What do you think?
Rate this book
We Do Our Part
“We Do Our Part” was the slogan of Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s National Recovery Administration—and it captured the can-do spirit that allowed America to survive the Great Depression and win World War II. Over the course of a sixty-year career as a Washington, D.C., journalist and historian, Peters, the founder of the Washington Monthly, has witnessed drastic changes firsthand. Ranging from the history of lobbying to the explosion of high-end fashion and travel reporting, this surprising book explains how we can consolidate the gains we have made while recapturing the generous spirit we have lost.
We Do Our Part is entertaining, insightful, and engaging. Spanning decades of politics and culture, Peters compares the flood of talented, original thinkers who flowed into the nation’s capital to join FDR’s administration with the tide of self-serving government staffers who left to exploit their opportunities on Wall Street and as lobbyists from the 1970s to today. During the same period, the economic divide between rich and poor grew, as we shifted from a culture of generosity to one of personal aggrandizement. With the wisdom of a prophet and the wit of a great storyteller, Peters connects these two trends by showing how this money-fueled elitism has diminished our trust in one another and our nation—and changed Washington for the worse.
If liberal Democrats—and Peters is one—want to win again, they need to be fair to everyone, including the working man who was once essential to the party of FDR. We Do Our Part shows us where we have been and where we are going, drawn from the invaluable perspective of a man who has seen America’s better days and still believes in the promise that lies ahead.
We Do Our Part is entertaining, insightful, and engaging. Spanning decades of politics and culture, Peters compares the flood of talented, original thinkers who flowed into the nation’s capital to join FDR’s administration with the tide of self-serving government staffers who left to exploit their opportunities on Wall Street and as lobbyists from the 1970s to today. During the same period, the economic divide between rich and poor grew, as we shifted from a culture of generosity to one of personal aggrandizement. With the wisdom of a prophet and the wit of a great storyteller, Peters connects these two trends by showing how this money-fueled elitism has diminished our trust in one another and our nation—and changed Washington for the worse.
If liberal Democrats—and Peters is one—want to win again, they need to be fair to everyone, including the working man who was once essential to the party of FDR. We Do Our Part shows us where we have been and where we are going, drawn from the invaluable perspective of a man who has seen America’s better days and still believes in the promise that lies ahead.
288 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 2017
About the author
Charles Peters
58 books20 followersCharles Given Peters Jr. (December 22, 1926 – November 23, 2023) was an American journalist, editor, and author. He was the founder and editor-in-chief of the Washington Monthly magazine and the author of We Do Our Part: Toward A Fairer and More Equal America (Random House, 2017). Writing in The New York Times, Jonathan Martin called the book a “well timed … cri de coeur” and “a desperate plea to his country and party to resist the temptations of greed, materialism and elitism.”
Librarian Note: There is more than one author in the GoodReads database with this name. See this thread for more information.
Charles T. Peters Jr.: Erotic
Librarian Note: There is more than one author in the GoodReads database with this name. See this thread for more information.
Charles T. Peters Jr.: Erotic
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 20 of 20 reviews
July 5, 2017
On the whole I found this disappointing, especially after the rave reviews quoted on the book's dust jacket. The first half is mildly interesting in parts, but much of the second is eye-glazingly banal. Jon Meacham writes in the Forward to his eighty-nine year old friend's book, “This book is Charlie's valedictory, his view from the mountaintop after decades in the arena,” and that is indeed the feeling conveyed. This is a swan song, in which a few sections may be of interest but much is misty-eyed and meandering. For example, Peters concludes chapter 8, “The Education Wars,” in which he explains that gifted, well-trained teachers are important and that teachers' unions have been an obstacle in raising teacher quality, with the interesting insight that
Okay then. Just get those entertainment people on board and that problem should be solved!
Another example of this sort of silliness is in chapter 9, “A Cynical Age.” Having introduced the chapter with a summary of how presidential lies about Vietnam and Watergate increased public cynicism about politics, Peters goes on to give equal space and weight to movies – “The Godfather” movies and “The Candidate” – as “another contributor to cynicism about institutions.” Rather than seeing movies as a reflection of changing views, Peters credits them with being the cause, which seems like a claim requiring some serious support to me, but that never materializes. Actually, that is typical of the book, throughout which the author makes claims about education, abortion, guns, and so on (claims which, as a fairly liberal person, I am often inclined to agree with, but which, to be convincing in a polemic of this sort need some proof) but fails to provide evidence.
