What do you think?
Rate this book
Pobres magnates
George Orwell afirmó célebremente que en términos políticos el sentido común no resultaba de mayor utilidad. Personas que en otros ámbitos de su vida se conducen con una lógica racional y coherente, en política albergan conceptos contradictorios sin advertirlo y se guían por prejuicios y pasiones que muchas veces desembocan directamente en el fanatismo.
En Pobres magnates, Thomas Frank explora con una impresionante lucidez un fenómeno que parecería desafiar toda lógica común: cómo la derecha norteamericana logró dar la vuelta a la mayor crisis financiera desde la Depresión de 1929 para convencernos de que las corporaciones que la ocasionaron, en especial, Wall Street, en realidad eran sus principales víctimas. Así, en lugar de que la crisis llevara a cuestionar el fanatismo de mercado y la desregulación financiera que permitió –una vez más– que las ganancias millonarias fueran privadas mientras las pérdidas se socializaban, el 1% que detenta la mayoría de la riqueza salió más fortalecido que nunca, con el inexplicable apoyo de buena parte del 99% desfavorecido.
En este momento de crisis económica generalizada en Occidente, en el que los ciudadanos europeos de varias generaciones tendrán que pagar los rescates bancarios, Pobres magnates es una guía inmejorable para entender el inmenso poder y el avance electoral del populismo de derechas. En ese sentido, como demuestra Thomas Frank, el primer enemigo a vencer para cambiar la situación nos mira cada mañana desde el otro lado del espejo.
En Pobres magnates, Thomas Frank explora con una impresionante lucidez un fenómeno que parecería desafiar toda lógica común: cómo la derecha norteamericana logró dar la vuelta a la mayor crisis financiera desde la Depresión de 1929 para convencernos de que las corporaciones que la ocasionaron, en especial, Wall Street, en realidad eran sus principales víctimas. Así, en lugar de que la crisis llevara a cuestionar el fanatismo de mercado y la desregulación financiera que permitió –una vez más– que las ganancias millonarias fueran privadas mientras las pérdidas se socializaban, el 1% que detenta la mayoría de la riqueza salió más fortalecido que nunca, con el inexplicable apoyo de buena parte del 99% desfavorecido.
En este momento de crisis económica generalizada en Occidente, en el que los ciudadanos europeos de varias generaciones tendrán que pagar los rescates bancarios, Pobres magnates es una guía inmejorable para entender el inmenso poder y el avance electoral del populismo de derechas. En ese sentido, como demuestra Thomas Frank, el primer enemigo a vencer para cambiar la situación nos mira cada mañana desde el otro lado del espejo.
280 pages, Paperback
First published January 3, 2012
79 people are currently reading
2143 people want to read
About the author
Thomas Frank
43 books712 followersThomas Frank is the author of Pity the Billionaire, The Wrecking Crew, and What's the Matter with Kansas? A former columnist for The Wall Street Journal and Harper's, Frank is the founding editor of The Baffler and writes regularly for Salon. He lives outside Washington, D.C.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 197 reviews
October 7, 2019
I enjoyed this book when I read it about a week and a half ago, but now that I sit down to write about it I can't remember any of it clearly, and I think that might be because it didn't give me anything new to think about, I think this might because Thomas Frank doesn't have anything new to say.
I loved "What's the Matter with Kansas?"--a book that gave me a new perspective from which to analyze the growth of the new right, a book that helped explain why working class white voters vote Republican against their own interests--and I liked "The Wrecking Crew" too, but now I find myself feeling that this brief book "Pity the Billionaire" is a mere rehash of Frank's old arguments. Sure, he makes perceptive comments about Ayn Rand and her Objectivists, the way they eagerly adopt Stalinist strategies while denouncing socialist principles, and the book's peroration--an apocalyptic description of the consequences of a 2012 Republican presidential victory--is without doubt both witty and devastating, but much of the rest--the Tea Party observations in particular--is old hat, and I am beginning to sense that Frank is an abler polemicist and stylist than he is a thinker. Which is fine . . . except that analysis is what I need--not more polemics, not even when they are cloaked in an elegant style.
July 2, 2016
When I read What's the Matter With Kansas? several years ago, I finished the book determined to conduct any future political discussions with a focus on how economic/social justice issues are inseparable from personal morality: that is, if one claims to be a "Christian", one cannot ignore one's responsibility to care for the needy and the oppressed, and said responsibility includes approving and encouraging government assistance such as food stamps, disaster relief, and jobs programs.
It's been a very frustrating several years.
Thomas Frank's new book helps explain WHY it's been so frustrating. In this new America, The Free Market is God, and any attempt to regulate and control The Free Market is seen as socialism, communism, fascism, choose-your-ism, both by people who ought to know better AND by people who don't know better because they've never bothered to educate themselves in matters of economic policy as it has played out in US history.
As Frank points out, however, it has been ever thus. In one of the few passages that actually made me laugh, Frank briefly discusses how labor unions were seen as a threat to capitalism in the 1840s, and "...sure enough, the form of capitalism they had in those days died, to be replaced by 'capitalism modified by the right of collective bargaining.'" A few decades later, regulation of railroads signaled the End Times and "...the end of the world came to pass. Capitalism died, to be replaced this time by 'capitalism modified by the right of collective bargaining and Federal regulation.'"
The main thrust of Frank's thesis here, though, is the surprising "Hard Times Swindle and the Unlikely Comeback of the Right", to quote his subtitle. Based on previous economic history as it played out in the 1930s, the Right's new fascination with Ayn Rand's doctrine of Objectivism and its anti-government, anti-regulation rhetoric should never have taken hold in the general population. Conventional wisdom dictated the rank and file "common man" should have been screaming in the streets for Washington to come down hard on the bankers, investors, and corporate entities who created the crisis. Instead, the Tea Party was screaming in the streets for government to take its dirty little fingers out of the pockets of the "job creators", to cut back on current and proposed regulations that "crippled the economy", and decrying any government attempt to alleviate social ills as treacherous steps on the road to the evils of a socialist society.
How the Right managed this shift in public perception makes for fascinating reading. Unfortunately, said reading had the side effect of leaving me feeling (a) helpless and demoralized in the face of so much misinformation, misunderstanding, and sheer right-wing obstinacy, and (b) supremely angry at liberal leaders and politicians who cowered in the face of such obstinacy, who did not articulate their positions in language that would be understood by the rank and file Right, who essentially shrugged their shoulders and abdicated their responsibility. (Yes, you, President Obama, I'm looking at you.)
I'll get over the demoralization in a few days, and re-enter the fray with renewed vigor and determination. I hope our elected liberal officials -- who are few and far between these days -- find their courage and their voice and join me.
It's been a very frustrating several years.
Thomas Frank's new book helps explain WHY it's been so frustrating. In this new America, The Free Market is God, and any attempt to regulate and control The Free Market is seen as socialism, communism, fascism, choose-your-ism, both by people who ought to know better AND by people who don't know better because they've never bothered to educate themselves in matters of economic policy as it has played out in US history.
As Frank points out, however, it has been ever thus. In one of the few passages that actually made me laugh, Frank briefly discusses how labor unions were seen as a threat to capitalism in the 1840s, and "...sure enough, the form of capitalism they had in those days died, to be replaced by 'capitalism modified by the right of collective bargaining.'" A few decades later, regulation of railroads signaled the End Times and "...the end of the world came to pass. Capitalism died, to be replaced this time by 'capitalism modified by the right of collective bargaining and Federal regulation.'"
The main thrust of Frank's thesis here, though, is the surprising "Hard Times Swindle and the Unlikely Comeback of the Right", to quote his subtitle. Based on previous economic history as it played out in the 1930s, the Right's new fascination with Ayn Rand's doctrine of Objectivism and its anti-government, anti-regulation rhetoric should never have taken hold in the general population. Conventional wisdom dictated the rank and file "common man" should have been screaming in the streets for Washington to come down hard on the bankers, investors, and corporate entities who created the crisis. Instead, the Tea Party was screaming in the streets for government to take its dirty little fingers out of the pockets of the "job creators", to cut back on current and proposed regulations that "crippled the economy", and decrying any government attempt to alleviate social ills as treacherous steps on the road to the evils of a socialist society.
How the Right managed this shift in public perception makes for fascinating reading. Unfortunately, said reading had the side effect of leaving me feeling (a) helpless and demoralized in the face of so much misinformation, misunderstanding, and sheer right-wing obstinacy, and (b) supremely angry at liberal leaders and politicians who cowered in the face of such obstinacy, who did not articulate their positions in language that would be understood by the rank and file Right, who essentially shrugged their shoulders and abdicated their responsibility. (Yes, you, President Obama, I'm looking at you.)
I'll get over the demoralization in a few days, and re-enter the fray with renewed vigor and determination. I hope our elected liberal officials -- who are few and far between these days -- find their courage and their voice and join me.
July 9, 2012
In the financial meltdown that punctuated the end of the G. W. Bush administration, "sixteen trillion dollars in household wealth was incinerated on the pyre Wall Street had kindled." Some of that was my wealth and—unless you happen to be a member of the now-infamous 1%—some of it was undoubtedly yours. And we are still feeling the effects of those losses.
