ديمقراطية للقلة

by Michael Parenti, حصة منيف (Translation)

Studies the American political system and government from the viewpoint that our government represents the privileged few as a result of the distribution of sources of power within American society.

Genres: Politics, Nonfiction, History, Theory, Sociology, Economics, Political Science

568 pages, Unknown Binding

First published January 1, 1974

About the author

Michael John Parenti, Ph.D. (Yale University) is an American political scientist, academic historian and cultural critic who writes on scholarly and popular subjects. He has taught at universities as well as run for political office. Parenti is well known for his Marxist writings and lectures. He is a notable intellectual of the American Left and he is most known for his criticism of capitalism and American foreign policy.

Reviews

[Jessie · Rating 4 out of 5]

If you've become increasingly disillusioned with the U.S. policitcal and economic landscape, then you'll be enraptured by this book. It is basically a litany of abuses by the wealthy, "owning" class against... well... the rest of us. If you want to reinforce the gut feeling you have that everything wrong with society is because "the man's puttin' us down" - then this book will give you the "evidence" you need to make that argument. I found it to be a good-paced read. Very well annotated with footnotes (sometimes half a page is filled with the footnotes) - which is helpful for someone who might want that little extra bit of information. Reading this book made me feel a little bit depressed though - that the United States is just on a corporate-greed-driven road to under destruction and there's basically nothing that the rest of us can really do about it. Very riveting and impassioned, but scholarly at the same time. I recommend that every middle-American read this book to get a better understanding of where "we" fit into the scheme of American life. (While this book is now 10 years old, at least the edition I was reading, it was still extremely relevant to the problems with constantly hear about in the news today.)

[Jacob · Rating 1 out of 5]

Read this paragraph and then think about it for a minute before reading on (from Chapter 16):

In the wake of the 9/11 attack, Bush Jr. issued a host of executive orders supposedly to enhance national security, one of which rescinded certain labor protections required of federal contractors. When a federal court revoked Bush’s decision, the president ignored the court decision, justifying his action as a response to “national emergency.” Executive Order 11000 allows the government to mobilize civilians into work brigades under government supervision; 11002 designates the Postmaster General to operate a national registration of all persons; and 11004 allows the government to designate residential areas to be abandoned and move whole populations to new locations.

Does it sound familiar? I remembered hearing about it but it was a conspiracy theory about Obama that I read about and then checked out on Snopes (here is the link to the Snopes piece http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/... that proves Obama didn't issue these Executive Orders). That said, Bush didn't issue them either. From what I could find, they were all issued by JFK:
http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pi...
http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pi...
http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pi...

I attempted to check Parenti’s reference on this one and could not locate the Washington Post article but did eventually find the Whitehouse news release (although the original link is no longer active since it has been a few years since the 2011 edition I read was published). Here is the link to the press release:
http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archive...

A national emergency exists by reason of the terrorist attacks at the World Trade Center, New York, New York, and the Pentagon, and the continuing and immediate threat of further attacks on the United States.
NOW, THEREFORE, I, GEORGE W. BUSH, President of the United States of America, by virtue of the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States, I hereby declare that the national emergency has existed since September 11, 2001, and, pursuant to the National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C. 1601 et seq.), I intend to utilize the following statutes: sections 123, 123a, 527, 2201(c), 12006, and 12302 of title 10, United States Code, and sections 331, 359, and 367 of title 14, United States Code.
This proclamation immediately shall be published in the Federal Register or disseminated through the Emergency Federal Register, and transmitted to the Congress.
This proclamation is not intended to create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law by a party against the United States, its agencies, its officers, or any person.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this fourteenth day of September, in the year of our Lord two thousand one, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and twenty-sixth.
GEORGE W. BUSH

Still no mention of those executive orders, but this is when Bush declared a state of emergency (mentioned in the quoted paragraph from the book) which would allow him to use the powers in those orders. So, a rebuttal to me might be that even though that was all one paragraph, I the reader misconstrued what the author meant and he never technically stated that Bush was the ones who is responsible for those orders. Okay I disagree with that but I can see where someone would be coming from if they made that argument. So let’s move on to an example which still has an active webpage and which was the one that originally set off my spider sense.

