Book List Update - 57 New Books!

[Leo Gura]

On 7/10/2025 at 7:14 AM, CARDOZZO said:

@Leo Gura

Do you accept gift cards as a payment method? 

Whatever Paypal accepts.

[Leo Gura]

On 7/11/2025 at 8:33 AM, Husseinisdoingfine said:

I've only read the fourth book about Lenin on the new list, and it was incredible.

The other book on there about communism is great too.

Oh, shoot! I totally forgot to add the book I read about Stalin.

[ExploringReality]

@Leo Gura are you going to put it? That's for sure a cold book if you do.

Leo, when will you add an audio review for each book? Iknow your handling so much, would really love that. Your passion and articulation is very infectious and inspires me

Edited Saturday at 11:54 PM by ExploringReality

[Leo Gura]

Added the Stalin book to the list.

Search the list with Ctrl+F "stalin".

I read so many books last year that it's hard to remember them all.

Edited Sunday at 12:09 AM by Leo Gura

[Daniel Balan]

@Leo Gura Hi Leo, I really am confused in regards to Hitler and nazism. I argued on twitter today with that TIK guy about Hitler being far right, and I used phrases from your blog post about Hitler being a conservative to counter his arguments about Hitler being a leftist socialist! He debunked all the arguments you presented in that blog post, while claiming I am spreading falsehood, and all his followers jumped on me saying that Hitler was a socialist! I contemplated hard about this topic in the last year and I hate to admit it but there are a lot of stage red/blue socialist elements in Nazism! There were a lot of similarities to the USSR in regards to economy! Please add a book on your book list that I must read to clarify my confusions about this topic that this TIK guy brought upon my mind

Edited Sunday at 12:17 AM by Daniel Balan

[Leo Gura]

9 minutes ago, Daniel Balan said:

@Leo Gura Hi Leo, I really am confused in regards to Hitler and nazism. I argued on twitter today with that TIK guy about Hitler being far right, and I used phrases from your blog post about Hitler being a conservative to counter his arguments about Hitler being a leftist socialist! He debunked all the arguments you presented in that blog post, while claiming I am spreading falsehood, and all his followers jumped on me saying that Hitler was a socialist! I contemplated hard about this topic in the last year and I hate to admit it but there are a lot of stage red/blue ocialist elements in Nazism! There were a lot of similarities to the USSR in regards to economy! Please add a book on your book list that I must read to clarify my confusions about this topic that this TIK guy brought upon my mind

Haha.

It does not take more than a few Wikipedia articles to see that fascism and Nazism are far-right, conservative, traditionalist ideologies.

TIK's fans are libertarians, the dumbest group of political people. Don't take them seriously.

Nazism is not primarily about economics. Trying to understand Nazism through economics is already wrong-headed. Nazism is about ultra-nationalism and racism, which is a conservative attitude.

Why do neo-Nazis support Trump and want to kill AOC and Hillary Clinton? Ask TIK that. Why do so-called "socialist" Nazis love Trump? And why did Hitler kill Marxists and leftists?

There is no way TIK has rebutted the points in my blog post. That is impossible. There's not rebutting Hitler's hatred of Marxism.

Edited Sunday at 12:24 AM by Leo Gura

[Daniel Balan]

Just now, Leo Gura said:

Haha.

It does not take more than a few Wikipedia articles to see that fascism and Nazism are far-right, conservative, traditionalist ideologies.

TIK's fans are libertarians, the dumbest group of political people.

For me it is not funny because they made me very unsure of my understanding of Nazism! I totally agree with your blog post where you describe point by point why Hitler was a conservative! I even asked Tik who today's neo nazis vote for? Do they vote for the Afd, or Die Linke? And he said that they vote for Die Linke! And that Bernie Sanders is more related to Hitler than Trump is! 

He made me unsure of myself when he pointed out that Nazis abolished the stock market! That is something todays socialists advocate for!

[Leo Gura]

15 minutes ago, Daniel Balan said:

For me it is not funny because they made me very unsure of my understanding of Nazism!

Yes, fools will gaslight you like that.