Peters' premise is that America has largely abandoned its generous, civic minded past to become, especially by the early 1980's and ever increasingly, selfish, greedy, and snobbish. The period of great virtue was during F.D.R.'s presidency, when the country came together to overcome the Great Depression and win WWII, through the early '60s. Now, I'm willing to believe that a spirit of generosity and cooperation might have been more prevalent during those times – adversity can bring out the best in people – but Peters does not, for me, persuasively demonstrate that there was a real change in national character. The New Deal, the Great Society, etc. are evidence of Americans' willingness to sacrifice temporarily for the greater good, but less noble impulses were evident before and during this period, as well as the more recent ones that Peters deplores. Going back a few years before FDR we have the Teapot Dome scandal of the Harding administration, the original Ponzi scheme, the Triangle Shirtwaist factory fire, the “conspicuous consumption" of Fifth Avenue and Newport, racism, antisemitism, etc. Peters talks about how snobbishness about going to the “right” college or university is only a recent development, but a quick Google search will bring up articles about Columbia, Harvard, and Yale advertising back in the 1860's and 70's the advantages their graduates enjoyed, and few readers will believe that “networking” is a recent phenomenon. It seems more likely, and more supported by Peters' evidence, that segments of the country experience occasional bouts of public spiritedness, as evidenced by the popularity of service in the Peace Corps during the Kennedy years or the generosity of housewives to hobos at their doors during the Depression, and then lapse back to more typical levels of moderate communal engagement leavening self-interested behavior.
For all that the years and programs he idealizes may have promoted a “fairer and more equal America,” the years of the New Deal, the Great Society, etc. were also the time of the Red Scare, “The Protocols of the Elders of Zion,” the John Birch Society, and more. Enthusiasm for “fairness and equality” was certainly not shared by all Americans, even in the 30's through the 60's – plenty of citizens loathed FDR, and I recently read One Nation Under God: How Corporate America Invented Christian America, which details how the bond between Evangelical Christianity and conservative businessmen was forged at this time in reaction against Great Society programs (Jerry Falwell Jr. endorsing the playboy businessman and pageant promoter Donald Trump with “In my opinion, Donald Trump lives a life of loving and helping others as Jesus taught in the great commandment,” however bizarre, didn't come out of nowhere). Peters does, however, provide dramatic and relevant figures for things such as “the ratio of CEO pay to factory-worker pay rose from 42 to 1 in 1960... to as high in some companies as 531 to 1 in the year 2000,” and a top income tax rate of 90 percent in the Roosevelt years being reduced under Reagan (from the then top rate of 70 percent) to 36 percent. And now, of course, with income inequality at stratospheric levels and cuts in programs for the needy imminent, Trump proposes to cut that top rate even more.
As an example of what I find unconvincing in his claim for there having been a period of virtue, in the chapter “Main Street Goes Wall Street” Peters traces the careers of three lawyers from their early days as activists “for liberal causes” in the 60s to their later careers as (wicked) corporate lobbyists by the 80's. While acknowledging the effects of things like the end of the Vietnam war, the draft, and inflation, Peters seems not to consider that his young idealists, like those in generations before them, were also getting older, perceiving more personal financial obligations, and being increasingly tempted by opportunities. What he sees as a “societal” change looks more to me like the sort of change typical in individuals. Young people today still join the Peace Corps, Teach for America, AmeriCorps, just as Americans of all ages still come together to help neighbors in need, operate food pantries, build houses for the poor, crowd-fund for medical emergencies.
A few parts of the book are just weird, such as chapter 10, “Fashionable Trouble.” Peters' descriptions of the expensive tastes of the wealthy, in designer clothing, handbags, decorating, food, and more are so irrelevant to the topic of “fairness” in America, not to mention painfully dull (this was the only chapter where I eventually started skimming) that it's hard not to feel annoyed at his far too deferential editor.