In Chapter 13, Parenti states:

The Internet also offers progressive websites that provide information and opinion rarely accommodated by mainstream media. By its nature the Internet provides for individual transmission and commentary by just about anyone who has a computer and an opinion, bringing us some of the best and worst, but also providing new opportunities for networking and organizing, and for gathering information. Some giant telephone and cable companies began pressuring Congress to limit the number of Internet servers, in an effort to establish high-fee monopoly control. Their goal has been to create the electronic equivalent of an expensive“fast lane,” while relegating all nonpaying users to slower, more limited, and less reliable access.

Now, I'm pro-Net Neautrality and had obviously heard about, and been worried about, internet "fast lanes" but this was the first I had heard of the telecoms trying to get Congress to limit the number of internet servers. So I couldn't wrap my head around this one. Not just why I hadn't heard about this before, which would be understandable, but I couldn't understand whose internet servers he was talking about. So I checked out the reference for this one (http://civic.moveon.org/save_the_inte...) and found that the source is a call-to-action from MoveOn to contact your representatives to support net neutrality but it never mentions anything about limiting servers. So since I am reading the 2011 edition I thought that maybe the information on the page has changed since he used it. Using Internet Archive's Wayback Machine I looked at a copy from 2008 ( https://web.archive.org/web/200808272... ) and found that although there are small wording differences, it still makes no reference to limiting servers (which I still don't understand whose servers he's talking about. The telecoms? If so why didn't they just limit them instead of going to Congress). So for this example I still won't say that I am 100% sure he is wrong, partially because I may have missed something and partially because I may be misunderstanding what he is saying, but here is an example where I know he was incorrect.

In the chapter about the U.S. military (Chapter 11), he writes:

Corporate contractors enjoy these special features of military spending:
[...]
Almost all contracts are awarded at whatever price a corporation sets without competitive bidding. That means the defense firm can name its own price and the Pentagon pays up.

I understand what no-bid (aka sole-source) contracts are and how their usage went up drastically during the Iraq war but I was pretty sure it was not even the majority of contracts, let alone “almost all.” Now there was no reference for this so I did some googling of my own and found an article from The Center for Public Integrity that another news agency was quoting. ( http://www.publicintegrity.org/2011/0... ) From the article:

And despite repeated pledges to reform the process, non-competitive contracts are a hard habit to break. According to federal data, the Pentagon’s competed contracts, based on dollar figures, fell to 55 percent in the first two quarters of 2011, a number lower than any point in the last 10 years since the terrorist attacks of 9/11.

Like I said, I was reading the 2011 edition, so if the awarding of no-bid contracts was highest in 2011 at 45%, then it was not most, and definitely not "almost all", when my edition was revised. GAO also released a report in 2014 (http://www.gao.gov/assets/670/662579.pdf ) that found that

In fiscal year 2013, the Department of Defense (DOD) awarded contracts for about $308 billion for products and services, of which 43 percent was awarded without competition. In addition, DOD accounted for over 80 percent of government-wide obligations that used noncompetitive contracts.

further debunking the claim that “almost all” military contracts are no-bid.

To be honest I did not fact check everything he wrote nor do I plan to, so this list is not comprehensive. It was only a few items I found extremely interesting or thought were incorrect that I went on to read more about elsewhere. That is not to say I think the book is full of incorrect data or assertions and if I had to make a guess, I would say that the majority of the book is true based on the fact that I have seen much of these same claims in other sources. Still these few issues completely ruined the book for me, which up until the point that I noticed them, I had thought I was going to rate the book 5 stars. I mean it really is an extremely engaging book in my opinion, I loved Parenti’s writing style, and I believe his overall thesis is correct. Some people might dislike it because it is not “unbiased” (code for an ideology different from their own), but I think this is perfectly acceptable especially when you take into consideration the fact that most of the news and history books we are exposed to is extremely pro-capitalist, pro-federal government, pro-expansionism, etc, without any mention that there might be a different side to the story. Still, I think a 1 star rating is justified since these errors made me question everything else I learned from the book.