That's $16,000,000,000,000 in household wealth, middle-class wealth—the homes and jobs and hard-earned savings of ordinary folks. We're not talking here about the wealth of billionaires or billion-dollar-plus banks and corporations—Bank of America, Exxon, and Wall Street itself are all doing just peachy, thank you.
Yet somehow, the Powers That Be—those who serve the interests of the 1%—managed in short order to engineer a populist movement to defend and protect the unbridled, unregulated free-market system that created all this havoc. Those who attempt to reestablish a reasonable balance between the interests of ordinary folks and those of the unimaginably rich (and, hence, enormously powerful) were labeled "socialists." Those who (like Mitt Romney, their current standard-bearer) assert that what the market needs is even more freedom to gamble with the nation's—and, indeed, the world's economies—are praised as being "successful." ("Successful" being a synonym for having become filthy rich by whatever means and at whatever cost to ordinary people.)
But here's the thing about this book: Having reread a few pages to be sure that I had that number right—$16 trillion—I just kept on reading. I'm now committed to reading the book again. It's that good.
Thomas Frank writes compelling prose, and his topic in this case couldn't possibly be of greater importance. I can't recommend Pity the Billionaire highly enough.
That's $16,000,000,000,000 in household wealth, middle-class wealth—the homes and jobs and hard-earned savings of ordinary folks. We're not talking here about the wealth of billionaires or billion-dollar-plus banks and corporations—Bank of America, Exxon, and Wall Street itself are all doing just peachy, thank you.
Yet somehow, the Powers That Be—those who serve the interests of the 1%—managed in short order to engineer a populist movement to defend and protect the unbridled, unregulated free-market system that created all this havoc. Those who attempt to reestablish a reasonable balance between the interests of ordinary folks and those of the unimaginably rich (and, hence, enormously powerful) were labeled "socialists." Those who (like Mitt Romney, their current standard-bearer) assert that what the market needs is even more freedom to gamble with the nation's—and, indeed, the world's economies—are praised as being "successful." ("Successful" being a synonym for having become filthy rich by whatever means and at whatever cost to ordinary people.)
But here's the thing about this book: Having reread a few pages to be sure that I had that number right—$16 trillion—I just kept on reading. I'm now committed to reading the book again. It's that good.
Thomas Frank writes compelling prose, and his topic in this case couldn't possibly be of greater importance. I can't recommend Pity the Billionaire highly enough.
January 26, 2012
This is a difficult book to write about, and I’m not quite sure where to start. I read Thomas Frank’s book What’s the Matter With Kansas a few years back and really enjoyed it. Mr. Frank, at the time, had assumed the mantle of a modern day prairie populist, like a 21st century William Jennings Bryan, who set out to understand how the people of Kansas (or anywhere in Red State America) could be so foolish to vote for the likes of George W. Bush over John Forbes Kerry. Frank was amazed that the people of Kansas, his home state and—at one time, a hotbed of lefty political radicalism—could time and time again vote against their economic interests and put a greedy Republican warmonger in the Oval Office instead of the Democrat du jour. Mr. Frank was utterly baffled that the good people of the Plains did not view themselves primarily as homo economicus and vote appropriately, and instead let pointless, non-economic issues like God and family values interrupt their thinking. (Two digressions. First, Mr. Frank published a magazine titled The Baffler, which is perfect for him. Second, the documentary What’s the Matter With Kansas was utterly boring. Back to business):
I remember What’s the Matter With Kansas well because I found the author’s bewilderment to be so…bewildering. Former New York Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan once said that culture trumps politics, and in this he was correct. People do not view themselves through the Marxist lens that Mr. Frank employs throughout all of his writing. That is to say, there are things that are more important to the desperate Bible and gun clingers Mr. Frank puzzles over than class solidarity, a point that is lost on the author in both his former book, and this his latest. (Explanatory note: I don’t use the term “Marxist” as a pejorative. It is a simple statement of fact that, throughout Mr. Frank’s books, the spirit of class war, class envy, class solidarity, and class-consciousness is omnipresent. Frank even quotes Marx’s famous maxim about all history being the story of class struggle, although he uses the phrase as an insult instead of a rallying cry. Still: Thomas Frank and Marx are well acquainted).
In his latest work, Pity the Billionaire: The Hard-Times Swindle and the Unlikely Comeback of the Right, Mr. Frank employs a smarmy, superior, condescending tone that readers of Maureen Dowd and Gail Collins will find quite familiar. He begins by re-telling the story of the Great Recession: trillions of dollars lost, millions of jobs evaporated, houses foreclosed, retirements ruined, businesses shuttered, etc. He—quite correctly, in my view—lays the blame for the Great Recession at the door of Wall Street malfeasance, corporate greed, and a paucity of government regulation and oversight. What Frank finds utterly beyond comprehension, however, is the response of We the People to this damn near unraveling of our nation’s economy: we did not rise up in a mass tide of social unity, bearing pitchforks and torches, demanding a worker’s utopia to take the place of the mean and brutish free market capitalism that had driven our nation to its knees. No, instead…we had a Tea Party.
And it is the Tea Party—along with Glenn Beck, Ayn Rand, the Koch brothers, Ludwig von Mises, Freedomworks, Paul Ryan, Friedrich Hayek, and conservative bloggers—that Frank trains most of his ire upon. How dare Americans respond to an economic crisis with Gadsden flags, town hall meetings, and the largest electoral bitch-slapping the Democrats had received since the last economic meltdown! Here was the opportunity to make it all right at last, and what did the unwashed, Bible thumping, gun totting, non-kale eating bastards do? They decried the economic stimulus! They called for less taxes! They railed against health care reform! Oh, the horror, the horror.
This isn’t to say that Frank doesn’t score some very legitimate points. He does. He also makes some wise observations about the role of small business owners and Tea Party membership, a connection I had not heard made before. Likewise, Frank points out many of the…let’s say interesting inconsistencies of men like Rep. Paul Ryan, who shrieks about government collusion with corporations while accepting very generous financial favors from these same proto-fascist entities.
Did you know that Amity Shales, in her widely read conservative history of the Great Depression, The Forgotten Man, didn’t use GDP as a measure of the economy during the 1930s ? (I didn’t). Did you know that Ludwig von Mises’s prediction about socialism turning into totalitarianism was directed, not toward the USSR, but post-WWII England? (I didn’t). Did you know that Glenn Beck cries a lot, and is smarter than he dresses? (I actually did know that).
Ultimately, this book was annoying and sad. It’s not that the author doesn’t score some solid hits on the hypocrisies of small government conservatives with big business connections. Likewise, Frank points out that an unhealthy adoration of ‘free markets’ can lead people to some fairly stupid conclusions about the nature of reality. What annoyed me is that he is so damn self-satisfied about everything; it’s as though he can’t imagine how anyone could look at our economy, our culture, and our government and reach different conclusions than he does about how best they should be organized. There is a story told by the journalist Bill Moyers about the day after George McGovern’s electoral loss in 1972. Moyers was walking in downtown Manhattan when he met a woman, sobbing, and saying, “How could he have lost? Everyone I know voted for him!” The same principle is applicable here: not everyone in America views themselves as, first, a worker being exploited by the Man, nor does every thinking person believe that the answer to each question of the 21st century should end with “…and more government programs, regulations, and power.”
I will not read anymore of Mr. Frank’s books. I pity him, in a sense. Like many people of the far Left, has no idea what country he lives in.
I remember What’s the Matter With Kansas well because I found the author’s bewilderment to be so…bewildering. Former New York Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan once said that culture trumps politics, and in this he was correct. People do not view themselves through the Marxist lens that Mr. Frank employs throughout all of his writing. That is to say, there are things that are more important to the desperate Bible and gun clingers Mr. Frank puzzles over than class solidarity, a point that is lost on the author in both his former book, and this his latest. (Explanatory note: I don’t use the term “Marxist” as a pejorative. It is a simple statement of fact that, throughout Mr. Frank’s books, the spirit of class war, class envy, class solidarity, and class-consciousness is omnipresent. Frank even quotes Marx’s famous maxim about all history being the story of class struggle, although he uses the phrase as an insult instead of a rallying cry. Still: Thomas Frank and Marx are well acquainted).
In his latest work, Pity the Billionaire: The Hard-Times Swindle and the Unlikely Comeback of the Right, Mr. Frank employs a smarmy, superior, condescending tone that readers of Maureen Dowd and Gail Collins will find quite familiar. He begins by re-telling the story of the Great Recession: trillions of dollars lost, millions of jobs evaporated, houses foreclosed, retirements ruined, businesses shuttered, etc. He—quite correctly, in my view—lays the blame for the Great Recession at the door of Wall Street malfeasance, corporate greed, and a paucity of government regulation and oversight. What Frank finds utterly beyond comprehension, however, is the response of We the People to this damn near unraveling of our nation’s economy: we did not rise up in a mass tide of social unity, bearing pitchforks and torches, demanding a worker’s utopia to take the place of the mean and brutish free market capitalism that had driven our nation to its knees. No, instead…we had a Tea Party.
And it is the Tea Party—along with Glenn Beck, Ayn Rand, the Koch brothers, Ludwig von Mises, Freedomworks, Paul Ryan, Friedrich Hayek, and conservative bloggers—that Frank trains most of his ire upon. How dare Americans respond to an economic crisis with Gadsden flags, town hall meetings, and the largest electoral bitch-slapping the Democrats had received since the last economic meltdown! Here was the opportunity to make it all right at last, and what did the unwashed, Bible thumping, gun totting, non-kale eating bastards do? They decried the economic stimulus! They called for less taxes! They railed against health care reform! Oh, the horror, the horror.
