong (or right) and what they could have done differently. I understand how my fellow voters think, and I’ve even gained a great deal of insight into how I think (though I didn’t realize it).
Unfortunately, Westen’s book is really two books. The first book is a rational, scientific analysis of the brain, a breakdown of various campaigns in America throughout history, and a discussion of what candidates need to do in order to effectively communicate their personalities and politics to the voting populace.
The second book is a biased diatribe against Republicans and an overly emotional plea with democrats to follow Drew’s advice.
The first of these two books is phenomenal: scientific, accurate, and rational. The second of these two books is garbage: emotional, biased, and relentlessly irritating. To make matters worse, these two books are overlayed on top of each other inside of “The Political Brain,” the content of the book suddenly switching between these two sub-books at random in a jarring, frustrating way.
It’s a shame to see a scientific man fall victim to his own emotions and biases. I’m not saying Westen’s personal political views are WRONG, but I am saying they have absolutely no place in a book that really ought to be scientific and fair-minded.
The plus side is that the switches from scientific book to political rant are so extremely obvious and transparent that you never have to worry about internalizing as scientific fact something that is really political opinion. The facts are backed up by studies, and the opinions backed up by emotional pleas. While jarring, the differences are so stark that it makes it somewhat easy to read the political nonsense with one skeptical eyebrow raised and simultaneously read the scientific information with an open, spongelike mind ready to absorb new information.
Like I said, the factual portion of the book is absolutely riveting – well worth a read for anyone interested in politics, cognitive science, or psychology. The opinion portion of the book is frustrating and tiresome, and the reader is forced to wade through it to get to the good stuff.
I wish I could say this is simply a matter of me having different political opinions than Westen, but the fact is that I agree with most of his opinions. I agree with many of his characterizations of the modern day Republican and Democratic parties, and I believe in a lot of the same values he espouses in the book. But the fact remains, even as I read opinions I agreed with I found it obnoxious I was reading opinions at all, embedded in an otherwise factual and intelligent book.
I recommend the book, but I also feel compelled to warn anyone reading it, particularly people of political persuasions that differ from Westen’s, they are going to have a tough time getting through many parts of the book without hurling it across the room. Keep at it, it’s worth it.
Rating: 3 out of 5