[Dan · Rating 5 out of 5]

Great, great overview of our government of the rich, by the rich, and for the rich. Parenti's ability to explain complex topics in very simple, accessible language that anyone can understand is really impressive. He hits a broad range of topics, expertly tying them all back to their root causes in capitalism. I had the second edition which is by now a little dated in language and a few topics, but still (unfortunately) just as relevant. Fantastic look at a Marxist understanding of the state in the US instance. Would be especially good for liberals or new leftists, because it doesn't require all the historical context and confusing language that can sometimes make older or more academic theory difficult.

[Vic u · Rating 4 out of 5]

Parenti spittin as always

[Jamie · Rating 5 out of 5]

In the beginning of my education I had rated this lower in review primarily due to my lack of knowledge of the social and political implications on the expansion of Marxism's economic theories. However my opinion shifted towards the true ramifications of the hegemonic system that we are sadly bound by. Please keep an open mind while reading. I say this because the tendency to fall into that rhetorical trap of "not enough hard work" can be imbedded within the subconscious through past influence.
Couple this with Society the Basics by Macionis and Diversity and Society: Race, Ethnicity, and Gender by Healy. With these textbooks a previous uninformed writer will more likely let go of preconceived notions inspired by the other uninformed members of society, and take on a new approach to the complexity of situations through environmental, political, and social constructs which may leave a person economically pigeonholed.

[Erin Crane · Rating 3 out of 5]

This was okay - it reminded me of American Exceptionalism and American Innocence as well as Lies My Teacher Told Me. There's useful information in here, I've just already heard much of it elsewhere in some form. This would have been much more useful to me years ago.

It's also largely a list of facts or "facts." Unfortunately, air quotes are needed because sometimes his sources are real iffy, and he makes some unwarranted leaps of logic. That's extra frustrating when you agree with the overall point an author is making - don't ruin it with shoddy research. The fluoride stuff was a real eye twitch moment for me.

The thing about lists of facts, though, is that it's not very interesting to me. I can't retain all of that, especially when it's so much and so broad. The data he included often felt meaningless without context. "x gallons of toxic chemicals are dumped into our water supply every year!" Okay, I guess that's bad? Should it be zero? Should it just be lower? I appreciated it when he gave me the context I needed to make sense of the data, like when he compared the cuts made to a social welfare program to 1/3 of the cost to build and maintain one military aircraft.

I do appreciate that this exists because there was a time I was looking for more of this information and couldn't find a resource. It's unfortunate that it's a textbook and expensive. A mishmash of other cheaper books cover a lot of the same ground, but having it all in one place is nice.

[Public Scott · Rating 4 out of 5]

Terrific and depressing at the same time. I had the same experience reading this that I had reading People's History of the United States by Howard Zinn... the feeling that "that is how I always suspected things worked, and this is confirmation." My only critique is that, like People's History, the facts become overwhelming after a while and it's almost like reading a really long list of everything that's wrong with our system. However, I'd still highly recommend this work to any iconoclast.

[Brody Seaton · Rating 5 out of 5]

Guess who finally finished a book!?!? Despite the fact that it took me literally 3 months to finish this book it was so unbelievably good.

[Sarah · Rating 4 out of 5]

It made me want to burn everything down to start over.

I’d say it was successful in its goal of educating and reaffirming how unfair things are for those without wealth and power in this country.

It’s also depressing that the edition I listened to from 2010 is just as relevant today as it was then, if not more so. I’d be interested in seeing an updated edition or follow-up for events that have occurred since its release.

[Hungry Rye · Rating 5 out of 5]

I would kill to have this be the text book that every highschool civics class has to read. And every modern day liberal after this election.

