We Own the Future: Democratic Socialism—American Style

by Kate Aronoff (editor), Peter Dreier (Editor), Michael Kazin (Editor)

A stunningly original and timely collection that makes the case for “socialism, American style”

It’s a strange day when a New York Times conservative columnist is forced to admit that the left is winning, but as David Brooks wrote recently, “the American left is on the cusp of a great victory.” Among Americans under thirty, 43 percent had a favorable view of socialism, while only 32 percent had a favorable view of capitalism. Not since the Great Depression have so many Americans questioned the fundamental tenets of capitalism and expressed openness to a socialist alternative.


We Own the Democratic Socialism—American Style offers a road map to making this alternative a reality, giving readers a practical vision of a future that is more democratic, egalitarian, inclusive, and environmentally sustainable. The book includes a crash course in the history and practice of democratic socialism, a vivid picture of what democratic socialism in America might look like in practice, and compelling proposals for how to get there from the age of Trump and beyond. To quote Franklin Bynum, a socialist elected in 2018 as judge in Harris County, Texas, “It’s about showing we have a vision of a better future, in a time when there’s an overwhelming sense of despondency and most Democrats are doing nothing to dissuade us of that.”


With contributions from some of the nation’s leading political activists and analysts, We Own the Future articulates a clear and uncompromising view from the left—a perfectly timed book that will appeal to a wide audience hungry for change.

Genres: Politics, Nonfiction, Economics, Essays, Social Justice

ebook

First published January 14, 2020

About the author

Kate Aronoff is a staff writer at The New Republic and author of Overheated: How Capitalism Broke the Planet — And How We Fight Back. She is co-author of A Planet To Win: Why We Need a Green New Deal and co-editor of We Own the Future: Democratic Socialism—American Style. Follow her on Twitter @katearonoff.

Reviews

[Amy]

So, this book doesn't even come out for another month but has already attracted trolls. Even the one that supposedly left a "review" just left a comment that proves he has no idea what democratic socialism is, let alone what the book might say. With that in mind, I have preordered the book. If you're thinking about reading this, ignore the star rating.
- December 9, 2019

[Julie]

We Own the Future is well-written, well-organized, and well-timed, tackling democratic socialism from numerous angles to produce an engaging book. Readers familiar with the topic, as well as those motivated by current policy debates to learn more, will find the book informative and interesting.

[Kerry Pickens · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book is a collection of articles on the history of leftist politics in the United States, probably much information that is barely mentioned in US History textbooks.

[Zach Koenig · Rating 4 out of 5]

Identifying as a democratic-socialist in today’s political/cultural environment can be a bit confusing. On one hand, even mentioning the world “socialism” will draw comments like “so you’re a communist?” or “go live in Russia”. But on the other hand, the ideology is more popular now than it has perhaps ever been, what with Senator Bernie Sanders nearly being a DNC-sponsored presidential candidate in 2016 and/or 2020. Some of the core ideals of democratic socialism (universal health care, high taxes on extreme wealth, etc.) have now been adopted by even centrist political candidates. In other words, it is a fertile environment right now in which to at least cogitate over such theories.

In “We Own The Future”, the editors collect essays on numerous political/societal topics all viewed through the prism of socialism. Some of the areas covered here include: racial/economic justice, climate, voting, banking, incarceration, immigration, foreign policy, city infrastructure, health, family structure, education, and even sports & the arts. The author(s) of each essay pontificate over how the above topics could be made better for all involved if not so deeply invested in a capitalistic worldview.

As with any collection of essays, your mileage may vary from one to another. Some authors are clearly in favor of breaking down capitalism altogether, while others are more concerned about working within that system to control “runaway capitalism” and simply reign it in a bit. You will likely agree/disagree with many thoughts expressed in these pages, but the overall effect is to present many different ideas & avenues to mentally chew over.

Because of America’s “Red Scare” and supremely capitalist history, a book like “We Own The Future” still seems slightly subversive even now. But again—only slightly (and that’s progress). Whether 100% viable or not, it is good to see such an open exchange of ideas outside of capitalism. Sometimes, it can be very helpful to realize that capitalism is not the only socio-political system that has worked in the history of world politics. I tend towards the approach of using socialist principles to reel in the worst of capitalism’s inherent faults, but even to get to that point I had to open my mind to such outside ideas. Books like this one really help with that process.