This isn’t to say that Frank doesn’t score some very legitimate points. He does. He also makes some wise observations about the role of small business owners and Tea Party membership, a connection I had not heard made before. Likewise, Frank points out many of the…let’s say interesting inconsistencies of men like Rep. Paul Ryan, who shrieks about government collusion with corporations while accepting very generous financial favors from these same proto-fascist entities.
Did you know that Amity Shales, in her widely read conservative history of the Great Depression, The Forgotten Man, didn’t use GDP as a measure of the economy during the 1930s ? (I didn’t). Did you know that Ludwig von Mises’s prediction about socialism turning into totalitarianism was directed, not toward the USSR, but post-WWII England? (I didn’t). Did you know that Glenn Beck cries a lot, and is smarter than he dresses? (I actually did know that).
Ultimately, this book was annoying and sad. It’s not that the author doesn’t score some solid hits on the hypocrisies of small government conservatives with big business connections. Likewise, Frank points out that an unhealthy adoration of ‘free markets’ can lead people to some fairly stupid conclusions about the nature of reality. What annoyed me is that he is so damn self-satisfied about everything; it’s as though he can’t imagine how anyone could look at our economy, our culture, and our government and reach different conclusions than he does about how best they should be organized. There is a story told by the journalist Bill Moyers about the day after George McGovern’s electoral loss in 1972. Moyers was walking in downtown Manhattan when he met a woman, sobbing, and saying, “How could he have lost? Everyone I know voted for him!” The same principle is applicable here: not everyone in America views themselves as, first, a worker being exploited by the Man, nor does every thinking person believe that the answer to each question of the 21st century should end with “…and more government programs, regulations, and power.”
I will not read anymore of Mr. Frank’s books. I pity him, in a sense. Like many people of the far Left, has no idea what country he lives in.
November 4, 2012
American Horror Story. A real one that shows how a major political party was taken over by brainless zombies wearing tri corner hats, waving flags with chopped up snakes, while driving $40,000 SUVs. Frank delivers up a useful primer on the Tea Party, and salts it with just the right amount of snark. As a special bonus, he guts Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged, and with genuine literary flair. The book, by design, is not meant to be balanced, but late in the book he does serve up some shots for the Obama administration. Frank sees the financial meltdown as the greatest crisis to hit the country since the Great Depression, and one that called for another FDR. Rather than being bold, Frank feels that Obama chose the path of timidity, which reduced the President, at times, to a Democratic Hoover (Ouch!), lamely seeking common ground with radicals. Such timidity only emboldened a movement that is, in my opinion at least, as dangerous as any this country has ever faced.
September 4, 2012
For any American who hasn’t noticed that the economy has tanked, “Pity the Billionaire” will get you caught up on the details … oh, wait, the people who haven’t noticed that the economy has tanked are the billionaires.
If you liked the way George W. Bush cut taxes for the rich, ran up the budget deficit with two wars he refused to pay for, and deregulated Wall Street so it could give us the back of its invisible hand, then you have the chance to go through that again.
Through the miracle of dishonest Republican advertising, now it’s Barack Obama’s fault and we should elect the same party that destroyed the middle class from 2000 to 2008.
Yeah! Sounds good to me!
As author Thomas Frank says, “Though it sounds curious to say so, the newest Right has met its goals not by deception alone — although there has been a great deal of this — but by offering an idealism so powerful that it clouds its partisans’ perception of reality.”
Yeah! Tell me your Big Lies a thousand more times, Mitt Romney, and you’ve got my support!
Here’s little more perspective from Mr. Frank: “In the early months of 2009, it was mass public outrage against bankers that threatened to pull Americans out of their chairs and into the streets. By the time a year had elapsed, however, the bonus boys’ misbehavior had been pretty much forgotten. In no time at all, the public’s rage had migrated from Wall Street to Washington. Before long, the only populism available in the land was an uprising against government and taxes and federal directives — in other words, it was now a movement in favor of the very conditions that has allowed Wall Street to loot the world.”
For Americans who have read a newspaper semi-regularly during the last four years, there’s not a lot new in Mr. Frank’s book, though he does tell the story with wit and style. You may even laugh (or cry) when you are reminded of such Bush-isms as: “I’ve abandoned free-market principles to save the free-market system.”
Yeah! We had to destroy the village in order to save it!
Mr. Frank’s best chapter — because it is unexpected — is “The Silence of the Technocrats.” Here, he deconstructs the Obama response and shows that the spineless Democrat, like the cocksure Republican, is also a crony capitalist, Wall Street’s obliging lackey.
Yeah! The king is dead; long live the king! Meet the new boss; same as the old boss!
As we approach yet another big decision in November, the question arises: Should we vote for Mitt or Barack?
In a golden Manhattan penthouse, a billionaire is laughing at our answer as he buys a tax break and orders another Gulfstream G550.
Yeah! He’s a “job creator”!
If you liked the way George W. Bush cut taxes for the rich, ran up the budget deficit with two wars he refused to pay for, and deregulated Wall Street so it could give us the back of its invisible hand, then you have the chance to go through that again.
Through the miracle of dishonest Republican advertising, now it’s Barack Obama’s fault and we should elect the same party that destroyed the middle class from 2000 to 2008.
Yeah! Sounds good to me!
As author Thomas Frank says, “Though it sounds curious to say so, the newest Right has met its goals not by deception alone — although there has been a great deal of this — but by offering an idealism so powerful that it clouds its partisans’ perception of reality.”
Yeah! Tell me your Big Lies a thousand more times, Mitt Romney, and you’ve got my support!
Here’s little more perspective from Mr. Frank: “In the early months of 2009, it was mass public outrage against bankers that threatened to pull Americans out of their chairs and into the streets. By the time a year had elapsed, however, the bonus boys’ misbehavior had been pretty much forgotten. In no time at all, the public’s rage had migrated from Wall Street to Washington. Before long, the only populism available in the land was an uprising against government and taxes and federal directives — in other words, it was now a movement in favor of the very conditions that has allowed Wall Street to loot the world.”
For Americans who have read a newspaper semi-regularly during the last four years, there’s not a lot new in Mr. Frank’s book, though he does tell the story with wit and style. You may even laugh (or cry) when you are reminded of such Bush-isms as: “I’ve abandoned free-market principles to save the free-market system.”
Yeah! We had to destroy the village in order to save it!
Mr. Frank’s best chapter — because it is unexpected — is “The Silence of the Technocrats.” Here, he deconstructs the Obama response and shows that the spineless Democrat, like the cocksure Republican, is also a crony capitalist, Wall Street’s obliging lackey.
Yeah! The king is dead; long live the king! Meet the new boss; same as the old boss!
As we approach yet another big decision in November, the question arises: Should we vote for Mitt or Barack?
In a golden Manhattan penthouse, a billionaire is laughing at our answer as he buys a tax break and orders another Gulfstream G550.
Yeah! He’s a “job creator”!
March 15, 2012
Outrage apparently doesn't lead to reason. At least according to this author there was no reasoned response to the outrage that followed the 2008 economic meltdown. This book reviews the political reactions to the sub-prime mortgage crisis from a liberal's point of view and finds plenty to criticize on both sides of the political spectrum.
Everyone agrees that there's plenty cause for outrage at the way a small number of investment bankers nearly brought the world economy to its knees. A response based on reason would conclude that the three decade long shift toward removal of regulations over the financial industry was what led to a situation where mortgage derivatives could be manufactured with reckless abandon free of government regulations. It rationally follows that the prudent response to this would be to enact new government regulations to make sure that never happened again.
Instead, both the political right and left responded with irrational actions and positions. The radical right insisted that the solution was to remove the federal government from all regulations and let the markets be free. And basically, that is what has happened. Democrats under Obama's leadership, instead of riding the wave of outrage in the spirit of FDR, decided to bail out the financial industry and allowed their corporate officers to continue doling out their usual bonuses.
The author spends most of the book making snarky quips about the Tea Party, Glenn Beck (way too much Glenn Beck), Ayn Rand (Chapter 8 is a review of Atlas Shrugged from a liberal perspective), the Koch brothers, Ludwig von Mises, Freedomworks, Friedrich Hayed, and conservative bloggers. Reading the book is an experience similar to listening to seven straight hours of Jon Steward's "The Daily Show." It's entertaining for the politically liberal, but it probably doesn't deserved to be considered objective analysis. I don't appreciate snarky comments when they come from the right, and I feel a bit hypocritical when I enjoy hearing snarky comments from the left.
The last chapter of the book is dedicated to the topic of listing everything that Obama and the Democrats did wrong.
My main excuse for reading this book is that it has a catchy title, and the author is from Johnson County, Kansas (originally) but now lives in Washington D.C. He also put Kansas on the map by writing the book, What's the Matter with Kansas?" So I wish him well, and I recommend this to book those looking for political analysis from the political left.
Everyone agrees that there's plenty cause for outrage at the way a small number of investment bankers nearly brought the world economy to its knees. A response based on reason would conclude that the three decade long shift toward removal of regulations over the financial industry was what led to a situation where mortgage derivatives could be manufactured with reckless abandon free of government regulations. It rationally follows that the prudent response to this would be to enact new government regulations to make sure that never happened again.