[Narmin Isparzade · Rating 4 out of 5]

Depicting the portrait of the corporate US versus citizens, the book is full of examples of when vested interests of big oligopolists dominated over the Congress and public laws. Election system is established in a way through which only wealthy candidates can penetrate, thus ruling out the representation of the interests and needs of the impoverished in the government. For the protection of the overseas business interests, US backed authoritarian states and dictators from time to time. Wars against other states served corporate interests under the disguise of protection of national interests. All the while, media magnats served to be a tool to form public opinion based on the state propaganda, alienating alternative opinion.

Fines and prison terms can be very harsh for petty crimes such as shoplifting, illegal drug use and pickpocketing, meanwhile big corporate criminals go along with dumping toxic chemicals to the environment and water resources, sometimes being imposed to a ridiculously small amount of fine and/or short prison terms. Environmental-friendly public transport has not been developed due to the profit interests of oil companies. Budget of social programs and scientific research is trimmed and trimmed, meanwhile military budget gets generous shares. Interpretation of the constitution and laws for the favour of the wealthy by the judges is not a rare occurrence. Discrimination against women and blacks is still prevalent.

In the light of strong representation of the economic interests of the few, reactionaries argue that civil society and public outcry is not effective. "Democracy for the Few" provides a set of examples to disprove the previous argument, naming evidences when civil society has been effective in pushing for positive environmental, political and economic changes.

US in many ways possesses far more developed economy than many countries in the world; however, this book opens an entirely different vantage point for the readers to observe what invisible struggles are going on behind the glittery economic and political power. It is an eye opener for those who are not aware of the other side of the economic power of the US. It also shows the inordinate similarity of the rule of the opulent segment over the political will in the US and most, if not all, authoritarian states in the world, including mine.

The author refers to a rich collection of evidences and facts, however, I found the context a bit too repetitive. This is the main disadvantage which came on my way due to which I finished the book too late.

[Andrew Pratley · Rating 5 out of 5]

I read this book at University. That was back in 1978. It was a set text for a course I did on American government. Our lecturer was American whose views & very much on the far left. I liked him & really enjoyed the book which put a quite different slant on American Government & Democracy. It exposed the weaknesses & problems inherent in a system that favours the wealthy & well connected much more than it does the poor & even average Americans. It didn't turn me into a leftie but helped to make less accepting of the party line put out by the American Establisment. I would like to get a new revised copy.

[Tom Sulcer · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is a stinging critique of America from a left-leaning analyst which includes a surprising number of smart non-partisan recommendations. Parenti is also a significant non-partisan reformer, although he wanders into traditionally socialist territory when he examines themes like wealth inequality. After decades of Republican rule, he notes that the top 10% of households own 98% of state and local tax-exempt bonds, and when wealth is distorted to this extent, it's difficult for democracy to function effectively. Too few people have too much power. The really rich, he argues, have a "predominant voice in the highest councils of government", and I agree that this distorts democracy. He has a valid point.

I think America shifts between capitalist and socialist orientations every generation or so which serves as a healthy brake on our republic. With the recent election of a Democratic president, we've again shifted left and there's widespread relief that the system will correct itself.

But can it? Parenti's observations click with mine and suggest that America's problems are deeper, systemic, structural. He describes how much congressional activity is secret. There is excessive concentration of power in the executive -- the president has tremendous power to control media coverage and often controls the most information in any policy area, and can act in a way Congress can't. Parenti says that "executive privilege" was never written into the Constitution. He thinks partisan politics is out of control, and has a long list of sensible reforms such as term limits for judges, more subsidized airtime for candidates, public financing for elections, scheduling elections on weekends not just weekdays, caps on election spending, and easier ballot access for third parties. His moderate left-leaning suggestions include making the income tax more progressive.

But I think America's woes are greater than Parenti says, and that a solution won't come from lots of little reforms, a change of presidents, a shift from right to left, a change of parties, amendments to the Constitution, and so forth. I think the political process is broken. The federal system has broken down so that individual states no longer manage their own economies; Washington does, and it does this job badly. Further, people are no longer real citizens who participate in local government; rather, we've become consumers, investors, workers, political zombies who are thoroughly apathetic and powerless.

