Fantasia zero: a tutto viene attribuito il nome dal compito che svolgono nella storia come "L'Organizzazione", "Il Sistema" eccetera.
Pieno di razzismo e rancore.
Banale tentativo di sotto trama romantica che così scontata manco i film per ragazzine.
Un pieno e completo fallimento.
E poi NOIOSO NOIOSO NOIOSO, al punto che mi sono chiesto diverse volte durante la lettura se lo pseudonimo nascondesse un ragazzino di 13 anni "ribellino". E invece no, questo letame è opera di un adulto.
Quasi peggio del Mein Kampf, ma ad essere onesti il livello è più o meno lo stesso come d'altronde per i confusi contenuti. ( )

For my birthday I received a copy of The Turner Diaries, normally I would put a link in but any link I put in would get old quite quickly. While I had certainly heard of the book before I had never even seen a copy. So I was interested in finding out exactly what this book was about.

The conceit of the book is that 100 years after The Great Revolution a diary is found that was written by an ordinary member of the Organisation called Earl Turner. Everything is written from his point of view, with the exception of some notes to explain things, mostly for a future audience, not us. It begins in 1991 and goes until 1993, but it is not a day by day account. Dramatically I understand why the book has proven so popular. It is easy to read and always logical, it covers a great deal of ground, different types of action and locations. It shows you what is happening and gets the reader into the story. It is also technical, so if your interested in weapons or 'how would that work' questions then that is there. Just enough but never too much. Things constantly happen so it's hard to get bored at any point. Earl Turner is also an interesting character, both an everyman that most men can relate too and a heroic character. One forced by circumstances to go from everyman to hero. In the beginning Turner finds it hard to believe that he is capable of killing, by the end he kills countless people. While I won't spoil the story, I think it fair to say that the book and the violence within the book escalates by quite a bit.

So why is this book so controversial?

The book also escalates it's racial violence, at the start Whites need protection from the government. But the Organisation isn't Pro-White, it's anti-everybody who isn't White. Their ideology is at times anti-Black, at others anti-Jewish and at others anti-Liberal. Each is criticised multiple times throughout, but not at the same time. Each is treated as a separate issue. Just as the White traitors are always treated as a symptom of the disease and not as a cause, even though they are the ultimate cause of the problems. I was going to write that the killing of non-Whites was extreme, but actually the killing of Whites by the Organisation is also extreme. Turner and the Organisation are fanatics and killing people comes to mean nothing to them. Everything becomes about ends not means and killing anyone regardless of race or guilt to achieve those ends is justified in the book. Of course most people who dismiss this book simply call it racist, but it's not just non-Whites who die in droves.

As a story it's a good action story, it never lets up, something is always happening or about to happen. But this book is also about ideology, and a book that kills all non-Whites and a good deal of Whites is not a book on how to achieve our aims but one that shows us how things should not be done! ( )

If this is truly the 'bible of the racist right' as was claimed in the book's preface, it certainly deserves it. If there are still ideological racists clinging to this thing, it's (unsurprisingly) out of a misplaced sense of tradition, bad taste in literature, or both. I could imagine some pleasure being derived from the often pornographic descriptions of violence, but beyond some musings about guerrilla warfare, after reading this I wasn't surprised that only a few pages describing bomb-making were found among Timothy McVeigh's belongings after the Oklahoma City Bombing. Perhaps he, too, realized that the bulk of this book is a paper-thin marriage of ideology, strategy, and story?

There are a few rare moments when it manages to be entertaining, and only in spite of itself At one point Turner, the author's rather dumpy but dedicated Mary Sue, reflects on the fact that he 'couldn't imagine himself calmly butchering a teenaged White girl' before his induction into the all-powerful Organization, but he'd 'become much more realistic about life recently'. Pierce's style of journal entries, combined with his pale prose, allows him to constantly proselytize to the reader with embarrassingly blunt statements like this, and it grows tiresome long before we've reached the infamous bombings this book is known for.

As an ideological piece, this book offers a somewhat interesting look into a certain kind of radical racist mindset, though I feel like there are less poorly written ways, both in literature and academic analysis, to read that. As literature goes, this falls among the lowest grade of fanfiction, and while it's clear that the story element is pretty low among the author's priorities it's not clear that he understood how tedious it is to read about dilemmas which are resolved almost entirely by your enemies having inherent racial shortcomings and your protagonists designed as clever, all-knowing superheroes.

( )

Would have been 4-stars, but it is pretty (i.e. very) poorly written. However, as others have written, is a slightly disturbingly good guilty pleasure, a simple book of the white side in a near-future race war.

Some of it is just great because none of us are ever going to be allowed to hear such ideas ever again.

Good: easy to read, banned, very different
Bad: poorly written. ( )

It's a good book. No, I don't agree with the racism prevalent throughout, but it is a good book and presents an interesting "what if" scenario. ( )