You need more of a backbone.

15 minutes ago, Daniel Balan said:

For me it is not funny because they made me very unsure of my understanding of Nazism!

He made me unsure of myself when he pointed out that Nazis abolished the stock market! That is something todays socialists advocate for!

This is a childish way of reasoning about history and political movements. Social phenomena is complex and nuanced. You cannot boil down your analysis of fascism and Nazism to isolated facts like abolishing of the stock market. The abolishing of the stock market is like the 49th thing on the list of what matters about understanding Nazism. TIK's mistake is trying to understand Nazism from an economic-first lens. Political movements are not black and white. His analysis is as stupid as saying that Trump & Bannon are socialists because they floated the idea of raising the tax rate on top margin tax bracket or want to limit the power of Big Tech. You cannot make sense of political ideology with such narrow-minded, cherry-picked analysis.

TIK believes that anything that isn't purely private free-market is socialism. TIK thinks the fire department is socialism. His view is idiotic.

There is a deeper lesson here for you to recognize when you're debating with fools and stop doing it. Because you are never going to win them over with facts and logic. These are fucking libertarians! You might as well be arguing with Mormons.

The economics of Nazis is the least important thing about that worldview. To not understand that is in and of itself idiotic.

Edited Sunday at 12:38 AM by Leo Gura

[Daniel Balan]

Look Leo here under his reply I posted your 40 points reply from your blog post to debunk his take that Hitler was a socialist: https://x.com/TIKhistory/status/1943964095352324453?t=6yK4CX7osnuek9f7OtRBTQ&s=19

[Leo Gura]

@Daniel Balan I'm not even going to look at it because I know who TIK is. I know his worldview. I'm not going to argue with it.

His position would not be taken seriously by any serious historian or academic of that subject matter. TIK lives in a delusional social media echochamber of his own construction.

Why are you so attached to winning him over? That's the really issue here.

Edited Sunday at 12:42 AM by Leo Gura

[Daniel Balan]

1 minute ago, Leo Gura said:

@Daniel Balan I'm not even going to look at it because I know who TIK is. I know his worldview. I'm not going to argue with it.

I understand but the way he reframed everything from your blog post made me unable to form a counter argument! For him a guy like Trump is the opposite of Hitler because Trump loves the free market while AOC and Sanders are the real Hitlers because they want to heavily regulate the market 

[Leo Gura]

2 minutes ago, Daniel Balan said:

For him a guy like Trump is the opposite of Hitler because Trump loves the free market while AOC and Sanders are the real Hitlers because they want to heavily regulate the market 

Yeah. That's the absurdity of the libertarian worldview.

To a libertarian, free public education, fire department, and taxation is Nazism.

Hahahaha...

Edited Sunday at 12:46 AM by Leo Gura

[Daniel Balan]

12 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

Yes, fools will gaslight you like that.

You need more of a backbone.

This is a childish way of reasoning about history and political movements. Social phenomena is complex and nuanced. You cannot boil down your analysis of fascism and Nazism to isolated facts like abolishing of the stock market. The abolishing of the stock market is like the 49th thing on the list of what matters about understanding Nazism. TIK's mistake is trying to understand Nazism from an economic-first lens. Political movements are not black and white. His analysis is as stupid as saying that Trump & Bannon are socialists because they floated the idea of raising the tax rate on top margin tax bracket or want to limit the power of Big Tech. You cannot make sense of political ideology with such narrow-minded, cherry-picked analysis.

TIK believes that anything that isn't purely private free-market is socialism. TIK thinks the fire department is socialism. His view is idiotic.

There is a deeper lesson here for you to recognize when you're debating with fools and stop doing it. Because you are never going to win them over with facts and logic. These are fucking libertarians! You might as well be arguing with Mormons.

The economics of Nazis is the least important thing about that worldview. To not understand that is in and of itself idiotic.

The reason I try to understand the worldview of people like TIK is because they have totally opposite worldviews than I do, and after a decade of watching you I always try to get a glimpse at multiple perspectives, I like to give people like TIK the benefit of the doubt that maybe I am wrong and maybe his worldview is right! I watched all your videos with the word truth in it recently just to understand how to get to the truth in situations like these! But after I watched them I was left even more confused! I have a really hard time discovering what is true! How do I overcome this?