What I find particularly dangerous is that the nation lacks an adequate strategy to prevent terrorism. We can't prevent terrorism given our current structure. For me, this is proof that America's political process is broken and a clear sign that inaction is more dangerous than action.

Therefore, I think the only solution to fix America is to reform the American political structure. This, in my view, requires a Second Constitutional Convention. I've summoned over 100 of the nation's best thinkers from across the political spectrum to convene in Independence Hall in Philadelphia beginning July 4th, 2009, and I hope they will craft a revised document based on the existing Constitution which (1) prevents crime, tyranny, and foreign terrorism (2) identifies movement in public to thwart terrorism while strenthening privacy (3) restores the federal structure so state governments regain their rightful authority to manage their respective economies (let partisans compete at the state level) (4) redefines citizenship as an active contractual relation between individual and state with specific responsibilites and privileges (5) fixes the architecture of government to permit long-range and intelligent foreign policy (6) restores the checks and balances between branches of government (7) de-politicizes the Supreme Court and (8) restores a healthy democratic process.

I think most people and experts mistake terrorism as only a government and military and police problem. I think the problem of terrorism is bigger -- it's a citizens' problem. We suffer when it happens. So citizens need to prevent it. And as citizens we have wider latitude and authority to act than government officials have, that is, as citizens, we can reform the structure while preserving our rights and freedom while enabling officials to prevent terrorism. But this requires a new understanding of terrorism.

Terrorism, in my view, is "violence against individual rights". Begin with my definition and a solution will follow. Then, there are three types of terrorists -- criminals (neighbors who violate our rights), tyrants (our own government officials who violate our rights) and foreign terrorists (powerful individuals abroad or heads of state.) All three types of terrorism must be prevented, in my view. It's not enough for government by itself to try to fight terrorism, because in trying to fight terrorism, government may become a terrorist towards its own people. It's a multi-faceted problem, larger but solvable, in my view. We can't try to fight one form of terrorism by exacerbating another. But this happens routinely in airports: to prevent airline hijackings (crime) security guards frisk every passenger without cause (a form of tyranny that passengers put up with despite being treated like criminals.)

My book "Common Sense II: How to Prevent the Three Types of Terrorism" (Amazon & Kindle, 184 pages) spells out the logic for a prevention strategy. The essential concept linking an effort to prevent each type of terrorism is the application of light (meaning information, exposure, awareness.) For example, to prevent crime, we must identify all movement in public while strengthening privacy. For this to happen, citizens must agree to such monitoring, and for this to happen, people must become real citizens, not merely apathetic consumers and shoppers which characterize most Americans today. The concept of citizenship is examined (again, a type of light); citizenship should be a contract between individual and state with specific responsibilities and privileges. It's possible to prevent every instance of home-grown terrorism using this method. The rest of my book shows how one can apply the concept of light to exposing the other types. For example, I think the architecture of government requires an overhaul so that America's foreign policy consistently rewards friends and consistently punishes enemies; but today it can't do this because administrations change every eight years, sometimes after only four. I propose a revised architecture based on history and political philosophy.

My strategy will prevent all types of terrorism, including smuggled nuclear bombs. It's brief, rational, non-religious, written by a citizen for citizens, non-technical, non-partisan. Be prepared: there are some controversial ideas (one expert found it "bracing"). But my book can protect America. It's plain logic from one citizen to another. If a Constitutional Convention is impractical politically, then Parenti's suggestions for reform are intelligent and practical.

Parenti's book is an on-target critique of America which, in my view, tends to look at the problem through the viewpoint of a moderate left-leaning reformer, while I think America's woes are so severe that only serious, substantial non-partisan, centrist reform will save us.

[David · Rating 5 out of 5]

Really excellent material. There are a couple unsourced allusions to conspiracies in here that really distract from the forceful arguments that Parenti makes, which are unfortunate. Overall, it’s really excellent stuff. I would have benefited from this instead of my jingoistic American civics courses in high school.