Chapter 11, “Clinton and Beyond,” in which Peters describes the successes and failures of the last Democratic president he sees as having had a strong appeal to the “common man,” is well done and pulled the book back up to three stars. Bill Clinton's political career, and Hillary's, offer useful insights into the ways Democrats might strengthen their appeal for working class voters, as well as various ways politicians can go wrong.
Finally, in chapter 12, “What Do We Do Now?” Peters offers his suggestions for how to make America fairer. Since this is clearly a pretty heavy duty challenge it seems unfair to criticize, but... his suggestions range from the improbable (such as, executives choosing to take smaller compensation packages, companies spending profits on higher wages for workers rather than stock repurchases) to the obvious (young people voting). Most of his ideas are great, in theory, but the trick, unfortunately, is in getting them to catch on, and this book offers no compelling ideas for how to make that happen. Which is a shame. If Peters could explain the secrets to inspiring people to willingly paying higher taxes in order to help their less fortunate neighbors, to choose work in lower paying professions over higher paying ones for the opportunity to be of most service to society, to sacrifice their own convenience in order to promote the interests of disadvantaged citizens, and so on, I think many readers would be interested, but he can not.
”Perhaps most important of all is that those in the entertainment industry with influence over the opinion of young people make sure that they never suggest that taking school seriously is uncool. The students themselves, though they have excellent excuses for not giving school their best effort, should consider whether it is a good idea to use those excuses to wreck the rest of their lives.”
Okay then. Just get those entertainment people on board and that problem should be solved!
Another example of this sort of silliness is in chapter 9, “A Cynical Age.” Having introduced the chapter with a summary of how presidential lies about Vietnam and Watergate increased public cynicism about politics, Peters goes on to give equal space and weight to movies – “The Godfather” movies and “The Candidate” – as “another contributor to cynicism about institutions.” Rather than seeing movies as a reflection of changing views, Peters credits them with being the cause, which seems like a claim requiring some serious support to me, but that never materializes. Actually, that is typical of the book, throughout which the author makes claims about education, abortion, guns, and so on (claims which, as a fairly liberal person, I am often inclined to agree with, but which, to be convincing in a polemic of this sort need some proof) but fails to provide evidence.
Peters' premise is that America has largely abandoned its generous, civic minded past to become, especially by the early 1980's and ever increasingly, selfish, greedy, and snobbish. The period of great virtue was during F.D.R.'s presidency, when the country came together to overcome the Great Depression and win WWII, through the early '60s. Now, I'm willing to believe that a spirit of generosity and cooperation might have been more prevalent during those times – adversity can bring out the best in people – but Peters does not, for me, persuasively demonstrate that there was a real change in national character. The New Deal, the Great Society, etc. are evidence of Americans' willingness to sacrifice temporarily for the greater good, but less noble impulses were evident before and during this period, as well as the more recent ones that Peters deplores. Going back a few years before FDR we have the Teapot Dome scandal of the Harding administration, the original Ponzi scheme, the Triangle Shirtwaist factory fire, the “conspicuous consumption" of Fifth Avenue and Newport, racism, antisemitism, etc. Peters talks about how snobbishness about going to the “right” college or university is only a recent development, but a quick Google search will bring up articles about Columbia, Harvard, and Yale advertising back in the 1860's and 70's the advantages their graduates enjoyed, and few readers will believe that “networking” is a recent phenomenon. It seems more likely, and more supported by Peters' evidence, that segments of the country experience occasional bouts of public spiritedness, as evidenced by the popularity of service in the Peace Corps during the Kennedy years or the generosity of housewives to hobos at their doors during the Depression, and then lapse back to more typical levels of moderate communal engagement leavening self-interested behavior.