[Leo Gura]

5 minutes ago, Daniel Balan said:

The reason I try to understand the worldview of people like TIK is because they have totally opposite worldviews than I do

I was left even more confused!

But that's what you wanted.

You wanted to be confused.

When you entertain all sorts of diverse radical worldviews you will be left confused.

To be unconfused you have to make some decisions about what is true and what is false.

How about you decide whether libertarianism is true or false?

Edited Sunday at 12:53 AM by Leo Gura

[Daniel Balan]

18 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

Yes, fools will gaslight you like that.

You need more of a backbone.

 

Yes, but sometimes I might be wrong on a subject, how do I know when to be humble and be critical of my own understanding of a topic, and when do I know that my worldview is correct and I should dismiss as gaslighting the arguments of the perspective that is contradicting my perspective? 

Here I find it really difficult, Thats the biggest problem I have right now in regards to self actualization work!

[Leo Gura]

5 minutes ago, Daniel Balan said:

Thats the biggest problem I have right now in regards to self actualization work!

The answer is that you must ground yourself directly in truth, direct experience, personal insight.

If you study enough Nazi and conservative ideology you will understand that TIK is false.

TIK himself is right-wing/conservative. So of course he wants to blame Hitler on the left. That's his game. It's the same stupid game that Jordan Peterson, Dennis Prager, and Dave Rubin play.

Every right-winger today says that the American left are authoritarian. It's stupid projection.

Edited Sunday at 12:59 AM by Leo Gura

[Daniel Balan]

2 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

To be unconfused you have to make some decisions about what is true and what is false.

Here is where I am really lost! I always fear that the perspectives I currently hold as true for myself, might actually be false! I always fear that due to my personal biases and self deception I might mistake falsehood as truth! The one thing that helps me somewhat is spiral dynamics! When faced with 2 perspectives, I hold as true the one that I deem is higher on the spiral.

But some other day I presented on twitter to some pro russian friend of mine the spiral dynamics model, and I told them that the west is at Orange while Russia is at Red! And he said that spiral dynamics is western bullshit propaganda that was created by the west to brainwash me! It left me wondering if this could be true! I dismissed it as false because he is pro Russian and I never take pro Russians seriously because they are in my eyes at stage red, but could I be the one that is deluded?

[Leo Gura]

8 minutes ago, Daniel Balan said:

but could I be the one that is deluded?

You have to realize that that could always be the case. There is no way around this. You could also be wrong about being deluded.

If you choose to be lost in absolute skepticism, that is your own choice. Notice that is something you are doing and choosing.

In the end you must take a stand for something. You cannot just be this neutral, confused, uncertain entity. Life forces you to make choices about what is true and what is false.

Grow some balls and make a bet.

Don't forget. Your absolute skepticism could also be delusion. In fact, it is, since your compromising with devils and idiots.

The devil wins when you are confused and don't believe there even is a truth anymore. That's victory for Trump, Putin, and TIK.

Edited Sunday at 01:09 AM by Leo Gura

[Daniel Balan]

13 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

How about you decide whether libertarianism is true or false?

Look it is not so black and white whether it is false or not. I live in Romania where the communist way of doing politics still persists to this day! There are hundreds of government institution that are there just for the mistresses of the ruling politicians to have good paying jobs paid by the state! We have government institutions that count how many bears are in a forest..... Some bullshit like that, and for this reason I do support libertarian policies that would get rid of all of these useless government departments! But I am totally against TIK's libertarianism! I want a state that provides free health care, schooling, strong police, fire fighters while we pay moderate taxes for good government service! But I do agre with libertarians when it comes to deficit spending! I would rather have worse quality government services that to have them funded from deficit spending!

[Leo Gura]

5 minutes ago, Daniel Balan said:

But I do agre with libertarians when it comes to deficit spending!

But you don't need to be a libertarian to want balanced budgets.

I like balanced budgets. Any sane person should.