[Lucas Clint Marks Peterson · Rating 4 out of 5]

This should probably be mandatory reading for all high school/college students.

[Owen Marcus · Rating 5 out of 5]

Michael Parenti’s Democracy for the Few is an in-depth materialist analysis of the US Government that is an excellent read for those looking to broaden their understanding of American politics. Parenti provides a deep and novel look at the relationship between economic and political power, US policies and actions, and the use of conspiracies, propaganda, fraud, secrecy, and other methods in US politics within and abroad. He highlights how democracy has been repeatedly violated by corporatist social order, but also how many have continued to fight back and even make gains against the popular forces despite the odds. Democracy for the Few reacts to the mainstream tendency to turn every vice into a virtue by challenging the status quo and turning every perceived virtue into a vice. Parenti boldly argues that electoral struggle is meaningless, that our civil liberties are a charade, that federal programs for the needy are fruitless, that reforms are mostly concessions to the oppressed, and that labor unions are too conservative and complacent with the corporate demands. Democracy for the Few challenges the reader to think critically about the intricacies of American politics and the complex latticework of deception designed to hide the truth. I found it highly engaging and a true eye-opener. His arguments were well put-together and persuasive, with an entire library of sources included in the book. I enjoyed reading Democracy for the Few and I agreed with its core message about the problems of the political situation in the US. I would recommend it to any and all who want to get a perspective on American politics that is unique and seldom taught in schools.

[David]

I decided not to finish reading this book. While most of the author's statements may be true, he refers to the CIA being involved in the JFK assassination, says there are "questions about" 9/11, and other occasional points which made me uncertain which statements I could rely on. The book has lots of footnotes - if you're inclined to try to use the footnotes to help you decide which "facts" are well founded, you might find useful data here.

Even if one accepts the above "conspiracy theories," I would think there was enough other data supporting the general thesis of the book that you would convince more people if you left out these assertions. So, I have less confidence in the author's choices.

[T.R. Locke · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book is so powerful I can only read a few pages a time because it makes me so mad. Written in 1977, it feels like it was written in 2011 about everything we've just gone through. You know it is truth when it lasts this long. Everything from the way capitalism works to favor the rich to the way the Constitution was constructed to protect wealth and stave off the influence of the masses on public policy, to the way the justice system works to perpetuate the control of the powerful over American democracy. If you read one book on the history of America in your life, read this one.

[Amanda · Rating 5 out of 5]

Highly recommend everyone to read this a big eye opener!

[Chase · Rating 4 out of 5]

Democracy For The Few by Michael Parenti is prefaced as being an alternative to traditional narratives told in American textbooks, providing a clearer, more critical view of American politico-economic society in all it's wretchedness and beauty. Parenti could not have made it clearer that his critiques of American institutions are not an attack on the American people, but rather the parasitic ruling class. He also exclaims while plutocracy dominates the throne of power in America, the working masses over the past 100 or so years have toiled, fought, and bled for tangible advances in democracy; the kind of democracy that our politicians today hail as being the "fruits of the founding fathers" (which as we can observe, is far from the truth, and rather the trophy of working people).

Why I appreciate this book is for it's approachability to Americans, working and middle-class, who have been told one narrative their entire lives but are curious or ready for a new one. Parenti, like in his other works such as Blackshirts and Reds: Rational Fascism and the Overthrow of Communism , sets the story straight on the misconceptions surrounding the relationship between socialism and democracy; where most Americans are familiar with socialism being a term analogous with totalitarianism, absolute dictatorships, failed economies, absence of liberty, etc. (the list goes on and on really. You know what I mean I suppose), Parenti through his robust "unveiling" of the American political system and his open suggestion to an alternative society, redefines what socialism really is and what it means/has meant to billions of people across the globe ever since the 1917 Bolshevik Revolution.

