Maybe Not

I followed a link from Insty to Amazon (“Top Books In Military History”) and found this:


That said, given the Smithsonian’s increasing descent into woke-based illiteracy, it wouldn’t surprise me at all if the cover was printed incorrectly, the book is about WWI, and nobody in the layers and layers of fact-checkers picked it up.

Or else it’s the Ockham principle, which would simply say that Amazon done fucked up.


  1. Software algorithms are barely one step removed from witchcraft and sorcery sometimes. All it takes is one quirk or error and you get all SORTS of interesting results.

  2. Literacy being what it is today, maybe the young whelps at Amazon thought it meant “World War, Won”.

    Yeah, I don’t think so either.

  3. Or whomever set the categories for the book when putting it up for sale on amazon made a mistake.
    Most likely reason IMO.

  4. There are people who regard the Second Unpleasantness as the First Unpleasantness, Round 2. Others think that it really only ended in 1989.

    1. Except it’s jumped the pond and showed itself to be alive, well, and all to virulent over here, as evidenced by this year’s menu of Democrat candidates. Choose your desired variety of totalitarianism. Want the Jews to be the totally evil villains? We have choices for that. Kulaks and the daringly imaginative who hew a new path for others to follow and make the world more prosperous? We have choices for that. Every one a little different, almost like M&M’s on the outside, but the same decayed evil flavor of “I will rule over you for your own good” on the inside.

Comments are closed.