Instead, both the political right and left responded with irrational actions and positions. The radical right insisted that the solution was to remove the federal government from all regulations and let the markets be free. And basically, that is what has happened. Democrats under Obama's leadership, instead of riding the wave of outrage in the spirit of FDR, decided to bail out the financial industry and allowed their corporate officers to continue doling out their usual bonuses.
The author spends most of the book making snarky quips about the Tea Party, Glenn Beck (way too much Glenn Beck), Ayn Rand (Chapter 8 is a review of Atlas Shrugged from a liberal perspective), the Koch brothers, Ludwig von Mises, Freedomworks, Friedrich Hayed, and conservative bloggers. Reading the book is an experience similar to listening to seven straight hours of Jon Steward's "The Daily Show." It's entertaining for the politically liberal, but it probably doesn't deserved to be considered objective analysis. I don't appreciate snarky comments when they come from the right, and I feel a bit hypocritical when I enjoy hearing snarky comments from the left.
The last chapter of the book is dedicated to the topic of listing everything that Obama and the Democrats did wrong.
My main excuse for reading this book is that it has a catchy title, and the author is from Johnson County, Kansas (originally) but now lives in Washington D.C. He also put Kansas on the map by writing the book, What's the Matter with Kansas?" So I wish him well, and I recommend this to book those looking for political analysis from the political left.
February 28, 2012
This was a fun, fast yet depressing read - it just reminds the reader of the ridiculously upside down logic (or lack thereof) that has lead countless Americans to somehow vote against common sense and against their own best interests in the aftermath of the global financial meltdown. Frank is snarky, fierce and funny and I enjoyed his writing; it's not his fault that a large portion of the American people have allowed themselves to be manipulated by master showmen like Glenn Beck (I don't know how anyone could have watched Beck for more than a few minutes let alone a steady, daily diet of his maniacal, illogical ranting, but I guess each his own). I can't help but be reminded of the famous adage about never going broke by underestimating the stupidity of the American people. . . I recall that the reviewer in the New York Times book review felt Frank went overboard in his persecution of Glenn Beck but I think the level of contempt must rise to the level of the cynical manipulation being practiced, so I had no problem with the author using examples from Beck's own shows and books to illustrate the level of chicanery Beck routinely sunk to!
I would recommend this book, as well as "Boomerang" by Michael Lewis, to anyone who watches the nightly news and wonders how in heaven's name did we get here? Since I don't have the stomach to watch Fox News or listen to right-wing radio personalities, these two books help explain how some of our fellow Americans have come to believe so firmly in the efficacy of voting against their own best interests and have fallen hook, line and sinker for the cult of the sacred free market at all costs. My husband is a financial services professional and he sees the value in regulation, for God's sake! He was telling me for years that people were overextended, using their homes as a personal bank and getting houses they couldn't afford; he knew the crash was coming, it was only a matter of when. That our political and business leaders couldn't see that and so badly mismanaged the aftermath for their own political and personal gain is the most galling reality of all - and not much to laugh about there!
I would recommend this book, as well as "Boomerang" by Michael Lewis, to anyone who watches the nightly news and wonders how in heaven's name did we get here? Since I don't have the stomach to watch Fox News or listen to right-wing radio personalities, these two books help explain how some of our fellow Americans have come to believe so firmly in the efficacy of voting against their own best interests and have fallen hook, line and sinker for the cult of the sacred free market at all costs. My husband is a financial services professional and he sees the value in regulation, for God's sake! He was telling me for years that people were overextended, using their homes as a personal bank and getting houses they couldn't afford; he knew the crash was coming, it was only a matter of when. That our political and business leaders couldn't see that and so badly mismanaged the aftermath for their own political and personal gain is the most galling reality of all - and not much to laugh about there!
January 16, 2012
Thomas Frank once again takes a measured look at the seemingly irrational forces that keep U.S. social, economic and political forces going ever-rightward, despite the stunning failures of every single solitary tenet of the Supply Side-Fundamentalist-Randian faith, and just as he did in What's the Matter with Kansas? comes up with plausible reasons for the collective insanity that threatens our gasping, frail republic.
Along the way, Pity the Billionaire prompts more than a few laughs (mostly of the gallows humor variety, I'll admit), smashes the feeble philosophical underpinnings of the market-worshippers, demolishes Glenn Beck and his ilk, slaps around the Obama administration, and looks in horror at what awaits us all in the years to come. Folks, it ain't pretty.
This author lays out with the simplicity of a modern-day Will Rogers just where we went wrong. Tellingly, there's no concluding summation of how to fight back. No rallying the troops to sanity. No "...yes, but" moment of optimism. Frank is well, frank about where we're headed. Buy this book and keep a well-wrapped copy in your bunker. Maybe when it's all over and we're starting again from scratch, we can remember the valuable lessons we are so incapable of learning now.
Along the way, Pity the Billionaire prompts more than a few laughs (mostly of the gallows humor variety, I'll admit), smashes the feeble philosophical underpinnings of the market-worshippers, demolishes Glenn Beck and his ilk, slaps around the Obama administration, and looks in horror at what awaits us all in the years to come. Folks, it ain't pretty.
This author lays out with the simplicity of a modern-day Will Rogers just where we went wrong. Tellingly, there's no concluding summation of how to fight back. No rallying the troops to sanity. No "...yes, but" moment of optimism. Frank is well, frank about where we're headed. Buy this book and keep a well-wrapped copy in your bunker. Maybe when it's all over and we're starting again from scratch, we can remember the valuable lessons we are so incapable of learning now.
July 13, 2012
"My opponent is a known raging heterosexual..." The easiest means of getting yourself elected is to draw the voter's focus to how bad the other guy is. Of course, the problem that develops over time, as we see from modern American politics, is that eventually voters lose trust in the system as a whole because everyone in it is covered in slung mud. Frank's book takes this tactic and applies it to the current phase of Fox News-driven conservatism. Essentially, his argument boils down to if "they" are this bad, we must be better (and thus I don't need to spend time explaining why our views are better). It's the intellectual equivalent of a rigged carnival game.
Frank focuses his attacks on the biggest, easiest target the latest incarnation of "the new right" offers - Glenn Beck. While Frank slandering of Beck often finds his mark, picking on the often confused, frequently teary Beck who made a short-lived career of demonstrating how both sides of any argument somehow support his essential "right-ness" does not a marksman make. And say what you will about Beck, although most have moved on, no one traversed the arch from D-list radio personality to America's mostly politically influential commentator to D-list radio personality faster than the roughly 30 months it took Beck to pull off the feat. Add the handicap of his shaky mental state and Beck must be applauded for sheer cultural velocity.
Beyond Beck, Frank pads the book with an extensive review of 1951's Atlas Shrugged. Yes, Ayn Rand's 1100 page downer is a fundamentally odd book (Frank rightly points out that steel and railroads are presented as the leading industries in the book's unspecified future despite the fact that they were well in decline even when as the book was being written). Yes, in a Rand-ian world Reed college dropout and unemployed part-time Hari Krishna Steve Jobs would have been permanently relegated to the sub-human underclass Rand rails against. And yes, Rand's view of romantic relationships leans far more Fifty Shades of Grey than Wuthering Heights. However, these criticisms find better expression in dozens of other books.
Frank does raise some valid points although he offers no better path. Socialist-style large business bailouts started under conservative icon George Bush and only continued under once liberal hero Barack Obama. These bailouts meant that free-market conservatives must lionize small businesses and demonize the large despite both being the same animal just differing in scale. A cornerstone of the movement is immigration control to help unemployment yet 50% of U.S. patents are held by recent immigrants. However, other hits in the book are not bulls-eye.
The best sections of the book discuss the commercialization of the movement. Frank talks about all manner of tchotchkes available for sale bearing the likeness of conservative darlings such as Sarah Palin, Chuck Norris and the always effervescent Joe the Plumber. Had Frank turned down the rhetoric (say from 11 to like 6) and spent more time covering this commercial aspect of the movement, in much the same way Bright-sided: How the Relentless Promotion of Positive Thinking Has Undermined America covered the commercialization and affinity networking of cancer it would make for a far more valuable commentary on the late post-millennial naughts.
In short, liberals and conservatives alike should insist their echo-chamber tomes explain why their ideology surpasses and not just why the other one sucks.
March 3, 2012
As we enter the 2012 election cycle, chances are you’ve asked yourself on more than one occasion “What the hell is wrong with these people?”
- Unregulated finance companies leveraged beyond their means trading in credit default swaps almost bring about global financial collapse and instead of responding with strong regulations to reign in these abuses we have free market zealots clamoring for less government intervention and more of what brought about the catastrophe.
- People with pre-existing health conditions are unable to get insurance coverage and those with insurance are going bankrupt after learning how little coverage they actually have. Yet attempts to establish basic health care reforms are met with cries of “Get government out of my Medicare!”
- An attempt to raise taxes on executives who are paying less tax than their secretaries? “Redistribution of wealth!”
Why do plain, hardworking people on the right carry water for the very richest and most privileged members of our society and vote against rational public policy that would benefit them the most? Why would a society that values personal liberty and merit based achievement seek to limit their own freedoms* and actively strive to solidify an aristocracy to which they have no chance of joining?