For all that the years and programs he idealizes may have promoted a “fairer and more equal America,” the years of the New Deal, the Great Society, etc. were also the time of the Red Scare, “The Protocols of the Elders of Zion,” the John Birch Society, and more. Enthusiasm for “fairness and equality” was certainly not shared by all Americans, even in the 30's through the 60's – plenty of citizens loathed FDR, and I recently read One Nation Under God: How Corporate America Invented Christian America, which details how the bond between Evangelical Christianity and conservative businessmen was forged at this time in reaction against Great Society programs (Jerry Falwell Jr. endorsing the playboy businessman and pageant promoter Donald Trump with “In my opinion, Donald Trump lives a life of loving and helping others as Jesus taught in the great commandment,” however bizarre, didn't come out of nowhere). Peters does, however, provide dramatic and relevant figures for things such as “the ratio of CEO pay to factory-worker pay rose from 42 to 1 in 1960... to as high in some companies as 531 to 1 in the year 2000,” and a top income tax rate of 90 percent in the Roosevelt years being reduced under Reagan (from the then top rate of 70 percent) to 36 percent. And now, of course, with income inequality at stratospheric levels and cuts in programs for the needy imminent, Trump proposes to cut that top rate even more.
As an example of what I find unconvincing in his claim for there having been a period of virtue, in the chapter “Main Street Goes Wall Street” Peters traces the careers of three lawyers from their early days as activists “for liberal causes” in the 60s to their later careers as (wicked) corporate lobbyists by the 80's. While acknowledging the effects of things like the end of the Vietnam war, the draft, and inflation, Peters seems not to consider that his young idealists, like those in generations before them, were also getting older, perceiving more personal financial obligations, and being increasingly tempted by opportunities. What he sees as a “societal” change looks more to me like the sort of change typical in individuals. Young people today still join the Peace Corps, Teach for America, AmeriCorps, just as Americans of all ages still come together to help neighbors in need, operate food pantries, build houses for the poor, crowd-fund for medical emergencies.
A few parts of the book are just weird, such as chapter 10, “Fashionable Trouble.” Peters' descriptions of the expensive tastes of the wealthy, in designer clothing, handbags, decorating, food, and more are so irrelevant to the topic of “fairness” in America, not to mention painfully dull (this was the only chapter where I eventually started skimming) that it's hard not to feel annoyed at his far too deferential editor.
Chapter 11, “Clinton and Beyond,” in which Peters describes the successes and failures of the last Democratic president he sees as having had a strong appeal to the “common man,” is well done and pulled the book back up to three stars. Bill Clinton's political career, and Hillary's, offer useful insights into the ways Democrats might strengthen their appeal for working class voters, as well as various ways politicians can go wrong.
Finally, in chapter 12, “What Do We Do Now?” Peters offers his suggestions for how to make America fairer. Since this is clearly a pretty heavy duty challenge it seems unfair to criticize, but... his suggestions range from the improbable (such as, executives choosing to take smaller compensation packages, companies spending profits on higher wages for workers rather than stock repurchases) to the obvious (young people voting). Most of his ideas are great, in theory, but the trick, unfortunately, is in getting them to catch on, and this book offers no compelling ideas for how to make that happen. Which is a shame. If Peters could explain the secrets to inspiring people to willingly paying higher taxes in order to help their less fortunate neighbors, to choose work in lower paying professions over higher paying ones for the opportunity to be of most service to society, to sacrifice their own convenience in order to promote the interests of disadvantaged citizens, and so on, I think many readers would be interested, but he can not.
May 23, 2017
I bought into the basic argument that we've evolved from the Roosevelt culture of service to the Trump culture of money. Where Peters started losing me was the last third of the book (probably because it's where I have the most direct experience), when he started talking about specific issues like abortion, gun rights, and (especially) public education (he thinks teachers are the problem and that charter schools are the solution), all without the benefit of any serious data or facts, just opinions, and his opinions, not others. Then he really lost me on page 178: "But talented people have not stopped coming into government entirely. There continue to be idealist men and women devoted to public service. One example is Timothy Geithner." Really? The man almost single-handedly responsible (along with Paulson and Bernanke) for the crash of 2008 with the Lehman bankruptcy? The man who brought the Clinton era back into the White House? The man who, after leaving the Treasury, became the president and managing director of Warburg Pincus, a private equity firm? In other words, exactly the kind of person out to maximize their pocketbook rather than serving? I stopped reading right there, outraged. Sorry, Mr. Peters--your basic idea may be right but your support of it needs work.
May 31, 2017
I found this book most timely, as the gap between the wealthy and poor continues to grow here in the U.S. and the Democratic Party and progressives seem to be struggling to define a positive message and path forward. A senior reporter and senior editor of “The Washington Monthly” and author of several books examining our political system, the writer brings important insights into the political and cultural situation in our country today.
