After maybe two or so chapters in, I have a feeling it’s a book that advocates an anti-civ stance. Normally I’d throw it out a window and proclaim the inanity of it, but I’ll actually read through it first this time. I’m somewhat curious about the content of this book.
Why would an anti-civ book be inane? Are you sure inane is the correct word you’re looking for?
I’d like to see how you feel about this book upon reading it.