Thomas Frank, a keen observer of cultural and political trends thinks he has the answer (and it’s not unlike the answer he proposed in What’s the Matter With Kansas). Basically, it’s the old switcheroo. Take the public anger against the banks for foreclosing on your house and misdirect it towards anger at the government and liberal politicians who bailed out the banks (never mind that the program began under Bush). Take the outrage over bonuses for financial company executives who crashed the economy and turn it into a Tea Party protesting raising taxes (never mind that the increase would only effect those making more than $250,000/yr). Convince people that we really do live in upside-down-world.
PR firms, pundits and right wing politicians haven’t been able to prevent the public from becoming aware that they are being screwed, but they have been very effective in misdirecting the anger in ways that serve their own ends. In those cases where the anger cannot be diverted, they resort to demonization and marginalization. And the public seemingly falls for it every time. In Pity the Billionaire Frank pulls away the veil, revealing the tactics for the cynical, self-serving, manipulation that they are, and he does so with scathing wit and intelligence. He also has a few choice remarks for the tone-deaf, weak-willed democrats whose defining attribute is that they have completely blown it, and seem incapable of doing otherwise.
* Freedom from destitution due to a job loss. Freedom from illness due to lack of insurance. Freedom from an endless string of mindless low wage jobs due to lack of an education.
- Unregulated finance companies leveraged beyond their means trading in credit default swaps almost bring about global financial collapse and instead of responding with strong regulations to reign in these abuses we have free market zealots clamoring for less government intervention and more of what brought about the catastrophe.
- People with pre-existing health conditions are unable to get insurance coverage and those with insurance are going bankrupt after learning how little coverage they actually have. Yet attempts to establish basic health care reforms are met with cries of “Get government out of my Medicare!”
- An attempt to raise taxes on executives who are paying less tax than their secretaries? “Redistribution of wealth!”
Why do plain, hardworking people on the right carry water for the very richest and most privileged members of our society and vote against rational public policy that would benefit them the most? Why would a society that values personal liberty and merit based achievement seek to limit their own freedoms* and actively strive to solidify an aristocracy to which they have no chance of joining?
Thomas Frank, a keen observer of cultural and political trends thinks he has the answer (and it’s not unlike the answer he proposed in What’s the Matter With Kansas). Basically, it’s the old switcheroo. Take the public anger against the banks for foreclosing on your house and misdirect it towards anger at the government and liberal politicians who bailed out the banks (never mind that the program began under Bush). Take the outrage over bonuses for financial company executives who crashed the economy and turn it into a Tea Party protesting raising taxes (never mind that the increase would only effect those making more than $250,000/yr). Convince people that we really do live in upside-down-world.
PR firms, pundits and right wing politicians haven’t been able to prevent the public from becoming aware that they are being screwed, but they have been very effective in misdirecting the anger in ways that serve their own ends. In those cases where the anger cannot be diverted, they resort to demonization and marginalization. And the public seemingly falls for it every time. In Pity the Billionaire Frank pulls away the veil, revealing the tactics for the cynical, self-serving, manipulation that they are, and he does so with scathing wit and intelligence. He also has a few choice remarks for the tone-deaf, weak-willed democrats whose defining attribute is that they have completely blown it, and seem incapable of doing otherwise.
* Freedom from destitution due to a job loss. Freedom from illness due to lack of insurance. Freedom from an endless string of mindless low wage jobs due to lack of an education.
February 15, 2016
I'm fascinated by how the present determines the story we tell ourselves about the past. Presently, Republicans and Democrats are vying for positions of power. Most at stake is the probable appointments of four Supreme Court Justices. Neither side will want to compromise much in these appointments. In light of these upcoming decisions Thomas Frank's book is alarming.
According to Frank, the Republican Party has been hijacked by a group of people who hate government, worship Free Market Economics and motivate people to be afraid. Frank attributes much of the damage done in 2008-2009 to deregulation of banks leading us to the brink of economic collapse. Instead of blaming this collapse on the policies of the Bush administration the Republican Party blames the collapse on big government and regulating the economy.
Frank thinks Free Market Economics doesn't work. Although they have maintained political power for thirty years, Republicans see themselves as outsiders. When Republicans get elected they do nothing. Everything Obama has suggested they oppose because Obama brought it up. When Obama was elected president, Rush Limbaugh said he wanted him to fail. Like their hero John Galt, they are on strike.
Applying what Frank thinks of Republican ideology to the selection of Supreme Court Justices, the Republicans think all compromise is weakness. They believe Liberals are passive wimps and they can bully to get what they want. They frighten people into believing that Liberals are traitors while they will never waver, read as compromise, on their agenda. This is not a rosy picture.
Republicans believe billionaires should be pitied because they are victimized by the liberal press who complains about the extraordinary discrepancy in income distribution in America. The government is trying to take away the bankers' billions instead of blaming the idiots who bought those houses they couldn't afford. According to the Tea Party there are productive people like the bankers who sold loans and bundled loans to make money while assuming little risk and the takers, those too dumb to manage their money. Winners should win and get the rewards, losers are losers and should pull themselves up by their bootstraps or (I guess) die Tea Party folk say.
According to Frank, the Republican Party has been hijacked by a group of people who hate government, worship Free Market Economics and motivate people to be afraid. Frank attributes much of the damage done in 2008-2009 to deregulation of banks leading us to the brink of economic collapse. Instead of blaming this collapse on the policies of the Bush administration the Republican Party blames the collapse on big government and regulating the economy.
Frank thinks Free Market Economics doesn't work. Although they have maintained political power for thirty years, Republicans see themselves as outsiders. When Republicans get elected they do nothing. Everything Obama has suggested they oppose because Obama brought it up. When Obama was elected president, Rush Limbaugh said he wanted him to fail. Like their hero John Galt, they are on strike.
Applying what Frank thinks of Republican ideology to the selection of Supreme Court Justices, the Republicans think all compromise is weakness. They believe Liberals are passive wimps and they can bully to get what they want. They frighten people into believing that Liberals are traitors while they will never waver, read as compromise, on their agenda. This is not a rosy picture.
Republicans believe billionaires should be pitied because they are victimized by the liberal press who complains about the extraordinary discrepancy in income distribution in America. The government is trying to take away the bankers' billions instead of blaming the idiots who bought those houses they couldn't afford. According to the Tea Party there are productive people like the bankers who sold loans and bundled loans to make money while assuming little risk and the takers, those too dumb to manage their money. Winners should win and get the rewards, losers are losers and should pull themselves up by their bootstraps or (I guess) die Tea Party folk say.
May 11, 2020
In absolute horror and frustration to the political gyrations of mid-century America, I read with fascination Frank's book - "What's the Matter With Kansas;" watched the documentary as well. I had read his "Commodify Your Dissent" in graduate school and loved his use of language and irreverence. This new book does for the economic collapse/depression/great recession what "Kansas" provided to political discourse linked with a dose of financial pablum. The resurgence of the right in 2010 is completely beyond understanding when you remember/recall that the last spectacular banking/financial apocalypse - THE GREAT DEPRESSION - swept into the nation's psyche massive restructuring in both government and the financial sectors. Not this time - if anything the rabble demanded more drastic reforms that stripped what little the middle class had and continued showering benefits on the 1%
Smash your head into a brick wall. Here is the final paragraph of the introduction:
"This is the story of a swindle that will have terrible consequences down the road. And although it sounds curious to say so, the newest Right has met its goals not by deception alone - although there has been a great deal of this - but by offering an idealism so powerful that it clouds its partisans perceptions of reality."
Frank cuts through the fucking incessant blathering of the pundits and paints a bleak picture of what America is becoming by blindly and willingly letting this happen. Here is a insightful comment in the conclusion "Frank warns us of heading in a direction of a new American dream, driven by the ideologues of the Right, that will lead us "on into the seething Arcadia of all against all" Those are the final words of this powerful volume. That idea is from of all against all is from Leviathan by Thomas Hobbes, and we all know what that was about.
Read the book and don't sit there anymore - Do something.
Smash your head into a brick wall. Here is the final paragraph of the introduction:
"This is the story of a swindle that will have terrible consequences down the road. And although it sounds curious to say so, the newest Right has met its goals not by deception alone - although there has been a great deal of this - but by offering an idealism so powerful that it clouds its partisans perceptions of reality."
Frank cuts through the fucking incessant blathering of the pundits and paints a bleak picture of what America is becoming by blindly and willingly letting this happen. Here is a insightful comment in the conclusion "Frank warns us of heading in a direction of a new American dream, driven by the ideologues of the Right, that will lead us "on into the seething Arcadia of all against all" Those are the final words of this powerful volume. That idea is from of all against all is from Leviathan by Thomas Hobbes, and we all know what that was about.
Read the book and don't sit there anymore - Do something.
November 29, 2012
Three and a half stars.
Frank makes some good points, but I wish it were a little bit more well-documented and a bit less sardonic.
I've not yet read What's the Matter With Kansas?: How Conservatives Won the Heart of America, but have read several reviews that mention his incredulity at Kansans' credulity. That same sense of "can you believe these idiots?" runs through this book, as well. That, along with the repeated attacks on Glenn Beck (deserving though they may be), cause this book to veer a bit too much (IMO) toward the personal rant rather than rational analysis.