As a Returned Peace Corps Volunteer myself I appreciated his involvement setting up the Peace Corps and serving as its first director of evaluation—he definitely appreciates the importance of global service. “We Do Our Part” seems an appropriate title as it was the slogan of FDR’s National Recovery Administration which mobilized the can-do spirit that allowed the U.S. to not only survive the Great Depression and win World War II, but to establish a number of monumental and historic infrastructure projects as well as basic democratic institutions which serve us well to this day.
He touches on some of the most crucial issues impacting, and even threatening, our country’s democratic institutions like what’s become a “money making culture” in which 40% of the wealth is in the hands of only 1% of the population—where firing workers to increase profits has become more than acceptable and where the ratio of CEO to worker wages had gone from 42-1 in 1960 to 531-1 by the year 2,000.
Peters provides concrete solutions to our country’s growing divisions by insisting our businesses go beyond focusing on corporate profits to what’s good for the workers and the public. He provides concrete solutions such as disallowing stock “buy backs” such as the $6.5 billion a year in buybacks by Walmart, which would have been enough to give each of its 1.4 billion U.S. workers a $4,642 raise for each of those years.
He makes a call for “public servants” again focused on the needs of the public and not simply personal gain and going beyond the Reagan politics of “selfishness.” He also comes up with some provocative predictions, such as the role former President Barack Obama will have based on his choice of a future career which will have a symbolic impact, and finally he exhorts liberals to abandon their “elitist snobbery” which resulted in the abandonment of so many hard-working Americans looking for solutions to a dwindling manufacturing market and viable jobs for the future.
The author has obviously witnessed drastic changes in our country firsthand. Ranging from the history of lobbying to the explosion of high-end fashion and travel reporting, this impressive book explains how we can consolidate the gains we have made while recapturing the generous spirit we have lost.
As a Returned Peace Corps Volunteer myself I appreciated his involvement setting up the Peace Corps and serving as its first director of evaluation—he definitely appreciates the importance of global service. “We Do Our Part” seems an appropriate title as it was the slogan of FDR’s National Recovery Administration which mobilized the can-do spirit that allowed the U.S. to not only survive the Great Depression and win World War II, but to establish a number of monumental and historic infrastructure projects as well as basic democratic institutions which serve us well to this day.
He touches on some of the most crucial issues impacting, and even threatening, our country’s democratic institutions like what’s become a “money making culture” in which 40% of the wealth is in the hands of only 1% of the population—where firing workers to increase profits has become more than acceptable and where the ratio of CEO to worker wages had gone from 42-1 in 1960 to 531-1 by the year 2,000.
Peters provides concrete solutions to our country’s growing divisions by insisting our businesses go beyond focusing on corporate profits to what’s good for the workers and the public. He provides concrete solutions such as disallowing stock “buy backs” such as the $6.5 billion a year in buybacks by Walmart, which would have been enough to give each of its 1.4 billion U.S. workers a $4,642 raise for each of those years.
He makes a call for “public servants” again focused on the needs of the public and not simply personal gain and going beyond the Reagan politics of “selfishness.” He also comes up with some provocative predictions, such as the role former President Barack Obama will have based on his choice of a future career which will have a symbolic impact, and finally he exhorts liberals to abandon their “elitist snobbery” which resulted in the abandonment of so many hard-working Americans looking for solutions to a dwindling manufacturing market and viable jobs for the future.
The author has obviously witnessed drastic changes in our country firsthand. Ranging from the history of lobbying to the explosion of high-end fashion and travel reporting, this impressive book explains how we can consolidate the gains we have made while recapturing the generous spirit we have lost.