[Art · Rating 4 out of 5]

Parenti reaalsuses kirjutab väga hästi välja oma ideed lugejale. See peaks olema ausalt ilmne kui vaadata tema kõnesid, see võime, mis tal on kaasata publikut oma juttu on hämmastav. See raamat põhiliselt räägib ainult Ameerika politilisest süsteemist, mis vahel tegi raskeks samastuda ja leida huvi selles raamatus, aga Parenti seostab kõik need teemad päris hästi globaalsete ja universaalsete probleemidega. Mulle eriti meeldis selle raamatu lõpp. Erinevalt ülejäänud ramatust on lõpp kirjutatud väga positiivselt ja lootust tekitavalt. See tõeliselt paneb tahtma võidelda parema tuleviku poole, isegi kui meie praegune olukord näeb lootusetu välja ja pikaajalised positiivsed mutuused meie poliitmajandusliku süsteemi all on võimatud. Hoolimata sellest kui küüniline Parenti võib näha tavalisele sotsile on ta lõppude lõpuks lihtsalt realist ja pragmaatik, ning ta seletab selgelt, miks reform pole võimalik ja kui perses meie tegelik olukord kapitalismi all tõesti on. Isegi kui sa inimesena ei nõustu kõigega, mida ta ütleb, siis ma arvan, et kõik kes loevad saavad aru mida ta ütleb ja miks ta jõuab nende järeldusteni.

[Michelle Mcnally · Rating 5 out of 5]

The truth can be refreshing, satisfying, shocking, and even depressing. This volume is essential for an honest assessment of our political life as Americans. It deserves our attention and critical analysis and the blueprint of suggestions which he concludes with are worthy of serious consideration. For the skeptical, refer to the copious citations; Parenti himself encourages his readers and audiences (during his speeches), to check the evidence. This is a man focused on reality, not profit, and that is why many readers will easily relate to his well researched and concise discourse.

[Roberto Yoed · Rating 4 out of 5]

Second book I've read from Parenti: his prose got better but his exposition way slower; multiple facts are repeated all over this work (easily could've been 150 pages and still be as good as it is).

That said, this book shines because of how it treats USA's history, it's political structure and it's fanatism of capitalism.

In a personal level, this book is really important because it details how some Federal Institutions work, it gives some examples of repressions to workers/communists/students and overall shows how the logic of capital is rooted both in the infra and suprastructure.

[Sam · Rating 5 out of 5]

Michael Parenti does so well explaining and expanding upon the horrible, intentional parts of our governmental system that do not conduce democracy but rather a sinister corporate oligarchy. The reasoning leads to the only conclusion - that reforms and incremental change within the system have been tried and have been suppressed throughout the nations history… and this was in the 1970s… pain.

[Che · Rating 4 out of 5]

I read it cover to cover but it's really more of a chapter by chapter kind of read. A reference book almost, in my opinion. I suppose if someone were newly "awakened" and disenfranchised by the US it would be more of a page turner. As with most Parenti it's a little sassy but densely packed with sourced facts and statistics. worth reading even if it's dated.

[Griffin Sherry · Rating 4 out of 5]

Imo not Parenti’s most powerful or perhaps engaging text that I’ve read, but certainly useful in its providing of a critical perspective and analysis of the origins, functions, and structures of basically every institution and section of the US political system. I read the third edition (so 45 years old at time of reading) and thus likely slightly outdated, but stands for itself regardless.

[Jc · Rating 4 out of 5]

I didn’t realize this was an actual textbook.

Still, it’s classic Parenti - historical, critical, straightforward, and passionate. If taught in a high school or college course, students would have a much firmer understanding of democracy, government, capitalism, and where they fit into it all.

[Luís Garcia · Rating 5 out of 5]

SUPERB!
10 stars.

(read in Jomtien, Thailand)

[Pushon Bhattacharya · Rating 4 out of 5]

An information-packed treasure-trove of dirt on the pathetic 'democracy' of the United States.

[Jesse Dilport · Rating 5 out of 5]

Accurate criticism of American Government.