Which isn't to say that outrage and ranting isn't called for. It definitely is, and Frank even points out the folly in Democrats' continued reliance on reason in the face of heated, emotionally charged protests by Tea Partiers. But if he's going to preach to the choir, and the choir speaks the language of reason rather than emotion, shouldn't his call to action use that language?
To be fair, he doesn't have much of a call to action. The book mostly left me feeling pretty depressed in that regard. And he hasn't tried to produce something other than a sardonic look at the Tea Party. I just wish that he had.
Frank makes some good points, but I wish it were a little bit more well-documented and a bit less sardonic.
I've not yet read What's the Matter With Kansas?: How Conservatives Won the Heart of America, but have read several reviews that mention his incredulity at Kansans' credulity. That same sense of "can you believe these idiots?" runs through this book, as well. That, along with the repeated attacks on Glenn Beck (deserving though they may be), cause this book to veer a bit too much (IMO) toward the personal rant rather than rational analysis.
Which isn't to say that outrage and ranting isn't called for. It definitely is, and Frank even points out the folly in Democrats' continued reliance on reason in the face of heated, emotionally charged protests by Tea Partiers. But if he's going to preach to the choir, and the choir speaks the language of reason rather than emotion, shouldn't his call to action use that language?
To be fair, he doesn't have much of a call to action. The book mostly left me feeling pretty depressed in that regard. And he hasn't tried to produce something other than a sardonic look at the Tea Party. I just wish that he had.
January 6, 2012
Thomas Frank begins the laying out a very strong case against the GOP's economic and tax policy platforms. He begins with well documented background on the financial crisis. Unfortunately, mid-way through the case, he digresses into anecdotes as if he's made the case that things have gone from bad to worse due to Republican influence and policy--and he realizes it's going to continue to get even worse. It's s quick read and worth the price of the book for the first few chapters; and you're forgiven if you skip the last few chapters.
March 21, 2012
This is a well-written, concise account of how the Right hijacked the economic crisis of 2008 to their own ends. Starting with Rick Santelli's notorious rant from the Chicago Board of Trade, and continuing with the Tea Parties -- about as phony a "populist" movement as one can imagine -- Frank gets all the major points across with humor. I find his approach refreshing compared to the overwrought profanity of Matt Taibbi in Rolling Stone.
December 14, 2020
A pithy primer on the 2008 recession and recessions in general, as well as how a fleeced populace usually responds. When a bunch of venal finance dudes sell everyone (and each other) a bunch of booby-trapped debt, crash the world economy and (yet again) so thoroughly debunk free market theories that this time even Alan Greenspan renounces his ideas, this should trigger a resurgence of Depression-era finance reforms and increased unionization. Instead, Democrats sweep into both houses of Congress with bullet-proof majorities only to make sure Wall Street can still give out bonuses that year. Glenn Beck becomes massively popular by redirecting populist outrage toward remaining financial safeguards and laundering libertarian billionaire wishlists during prime time. Unaffected liberals like Jon Stewart hold milquetoast rallies to “restore sanity” and urge people who have lost their homes and jobs and retirements to continue adhering to institutional process, deference to leadership expertise and surface civility. American leaders ostensibly conclude that our worship of markets has been insufficiently pious. We must do exactly what we were doing before the recession but with fewer restrictions and more cocaine! 🇺🇸
September 24, 2014
An account of the rise of the Tea Party, and the strange emergence of populist demands for further neoliberal free market policies in the USA; the title is a reference to the Tea Party and Republican Party's recent trend to portray the rich as victims of Big Government and the supposed "Socialist" policies which Barack Obama is accused of pursuing. Frank puts the Tea Party in the context of left-wing populist movements of the past, such as the New Left of the 1960s and, more specifically, the rise of FDR and the organised labour (or should I say "organized labor") movement of the 1930s, and tries to explain why this time, the populist cry has been for less government and less regulation of the economy, rather than the other way round. Frank points out that, although the Tea Party are clearly acting in favour of the status quo of big business and crony capitalism, their rhetoric and tactics is actually strongly based off those used by previous leftist movements, and sees itself as a highly anti-establishment organisation; a movement of small business vs. special interests.
Frank's answer to why the Tea Party's pro-free market message has been so successful, in the wake of the 2008 crash which should have been a damning discrediting of 30 years of Reaganomics, is that the Democrat Party have been unable or unwilling to put forward an alternate narrative, and are instead too willing themselves to work with the financial industry rather than challenge them, and are obsessed with compromise and bipartisanship, rather than vocally defining and defending the liberal ideology which the party had in the days of FDR and JFK. Frank also points out how the modern right (the "newest Right", as he calls it) have, like the CPUSA members of yore, sealed themself into a bubble in which facts are derived from ridig ideology - eg. Hayek warned that a Socialist Britain would be an unfree Britain, therefore Britain after WW2 became unfree (it didn't); the New Deal was a violation of free market principles, therefore it must have caused/worsened the Great Depression (again, it didn't).
I found this book to be a highly interesting take on the modern American Right, as well as a sad statement on the current state of the American Left. I certainly agree that the modern Democrats under Obama (one might also say under Clinton in the 90s) have been far too conserned with "compromise", and that they've become completely unwilling to determing their own principles and ideology, to the point that they have allowed words like "regulation", "union", "progressive", and "liberal" to become dirty words in the discourse of the nation's politics, and allowed themselves to be dragged so far to the right that Eisenhower, Nixon, and even Reagan would be considered "liberal" by today's extremist Republican party.
Though written from a liberal standpoint, it's fairly balanced in its sympathetic treatment of the Tea Party. I liked all the parallels of modern America with that of the 1930s, as well as his demonstations of how the actual history of that era has been thoroughly distorted by right wingers. It's clear that Frank has an awful lot of admiration for FDR- an admiration that I'll admit that I share, his horrible internment of Japanese Americans aside. I also enjoyed his examination of Atlas Shrugged, a book I haven't read but intend to in the future.
The book ends on a glum note, pessimistic about the state of the American left in the wake of the disappointment of the Occupy movement, and predicting tragic disaster for all but the superrich, should free market ideas and institutionalised crony capitalism continue to strengthen its grip on the nation's politics.
As a Brit who follows American politics fairly closely, I found this a good read. I was also reminded that I need to get around to reading The Shock Doctrine and Conscience Of A Liberal at some point. Oh, and that I need to read some decent books about the Great Depression and the New Deal, and maybe a couple good biographies on FDR. How come every book I read just puts several more books on my "to read" list...
Frank's answer to why the Tea Party's pro-free market message has been so successful, in the wake of the 2008 crash which should have been a damning discrediting of 30 years of Reaganomics, is that the Democrat Party have been unable or unwilling to put forward an alternate narrative, and are instead too willing themselves to work with the financial industry rather than challenge them, and are obsessed with compromise and bipartisanship, rather than vocally defining and defending the liberal ideology which the party had in the days of FDR and JFK. Frank also points out how the modern right (the "newest Right", as he calls it) have, like the CPUSA members of yore, sealed themself into a bubble in which facts are derived from ridig ideology - eg. Hayek warned that a Socialist Britain would be an unfree Britain, therefore Britain after WW2 became unfree (it didn't); the New Deal was a violation of free market principles, therefore it must have caused/worsened the Great Depression (again, it didn't).
I found this book to be a highly interesting take on the modern American Right, as well as a sad statement on the current state of the American Left. I certainly agree that the modern Democrats under Obama (one might also say under Clinton in the 90s) have been far too conserned with "compromise", and that they've become completely unwilling to determing their own principles and ideology, to the point that they have allowed words like "regulation", "union", "progressive", and "liberal" to become dirty words in the discourse of the nation's politics, and allowed themselves to be dragged so far to the right that Eisenhower, Nixon, and even Reagan would be considered "liberal" by today's extremist Republican party.
Though written from a liberal standpoint, it's fairly balanced in its sympathetic treatment of the Tea Party. I liked all the parallels of modern America with that of the 1930s, as well as his demonstations of how the actual history of that era has been thoroughly distorted by right wingers. It's clear that Frank has an awful lot of admiration for FDR- an admiration that I'll admit that I share, his horrible internment of Japanese Americans aside. I also enjoyed his examination of Atlas Shrugged, a book I haven't read but intend to in the future.
The book ends on a glum note, pessimistic about the state of the American left in the wake of the disappointment of the Occupy movement, and predicting tragic disaster for all but the superrich, should free market ideas and institutionalised crony capitalism continue to strengthen its grip on the nation's politics.
As a Brit who follows American politics fairly closely, I found this a good read. I was also reminded that I need to get around to reading The Shock Doctrine and Conscience Of A Liberal at some point. Oh, and that I need to read some decent books about the Great Depression and the New Deal, and maybe a couple good biographies on FDR. How come every book I read just puts several more books on my "to read" list...
April 21, 2012
I expected more of a middle of the road historical assessment of the economic collapse here, along with an analysis of how American society, especially our middle and lower classes, has responded to its aftermath. The beginning chapters of the book, including one that related the American popular response to the Great Depression and those responsible for causing it, were a great way to start this analysis. However, this book quickly degrades into "it's all their fault" language, and I found that disappointing.