July 16, 2017
There were good parts to this book about people becoming involved in government and teaching. I found a few flaws including the fact that he deplores the condition of public education while he switches his son to a private school while she gets a teaching position at the school to cover tuition. He criticizes high school students going to ivy league schools while he got advanced degrees from Columbia. He also calls anyone who did not serve in Vietnam a draft dodger. Vietnam was a travesty for my generation - the boys who did come back in body bags, suffered mental problems for the rest of their lives and some developed cancer from Agent Orange.. FOR WHAT? All social classes served in Vietnam and the boys who were drafted did not want to be there and did not help the situation with their lack of motivation and I will not go into the lies and poor judgment of Johnson, his generals and the cabinet. The author of this book is living in the world of FDR and World War II when all was good.and smart people flocked to Washington to get things done. Also he seems to forget about the huge amount of student loans most young people carry and so they have to get jobs to pay their bills.I also deplore contemporary materialism and lobbyists who corrupt our government process and it would be a perfect world if politicians did not benefit from public service.
May 29, 2017
This book by Charles Peters, publisher emeritus of The Washington Monthly, is both a memoir and critique of American culture and politics from the Truman administration to the present.
I find most of Peters' observations spot on. Peters lays the ¨blame¨ for the disintegration of USA´s New Deal ¨We Do Our Part¨ unity squarely on the shoulders of his generation and my g-g-g-g-generation. While my parents´ generation, of which Peters is a member, was noted for its conformity it also started the culture on the road to a meritocracy based more on prestige of where one attends school and knowledge which leads to class snobbery based on perceived aesthetic tastes and Thorstein Veblen´s ¨conspicuous consumption.¨
From my viewpoint the greatest irony is my g-g-g-g-generation, the baby boomer, blathered about how we rejected our parents' materialism, yet also spent hours discussing how much our latest pair of Cerwin Vega stereo speakers cost. And as I have observed the ¨Hell-No-We-Won´t-Go¨ college boys were secretly OK with letting ¨...those hillbillies go get shot.¨
I´m glad I read this book though I learned very little I did not already know. It is interesting since it is written from the prospective of one whose publication helped shape Democratic thought.
I find most of Peters' observations spot on. Peters lays the ¨blame¨ for the disintegration of USA´s New Deal ¨We Do Our Part¨ unity squarely on the shoulders of his generation and my g-g-g-g-generation. While my parents´ generation, of which Peters is a member, was noted for its conformity it also started the culture on the road to a meritocracy based more on prestige of where one attends school and knowledge which leads to class snobbery based on perceived aesthetic tastes and Thorstein Veblen´s ¨conspicuous consumption.¨
From my viewpoint the greatest irony is my g-g-g-g-generation, the baby boomer, blathered about how we rejected our parents' materialism, yet also spent hours discussing how much our latest pair of Cerwin Vega stereo speakers cost. And as I have observed the ¨Hell-No-We-Won´t-Go¨ college boys were secretly OK with letting ¨...those hillbillies go get shot.¨
I´m glad I read this book though I learned very little I did not already know. It is interesting since it is written from the prospective of one whose publication helped shape Democratic thought.
July 31, 2017
We Do Our Part is a book I really wanted to enjoy. It has a fantastic premise, makes some great promises in the book jacket, and takes an optimistic point-of-view of government not seen today outside of reruns of The West Wing.
Peters examines some really interesting individuals in recent American history and makes some particularly good points as well.
However, I feel like the argument being made in this book is not always particularly strong and at times conflicting. The latter being more problematic for me. One area in particularly is the author's promotion of charter schools at times as the silver bullet of education but also failing to realize why they did particularly well in some areas with some measures.
The last third of the book is probably the weakest part for me. Others may be able to get more out of it. Definitely a book you will be able to finish over the course of an afternoon.
Peters examines some really interesting individuals in recent American history and makes some particularly good points as well.
However, I feel like the argument being made in this book is not always particularly strong and at times conflicting. The latter being more problematic for me. One area in particularly is the author's promotion of charter schools at times as the silver bullet of education but also failing to realize why they did particularly well in some areas with some measures.
The last third of the book is probably the weakest part for me. Others may be able to get more out of it. Definitely a book you will be able to finish over the course of an afternoon.
May 12, 2017
This is a worthwhile book. The truly excellent parts are Peters's recollections about life during the "Roosevelt Era" (1933-1965 or so), when the country truly was much less greedy and much more willing to pitch in for the common good. He makes a very strong case that Americans have it in them to come together and put the country first. The second half of the book is basically a chronicle of all the various policy fights he got into through the Washington Monthly, along with why he was mostly right, and is a bit less interesting. The concluding section, which is largely an exhortation to young people to get involved in politics, is on point and surprisingly uplifting.
