The March of Unreason: Science, Democracy, and the New Fundamentalism Hardcover – Jul 14 2008

Anybody with an interest in the intersection of science and politics is already aware of the impact of science denialism on the conservative end of the spectrum (see Chris Mooney's "The Republican War on Science") on things like climate change, women's reproductive rights, education, etc. But the other end of the spectrum has its own brand of head-in-the-sand, too. The anti-sience, anti-tech, and anti-capitalist Left has a back-to-the-Garden-of-Eden fantasy that if we can just return to some idyllic past (that never existed), all will be right with the world. But the impact of such magical thinking has brought about the ban across Europe of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in foods, societal hysteria about nuclear energy at a time when we need to be taking a hard look at alternatives to hydrocarbons, and a proliferation of "alternative" medical practices that has allowed diseases once conquered to rear their ugly heads once again.

Now, in the interest of full disclosure, I'm a lifelong bleeding-heart liberal. I'm all for programs that help lift people out of poverty, relieve human suffering and ignorance and I'm wary of unfettered capitalism (while, at the same time, recognizing that the market economy has been the best engine we have for poverty eradication as well as funding my kids' education). So I'm not pointing fingers at the Progressives and saying, "See, told ya, you're wrong." I'm very much in line with them, and think we should be taking a hard look at some of the disastrous policies the Left has propagated by virtue of its own science denialism.

The author, a British politician not a scientist, lays out the evidence on many of these issues (with a fleshed out bibliography to support it) to demonstrate how this kind of unreason is having a severe impact on our abilities to tackle issue of relieving hunger and poverty in the developing countries, environmental issues and a host of other societal challenges that require policy based on evidence, not ideology. Another book, "Science Left Behind" by Berezow and Campbell, takes on this thesis from a more American-centric perspective; I've not read that one yet, but after reading this book, it's next on my list.

I have never left a review for a book I haven'y completely read yet but this one will be the exception. I received this book a few days ago and began reading it, then I quickly skimmed through some of the major parts of it. I am now thoroughly excited to continue my read! This is the book I've been waiting for, a book that concisely summarizes the problem of eco-fundamentalism in well thought-out detail. In the prologue, I thought I was reading about myself 40 years ago when the 'ecology' movement was in it's infancy and the author and I shared a deep concern for our environmental future. But the environmental movement that was based on science 40 years ago has morphed into a fundamentalist crusade by people who have labeled themselves as 'Green'. The 'Green' movement is an anti-science crusade of ignorance that is a virulent threat to our, and our children's, future rallying around a flag called 'the Precautionary Principle' which can only be defined as a demand for scientific stagnation. Thank you Mr. Taverne for writing this book.

Wonderful explanation of the need for evidence based policy in all spheres of life and human endeavour and how this is linked to the fundamentals of democracy.

Here is a well-researched and well-presented book defending science and rational thinking from the recent trend of society to lose its trust in science and embrace irrational, fear-based, feelings-based ideas.

Taverne takes aim at eco-fundamentalism, anti-globalisation organisations, environmentalist lobby groups, alternative medicine and other pseudo-scientific approaches. But he doesn't just do this in an ideological way; he presents studies, research and verifiable data to support his point.

Ironically, his opponents often don't. He presents the case that some of these approaches aren't based on scientific principles. For instance, he quotes Lord Melchett, the Director of Greenpeace, admitting that he would be permanently opposed to genetically modified crops, regardless of the scientific facts!

If you're already ideologically closed to Taverne's arguments, it's unlikely you will change your view by reading this book. However, if you read it with even a slightly open mind that encourages you to do your own investigation into the facts behind the claims, it will have served its purpose.