It is remarkable that the American conservative movement has managed to transfer outrage at the speculators who caused the mess into intraclass rage at those who are the victims of the collapse, and who have lost jobs, homes, and life savings. With that I am with the author. However, where I disagree is in the idea that the mess is all the fault of one group of people. Sure, speculators and economic tightrope walkers who invented dangerous financial products in an effort to squeeze every penny out of mortgage holders and and the property they occupied are sure to blame, but so are homebuyers who signed mortgages they would not be able to afford.
Frank's attempt to place it all in the lap of the political Right and the financial giants who supported them (and still do) seems disingenuous. It is not the whole truth, but I believe his aim is somehow to score political points and write for an audience that is pre-established and who will agree with his main premise: that, instead of casting blame for the recession on those who caused it, we turned that blame inside out and cast it upon our neighbors. This is a book for an audience who can read it an then say, "Yeah, that IS how it is!" It's not an easy conclusion to make, and in the end, somehow its not completely convincing.
I wanted to understand how the outrage at Wall Street's crimes has evaporated, because I believe it has, but I expect that the answer to that is much simpler than this analysis. I believe that, in the end, America just lost interest in casting blame. We wanted the whole thing to disappear, and its seemed at the time that the best way to do that was to pass TARP and bail out the banks with extreme urgency and force. Seemed like the right thing to do at the time, but who knows now? The Tea Party is not about assigning blame for the recession where it does not belong, as Frank asserts. Honestly, I don't have the insider information about the movement that Frank seems to have gathered in order to make any reasonable judgments about the purpose of the Tea Party. However, I do suspect that, in the end, America just lost interest in casting blame for the recession on anybody. It would have been justified for the American public to demand the heads of the speculators and those who were just in it to squeeze every cent out of the mortgage system before bailing out. However, two things happened: most importantly, our attention wandered, as it often does. After that, the powers that be (Wall Street) decided that their employees (the federal government) would first bail them out and then ensure that the story went away. Simple as that, in my opinion.
It is remarkable that the American conservative movement has managed to transfer outrage at the speculators who caused the mess into intraclass rage at those who are the victims of the collapse, and who have lost jobs, homes, and life savings. With that I am with the author. However, where I disagree is in the idea that the mess is all the fault of one group of people. Sure, speculators and economic tightrope walkers who invented dangerous financial products in an effort to squeeze every penny out of mortgage holders and and the property they occupied are sure to blame, but so are homebuyers who signed mortgages they would not be able to afford.
Frank's attempt to place it all in the lap of the political Right and the financial giants who supported them (and still do) seems disingenuous. It is not the whole truth, but I believe his aim is somehow to score political points and write for an audience that is pre-established and who will agree with his main premise: that, instead of casting blame for the recession on those who caused it, we turned that blame inside out and cast it upon our neighbors. This is a book for an audience who can read it an then say, "Yeah, that IS how it is!" It's not an easy conclusion to make, and in the end, somehow its not completely convincing.
I wanted to understand how the outrage at Wall Street's crimes has evaporated, because I believe it has, but I expect that the answer to that is much simpler than this analysis. I believe that, in the end, America just lost interest in casting blame. We wanted the whole thing to disappear, and its seemed at the time that the best way to do that was to pass TARP and bail out the banks with extreme urgency and force. Seemed like the right thing to do at the time, but who knows now? The Tea Party is not about assigning blame for the recession where it does not belong, as Frank asserts. Honestly, I don't have the insider information about the movement that Frank seems to have gathered in order to make any reasonable judgments about the purpose of the Tea Party. However, I do suspect that, in the end, America just lost interest in casting blame for the recession on anybody. It would have been justified for the American public to demand the heads of the speculators and those who were just in it to squeeze every cent out of the mortgage system before bailing out. However, two things happened: most importantly, our attention wandered, as it often does. After that, the powers that be (Wall Street) decided that their employees (the federal government) would first bail them out and then ensure that the story went away. Simple as that, in my opinion.
July 2, 2021
This is a 4.5 stars out of 5 review. The book does an excellent job of drawing parallels between the Great Depression and the 2008 Financial Crisis. It shows where the answers to each respective crisis diverged. A great short history of the rights response. Frank reveals the deep and stifling hypocrisy of the Tea Party and their populist leaders. It's maddening to read about the banksters before and after the crisis. Is even more maddening to hear the rights response. A call for all the policies that got us to this juncture. The claims of being your the little guy while simultaneously pushing policies that help the bankers and CEOs they "hate." I appreciate that Frank writes a book which isn't just a list of the absurd things done fringe Tea Partier said. As he wrote (paraphrasing) the left didn't engage the rights faulty ideas but just maligned them which helped feed their persecution complex. I liked the final chapter which offered up the problems of the lefts tone deaf response. Also does a superb job of pointing to the Democrat's abandonment of labor and the middle class and the poor for the benefit of their wealthy benefactors. My quibbles are his defense of the corporation from the barbs of the right. The big businesses are a large reason for the stripping labor of their bargaining rights and the suicidal pursuit of Neo liberal economic policies. I also think Frank gives Obama the benefit of the doubt. Says he went with the Wall Street-centric bailout and policies was an answer the socialist claims. I don't give him that same benefit. I think he's just another Reagan Democrat masquerading as a progressive continuing the advancement of privatization of America. I recommend this book with the deep insight into the mind of the populist right and solid debunking of the myths permeating their ranks. It is a witty welcome introduction of the leaders and kingmakers of the Tea Party. His sarcastic, acerbic barbs liven the already interesting subject.
August 14, 2012
A succinct, snarky summary of the rise of the Tea Party movement and the cunning ways in which the usual power players have obfuscated the story of the economic collapse. Frank is skilled in showing how voters are manipulated to vote against their interests - it's his calling card - and that theme from What's the Matter With Kansas?: How Conservatives Won the Heart of America continues here. It may wind up being more valuable as a historical document for later readers; having lived through a lot of this craziness and followed along with the day-to-day events, quite a bit of the book feels like well-trod territory. It's mostly the revitalized Right under the harsh spotlight, though Frank includes a necessary final chapter on how the Democrats badly bungled their economic message and underestimated their opposition.
One minor complaint: Glenn Beck is a fun and easy target and, though now marginalized, obviously played a pivotal role in fomenting the Tea Party's misplaced populist outrage. He merits inclusion and investigation - but Frank returns to him way too often, focusing more on the clownish mouthpiece than the ones issuing the marching orders.
My favorite footnote of the year may be the bit about how one of Ayn Rand's supposedly revolutionary/incisive/prophetic plot points (for her dopey Atlas Shrugged) was actually done in very similar fashion in the panels of Little Orphan Annie earlier.
One minor complaint: Glenn Beck is a fun and easy target and, though now marginalized, obviously played a pivotal role in fomenting the Tea Party's misplaced populist outrage. He merits inclusion and investigation - but Frank returns to him way too often, focusing more on the clownish mouthpiece than the ones issuing the marching orders.
My favorite footnote of the year may be the bit about how one of Ayn Rand's supposedly revolutionary/incisive/prophetic plot points (for her dopey Atlas Shrugged) was actually done in very similar fashion in the panels of Little Orphan Annie earlier.
May 6, 2016
American is so utterly broken that it will take at least a generation to put it back into some sort of sane order, that's if we decide to do that and if we start immediately. If we continue down our current path of winner-take-all-and-fuck-everyone-else then I see an armed struggle in our not-too-distant future. The frightening part is that our proletariat are already armed to the freaking teeth. Once they decide to point those guns at the people who have been stealing our country and who have done the most damage to our working class things will get very ugly very quickly. That day may never come because, as Frank points out again and again, our far right masters have been doing an excellent job of waging a propaganda war against anyone who dares to oppose them.
For anyone who disagrees with this book or any of the other excellent books written by Frank I defy you to name a single, reputable book written by a conservative. I defy you to name a single tenet of the conservative creed that holds any water.
For anyone who disagrees with this book or any of the other excellent books written by Frank I defy you to name a single, reputable book written by a conservative. I defy you to name a single tenet of the conservative creed that holds any water.
April 19, 2016
Released in 2012, this is basically a history of the first few years after Obama took office—the tea baggers, the bailouts, Glenn Beck's career (what ever happened to him?), the resurgence of interest in Ayn Rand and what have you. Because of all the crazy things that have happened in the past few years, a lot of this shit I'd already started to forget. I'd say the absence of much discussion of race was shortsighted, given the news cycle for the past few years. Maybe it was felt that that was off topic, but wasn't that whole teabagger thing driven by race? Otherwise, this is completely on point, but it's also a whole lotta preaching to the choir, and it's probably not a whole lot that you don't already know.
March 30, 2013
More serious than it appears from the jokey presentation, it is a case study of how manipulation of the media and repetition of misleading terms can fool the swindled into supporting their swindlers. The current example being the US "Tea Party", through which the very rich mobilize the poor in defense of something they call "liberty" which means basically letting the big corporations get away with anything. Fortunately, as Obama's re-election demonstrated and Lincoln reminded us a century and a half ago, you can't fool all the people all the time. But fooling most of them just some of the time can be enough for the billionaires to protect their interests.