May 7, 2018
This is a remarkably detailed history-framed-as-memoir of American politics since the ascent of Franklin Roosevelt. The great virtue of Peters' approach is that he remembers events in the context of the prevailing popular social environment, even going back to radio days, and can give a sense of the national mood and not just track what the politicians were up to. This guy was paying attention and he's trying to give us the benefit of his experience. His style is friendly and readable and I'd recommend this book even if you're only going to read half of it. (I ran out of steam in the Nixon era.)
May 29, 2017
Written from the perspective of a working-class raised, white educated Democratic liberal 91-year-old who---in this Democratic liberal elite's view --- shines light on the good and troubling in both parties. I appreciate the emphasis on being aware of when we're motivated to do good and when we're motivated to do well. The historical progression of the book fills in a lot of gaps. Enjoyable and thought-provoking.
July 28, 2017
I was fascinated by Peters' take on the creeping greed taking over Washington and the country. He dates it back to the end of FDR's administration, the development of the lobbying class, and later, the glamour that the Kennedy's exuded. He, of course, deals with much more, but this point stood out to me and resonated. All that stuff about service, dedication to country and hope for America wasn't so bad either.
September 28, 2017
This book is an excellent political history covering 1930 to the present day. The author gets almost everything right; except that I would take issue with his criticism of public schools and teachers unions. The book falls down in the area of what is to be done, and seems to lose focus after the first half of the book. The author's heart is in the right place; but he does not have a focused idea of how to make the changes that are needed, other than to push people to greater involvement.
November 7, 2017
While I had hoped for a book that talked more about the New Deal this book did offer some interesting insights about its afterbirth, including the rise of "real news" and its peddlers. I felt that the author was fairly neutral in his description of liberal vs conservative, but this feeling evaporated as the book went on, with a strong anti-liberal stance by the closing. Even so, I recommend this book if for no other reason than the history tidbits from the Depression to the present.
September 19, 2021
Meh
Charles Peters has the unique perspective of being able to personally recall the (d)evolution of American society from the New Deal to the depths of the MAGA era. His observations are spot on, as are his conclusions. But the writing is tepid and dull, and there really is nothing in here that an educated reader wouldn’t already know. A good editor could easily condense this book into an op-ed piece.
Charles Peters has the unique perspective of being able to personally recall the (d)evolution of American society from the New Deal to the depths of the MAGA era. His observations are spot on, as are his conclusions. But the writing is tepid and dull, and there really is nothing in here that an educated reader wouldn’t already know. A good editor could easily condense this book into an op-ed piece.
June 20, 2020
This was published in 2017 so some of it was written in anticipation of the 2018 mid-term election, but remains relevant. An overview of the New Deal Era and how the impact from that era has changed in more recent decades, with a call to return to policies which would return the US to a more equitable society. Interesting.
March 26, 2017
I received this book from Good Reads.
Charles Peters is a Liberal and proud of it. So am I, so I was happy to read this book. However, Mr. Peters is an older man, his first recollection of presidents if FDR, a bit before my time!
Interesting read; decently written. Leads to an understand of why Americans are frustrated by government, most especially the current administration.
Charles Peters is a Liberal and proud of it. So am I, so I was happy to read this book. However, Mr. Peters is an older man, his first recollection of presidents if FDR, a bit before my time!
Interesting read; decently written. Leads to an understand of why Americans are frustrated by government, most especially the current administration.
May 22, 2017
via NYPL - A fascinating, smart look at shifting public policies and public attitudes since the halcyon days of the New Deal to the present, critical of both the political left and political right.
May 23, 2017
excellent, now let's all do our part
July 21, 2017
Excellent personal recounting of the political development in the US from the Great Depression to present day: problems, what we did right, what we did wrong and how to fix it.
February 6, 2021
Lefty book..........Democrats they greatest thing since sliced bread and Republicans are the devils from hell.
April 16, 2017
A manifesto of why the GOP won and the Dems lost, while at the same time providing incredibly balanced accounts for why.
Displaying 1 - 20 of 20 reviews