As someone in their early 40s, a self-described "Social Democrat," I agree with most of the book's broad arguments, albeit less stridently than Remeikis.
The book reads like a very well-written polemic, which may be its intent. Regardless, it should have aimed higher.
I understand that this book is intended for someone younger than me, who didn't come of age in the Howard era. However, the book requires sophisticated political knowledge, and those interested in reading it would likely already have a position on the Howard Government. Consequently, the book will not change anyone's opinion on the subject.
This book is also an argument for why the retrospective of a government, particularly one lasting 11 years, cannot be the size of a novella.
While the book does a sufficient job of placing Howard's legacy in the context of modern Australia, it does a poor job of placing its ideology and policy objectives in historical context. The book would be better served if it spent a few chapters at the beginning assessing how Howard was influenced by the governments of Thatcher and Reagan, the reforms of "Rogernomics" in New Zealand, and, yes, even the Hawke and Keating Governments.
This context is particularly lacking when the book describes the trajectory of social policy in Australia. It was the economic rationalist policies of Hawke and Keating that entrenched the free market in this country, and set the stage for Remeikis's criticisms of the decay in housing, childcare, health, education, and employment.
Of course, Howard continued to open these floodgates, adding even more water. As Remeikis writes, Howard also put his own ideological spin on Australian culture, shaping it and stamping his view of it on the historical record.
The book is at its best when discussing economic policy. The strength of that chapter summarises the work of earlier writers such as George Megalogenis and Paul Kelly, arguing that Howard's economic record is one of good fortune, rather than of good management, thanks to the efforts of his predecessors. The chapter stresses that Howard was in the right place at the right time. It's a point that could have been made more explicitly across the entire book.
There is no doubt that Howard remains the dominant figure who has shaped this generation. However, his influence was cemented through his political acumen rather than continuing policy reforms that had already begun across the globe. You can see flashes of a good book at times, but to do a proper job, its length needed to be doubled, or at the very least increased by a third. Context matters, especially when assessing a government one generation removed, which won four consecutive elections. For this reason, Remeikis only skims the surface of John Howard’s influence on Australian society.