February 19, 2016
I would recommend the audio version, read by the author -- he reads with passion, making the book almost become an extended lecture, rather than simply a dry polemic. Although it does have a bit of dryness in spots, where points are occasionally overdone (hence four stars, not five). As other reviewers have noted, it probably won't recruit converts, but it lays out the case against our current corporate-worship political culture, sparing no one -- including the "New Democrats," a product of the Clinton era, currently (if only figuratively) led by Obama.
January 12, 2012
I won this book as a Goodreads First Read. It presents an interesting explaination as to how the US ran so far to the right when, historically speaking, we should have been sprinting in the opposite direction. it's nice to see that the whole world hasn't gone crazy thinking that the way to fix things is to do more of the same.
July 13, 2019
You can't read Thomas Frank without pulling out some of your hair. “We got a taste of their vision when they reconquered the House of Representatives in 2010—in the name of a nation outraged by economic disaster, remember—and immediately cracked down on the Securities and Exchange Commission, the regulatory agency charged with preventing fraud on Wall Street.” He focuses on such inconsistencies over and over again and you're left feeling exasperated.
There's a good brief dissection of the politics of Atlas Shrugged in one of the chapters. He calls out the Obama era democrats for being unable to tell a story, to have an ideology of their own, as a consequence of hobnobbing with the big donors. "Obama needed to be a second FDR but he chose to be Clinton II."
“Another place where thinking of this sort crops up constantly is in professional economics; indeed, the housing bubble itself could probably not have happened without the resolute determination of economists to blot out reality in favor of comforting myths of an all-seeing, superefficient market.
The list of heavy economic thinkers who denied that there was a bubble in the real-estate market, for example, is long and shiny with glittering names, every prestigious one of them convinced that prices were being driven upward by fundamentals, as theory says such prices almost always are.”
“More disastrous by far, though, was the economists’ push to roll back regulations against fraud in financial markets, on the smug belief that financiers were so keenly rational and so zealous to protect shareholder value that they simply would not allow fraud to happen. That fraud, in fact, happened in all sorts of catastrophic ways and at many different levels made no difference; theory canceled it all out.”
Glenn Beck comes up quite often. Don't let the opening chapters keep you from the good final chapters. To summarise, the book says the Right was able to benefit from the moment because it was quick to point at the villains while the Dems were busy hiring and bailing them out without attaching any conditions.
There are two types of bailouts apparently- the Herbert Hoover variety and the FDR variety. Obama, it seems, went with the former and let the Republicans reap the awards in the 2010 elections.
There's a good brief dissection of the politics of Atlas Shrugged in one of the chapters. He calls out the Obama era democrats for being unable to tell a story, to have an ideology of their own, as a consequence of hobnobbing with the big donors. "Obama needed to be a second FDR but he chose to be Clinton II."
“Another place where thinking of this sort crops up constantly is in professional economics; indeed, the housing bubble itself could probably not have happened without the resolute determination of economists to blot out reality in favor of comforting myths of an all-seeing, superefficient market.
The list of heavy economic thinkers who denied that there was a bubble in the real-estate market, for example, is long and shiny with glittering names, every prestigious one of them convinced that prices were being driven upward by fundamentals, as theory says such prices almost always are.”
“More disastrous by far, though, was the economists’ push to roll back regulations against fraud in financial markets, on the smug belief that financiers were so keenly rational and so zealous to protect shareholder value that they simply would not allow fraud to happen. That fraud, in fact, happened in all sorts of catastrophic ways and at many different levels made no difference; theory canceled it all out.”
Glenn Beck comes up quite often. Don't let the opening chapters keep you from the good final chapters. To summarise, the book says the Right was able to benefit from the moment because it was quick to point at the villains while the Dems were busy hiring and bailing them out without attaching any conditions.
There are two types of bailouts apparently- the Herbert Hoover variety and the FDR variety. Obama, it seems, went with the former and let the Republicans reap the awards in the 2010 elections.
September 28, 2023
When the stock market crashed in 1929 there was a surge of populist anger directed at laissez faire economic orthodoxy and the bankers, industrialists, and politicians who advocated for it. The years that followed would later be labelled the "Red Decade" as Americans demanded government intervention in the free market which had been so ruinous to their livelihoods. Common received wisdom would tell us that another massive economic meltdown would lead to a similar result, with popular anger directed at the wealthy capitalists whose avarice lead to disaster. But when the housing market crashed in 2008 it was government spending, social welfare programs, and regulations that became the target of mass ire from the American public. How did this happen?
This is the question Thomas Frank sets out to answer in this book. Or rather, this is the question a reader might expect Thomas Frank to answer. Instead we get one long diatribe in which Frank rails against the nonsensical ideology of the "New Right" in America following Obama's election. I am largely sympathetic to Frank's anger and confusion regarding the Tea Party movement and other Free Market fundamentalists, but what are we really accomplishing when we point out the doublethink of Glenn Beck? I don't disagree with Frank's conclusions here, I just find them practically irrelevant. I would have much rather read an actual examination of the material and historical factors which allowed for working class Americans to be so easily fooled by these transparent frauds.
To give credit where it is due, I thought the final two chapters did a decent job tackling some of the conditions which allowed the Glenn Becks of the world to rouse the rabble. The market segmentation of the American media and the abject failure of liberals to offer any kind of programmatic solution or ideological critique of the American economy in the wake of 2008 are great subjects for a history of this political moment. So it seems strange to me that the most substantive arguments the book actually makes are relegated to only a couple chapters towards the end. This book is more of a think-piece or long opinion column than it is a real work of political journalism. There's not a lot of research or history in here, I would have liked an actual examination of what has materially changed from the 1930s to the 2010s to explain how free market orthodoxy became so entrenched in the American mind. But as it is I don't think this book really justified it's length or even it's existence. There's still something on offer here but it really only needed a long article or column, not an entire book.
This is the question Thomas Frank sets out to answer in this book. Or rather, this is the question a reader might expect Thomas Frank to answer. Instead we get one long diatribe in which Frank rails against the nonsensical ideology of the "New Right" in America following Obama's election. I am largely sympathetic to Frank's anger and confusion regarding the Tea Party movement and other Free Market fundamentalists, but what are we really accomplishing when we point out the doublethink of Glenn Beck? I don't disagree with Frank's conclusions here, I just find them practically irrelevant. I would have much rather read an actual examination of the material and historical factors which allowed for working class Americans to be so easily fooled by these transparent frauds.
To give credit where it is due, I thought the final two chapters did a decent job tackling some of the conditions which allowed the Glenn Becks of the world to rouse the rabble. The market segmentation of the American media and the abject failure of liberals to offer any kind of programmatic solution or ideological critique of the American economy in the wake of 2008 are great subjects for a history of this political moment. So it seems strange to me that the most substantive arguments the book actually makes are relegated to only a couple chapters towards the end. This book is more of a think-piece or long opinion column than it is a real work of political journalism. There's not a lot of research or history in here, I would have liked an actual examination of what has materially changed from the 1930s to the 2010s to explain how free market orthodoxy became so entrenched in the American mind. But as it is I don't think this book really justified it's length or even it's existence. There's still something on offer here but it really only needed a long article or column, not an entire book.
May 17, 2018
Thomas Frank is great. He is one of the few commentators whose analysis provides true insight about the political economy. This is the fifth book I've read by him and I would rank this one behind only What's the Matter with Kansas as my favorite.
I must admit, the title of this book turned me off. I resisted picking it up for quite a while, even though I knew the title was ironic, because I had such an aversion to it. But this concept, that we should Pity the Billionaire as the title says, is important for the point that Frank is trying to make. Not only do billionaires get all the money... in the view of the billionaire class we the American public should also love them, agree with them, and get upset when they are criticized (unfairly in their opinion). Frank has explored this territory in books like Kansas, The Wrecking Crew, and One Market Under God, but this book really hammered home how crucial the airing of grievances and self-pity are to the right wing identity.
The chapter on mimicry was particularly inspired. Frank starts out talking about how animals take on the traits of predators for survival and compares this phenomenon to the Tea Party movement's appropriation of rabble rousing left wing tactics and strategies of the past. That was my favorite part. I could also see the seeds for Frank's follow up Listen Liberal in the later chapters of the book.
Frank is very smart and very funny. His books make me laugh and help me gain a more sophisticated understanding about American politics at the same time. This book is worth your time.
I must admit, the title of this book turned me off. I resisted picking it up for quite a while, even though I knew the title was ironic, because I had such an aversion to it. But this concept, that we should Pity the Billionaire as the title says, is important for the point that Frank is trying to make. Not only do billionaires get all the money... in the view of the billionaire class we the American public should also love them, agree with them, and get upset when they are criticized (unfairly in their opinion). Frank has explored this territory in books like Kansas, The Wrecking Crew, and One Market Under God, but this book really hammered home how crucial the airing of grievances and self-pity are to the right wing identity.
The chapter on mimicry was particularly inspired. Frank starts out talking about how animals take on the traits of predators for survival and compares this phenomenon to the Tea Party movement's appropriation of rabble rousing left wing tactics and strategies of the past. That was my favorite part. I could also see the seeds for Frank's follow up Listen Liberal in the later chapters of the book.
Frank is very smart and very funny. His books make me laugh and help me gain a more sophisticated understanding about American politics at the same time. This book is worth your time.
December 17, 2024
This was fine. I learned a little bit about the tea party movement but there really wasn’t anything substantial new or ground breaking for me to learn.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 197 reviews