The newer versions have been modified by committee, probably to remove politically incorrect elements and 'contemporize' the book. It's understandable, I guess

The newer versions have been modified by committee, probably to remove politically incorrect elements and 'contemporize' the book. It's understandable, I guess - the original was published during the Jim Crow era, and not very long after women's suffrage, so it has some eye-opening passages by our standards. The ideas expressed in the book also contradict much modern psychology and moral fashion. Unfortunately the editors of new versions removed or changed valuable stuff along with the 'anachronistic' elements. A smart reader should be able to deal with the original version without getting offended. I think the biggest reason to read the original, though, is that most of us are too young to have ever known someone from Dale Carnegie's generation in person. For instance, the oldest people I've ever been able to talk to were born circa 1900 or so - Carnegie is a full generation older. Mark Twain was still writing when Carnegie was a young man, think about that. Edison and Westinghouse were still duking it out over AC/DC. Carnegie is old, but not nearly as old as Plato or Galileo or Augustine or someone you might read in college. Reading stuff written by people from his era is eye-opening because if you 'look around the edges' you get a glimpse of what things were like 100 years ago. The world has changed so much since their time, yet so little. Just the austerity of ordinary peoples' lives before the US became a superpower is amazing by our blinged-out standards. It's useful for entrepreneurs, especially in tech, to have an expansive view of recent history. Also, it's just plain interesting. Is Carnegie's original book an anachronism? I don't think it is. I hope this makes some sense.