Reddit reviews Fear and Loathing: On the Campaign Trail '72

Hunter couldn't have been Hunter without Nixon. His finest reporting might have been Hell's Angels, his most entertaining and broadest book might have been Las Vegas, but the most important thing he ever wrote was Campaign Trail '72. The lounge lizards and banal tawdriness of the New America were crystallized in Richard Nixon -- he gave Thompson a white whale on which to train his harpoon.

It's depressing to watch alt-culture misread Fear & Loathing as a "tune in, turn on, drop out"-story and then ignore '72 and the pieces in Shark Hunt. As confused and hopeless as he could feel sometimes the good Doctor believed in Evil and when he could personify it in a monster like Nixon he didn't hesitate to stand to post and face it down.

I'd also highly recommend Fear and Loathing on the Campaign Trail '72.

Thanks for your response. I was wondering if you have the time, if you could elaborate on some of the stuff you said:

>I'm not a typical Trump follower, I do agree with a lot of left p.o.v too, but Trumps "ideas" were more important to me than some of Hillary's.

1a. Firstly I just wanted to say I thought it was pretty funny you put the word 'ideas' in quotes. I'm not sure if you were being cheeky, but I got a chuckle out of it lol.

1b. What exactly did Trump say that drew you to him that wasn't also said and elaborated on by Hillary?

>For me it's not a future shock so much as a strategy and using Trumps good qualities to benefit the USA. Trump does have some toxic negative qualities, but let's hope the good shine brighter than the negative.

2a. What good qualities of Trump's are you referring to and how would you envision those being put to use to benefit the US?

2b. Of the toxic negative qualities that you recognize, can you see how another person would view them as antithetical to their sense of inclusion (which I hope you grant me as being necessary to having societal cohesion) to the group as a whole ("whole group" meaning the US as a nation)?

>As a nation we should be helping him be a good POTUS not turning our backs and letting the country fall apart because we didn't want him. Be the change you wish to see. Fighting and holding grudges isn't going to change anything. Especially for relations. We're still Americans no matter who is president. We have come so far and no matter what anyone says we won't allow ourselves to regress.

3a. If we could turn the clock back to 2009, would you have made the same statement to Republicans who vowed to stymie Obama on anything he would try to bring forth; or in 2010 when Tea Party candidates were elected by their constituents to continue a bloc strategy of political stymie; or in 2013 when Ted Cruz forced a government shutdown over the ACA?

3b. [Similar question to 2b] While disregarding the Democratic abstention to the inauguration, can you see how another person would view the Republican party of last 8yrs as openly hostile to working together toward compromise on the litany of issues we as a nation face, given the premise of 3a?

>Also I disagree with what's happening with journalism. For me journalism has become less about telling it like it is and more about sensationalizing, getting ratings, and playing to the majority. Journalism has a lot more narrating and objective critical thinking than even that to when I was younger. It does feel at times (during the election especially) like propaganda. People are getting tired of it and are looking else were. The places people go may not be the most trustworthy of sites. Leading to this rise in fake news. Most people just want to read the news, form their own opinion (not the journalist's opinion) and go on with their lives. They don't want to sit there and fact check, cross reference and critical think. Most working families don't have time to devote to all that. We need to as people reject the sensationalized news in favor for neutral journalism that makes people form their own conclusions rather than giving out the journalist's personal conclusion. Provoke thought.

4a. In Hunter S Thompson's Fear and Loathing on the Campaign Trail '72, he says about Objective Journalism:

"So much for Objective Journalism. Don't bother to look for it here--not under any byline of mine; or anyone else I can think of. With the possible exception of things like box scores, race results, and stock market tabulations, there is no such thing as Objective Journalism. The phrase itself is a pompous contradiction in terms."

If we grant that Objective Journalism is a contradiction in terms, can we agree that the contradiction exists because of the human factor?

4b. If journalism is inherently subjective and dominated by human motives of what/how/why/when to publish, can we agree that in order for an individual consumer of publications (the voter) to be well informed it's incumbent upon that person to do their due diligence in verifying that what they're consuming is legitimate?


I'd like to hear from you on these points, but I understand if you need time to answer or aren't able to get around to it (these ended up being more in depth than I thought they'd be when I started lol).

The Hunter S Thompson book Fear and Loathing on the Campaign Trail '72 has a very in-depth look at this. I know Thompson does not necessarily meet the academic standard of this subreddit, but I think the book captures the mood of the time and has a pretty in-depth look at the nuts and bolts of politics during that campaign.

In that case, Fear and Loathing on the Campaign Trail '72. Not an academic book, obviously, but a very good read.

Aesthetics are simply important to me when I am buying a physical product, especially in this day and age. I can buy an ebook without any aesthetic value whatsoever, but if I decide I like something so much that I want a physical copy, be it a movie or a CD or a book, if it applies, attraction will play a factor in my purchase. I've been looking for a non-movie cover version of Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas for ages, simply because I don't like the glossy, absently considered DVD cover version that is most common. It doesn't need to be beautiful, since I was more than willing to buy the 70s-esque commonplace cover of Fear and Loathing on the Campaign Trail, and there are always exceptions to the movie cover rule. For instance, I bought the 80s movie edition of the Great Gatsby with the Robert Redford cover because it was comically cheesy. I can't even find a picture of it on the Internet.

Consider Playing in the Band: An Oral and Visual Portrait of the Grateful Dead by David Gans. This had an almost scriptural quality for me on a bus ride from Wisconsin to Texas in October 88 (first Built To Last!!) You could smoke on buses then. No one knew what the nitrous dispenser was.

HST's book on the 72 campaign can't be recommended too highly for perspective' sake: US politics, batshit then, batshit now.

Fear and Loathing: On the Campaign Trail '72 - Hunter S. Thompson

I think the best political journalism I've ever read is Hunter Thompson's Fear and Loathing on the Campaign Trail '72.

I love being a journalist, good luck with it.