[Stephen Politzer-Ahles · Rating 2 out of 5]

While I agree with most of the ideas in the book (which is not surprising, I'm a socialist), I didn't really find it useful and I'm not sure who it's meant to be for. I feel that the essays in this volume could be grouped into roughly three categories:

1. Preaching to the choir: essays that argue for things that anyone reading this book probably already agrees with. e.g., essays offering reasons why racial justice has to be part of a socialist platform, etc. I suspect that anyone who's been reading e.g. Jacobin for a couple years is not going to find anything new in these.

2. Vague platform pieces: essays that just assert that lots of things are important without explaining/arguing why. Like a political platform, some of them see to just be stating everything we stand for, without arguing why we should stand for them (per the above point, I think most readers of this book are already convinced why we should stand for it) or getting into details about how we can do it. This was probably the biggest chunk of the book, but the most prototypical example of this for me was essay by Flynn et al.

3. Useful and specific pieces: there were a few exceptions that actually gave concrete suggestions and where I actually learned new things. Of course, everyone has different backgrounds, so which essay teaches you new things will vary from reader to reader. For me, the essays by Darrick Hamilton and by Dorothy Roberts were the most enlightening ones; Hamilton had some concrete policy proposals and explained their importance and impact that I hadn't heard before, and Roberts had a compelling argument about the limitations of Medicare for All.

Those are my general criticisms. I would like to close with a few specific nitpicks about a couple of the pieces that are fresh in my mind.

Fiorentini: I have enjoyed some of her videos over the years and I agree with probably 99% of her essay, but ultimately the whole essay gets kind of ruined by the way she shits on certain artists. You can't both argue that art is not elitist and make snide remarks about Toby Keith being rednecky and "bad" art. I feel that an actual socialist proposal for public art would need to support all art—including art we don't like—rather than just supporting less-rednecky art.

Meyerson: His essay argues for the importance of socialists working in the Democratic party and poo-poos third parties, but he ignores any arguments for third parties. For example, he calls the DSA "the only socialist organization to have made an impact on American politics since the 1930s"—but just a few pages before that he touted Seattle's $15 minimum wage as having played an important role in making minimum wage a national issue, and that Seattle policy owes a lot to the work of Socialist Alternative and Kshama Sawant! Anyway, my point is, there may well be a good argument that working within the Democratic party is better than working outside it, but you can't make that argument if you simply ignore any counterarguments. Meyerson piles up several pieces of evidence for why working within the Democratic party is good, but does nothing to address the other side's arguments; I'm not sure I agree with the other side's arguments anyway, but those arguments do exist and need to be responded to. Look, I'm a teacher, and one of the things I have my students learn about is Wolcott & Lynch's "Thinking Performance Patterns", and piling up evidence for your side while ignoring the other side's arguments is the second-lowest level of critical thinking (out of five levels) in their framework.

[Jung · Rating 2 out of 5]

[2.5 stars] An anthology of essays examining American politics, economics, and society through a democratic socialist lens. I picked this book up after an acquaintance’s positive review, hoping to learn more about the application of democratic socialism but ultimately found it lacking. A majority of essays were written by academics and think tank-ers, ironically showing that even in a book about the power of the working class, the editors still failed to center working class voices of color and movement building examples. And because of that, what was supposed to be a book about democratic socialism actually made a strong case for social democracy where organizing is simply a means to a policy change end.

It should be no surprise that Dorothy Roberts’ essay on the limits of Medicare for All for Black communities and especially Black women, pushed forth the type of deep intersectional analysis I was hoping for in every essay. Other essays on “Governing Socialism” and “Democracy, Equality, & the Future of Workers” were also standouts in blending theory and application.

Unfortunately, I wouldn’t recommend this book for those new to learning about democratic socialist theory or ways to apply it in their organizing; surely there are better essays on Truthout and Jacobin, essay collections from publishers like Haymarket and AK Press, and case studies from DSA chapters. I do think some essays would be strong syllabus additions for an undergraduate or graduate sociology or social work policy or macro practice class, where the focus is academic essays on social democracy and the historical conditions that demand it.

Looking back, I should’ve known from the beginning that We Own The Future would frustrate and disappoint me after the opening essay tracing democratic socialist history by two of the white male editors credited Gloria Steinem’s 1960’s and 70’s activism with popularizing intersectionality, an assertion that’s both misogynoirist and temporally inaccurate. So, if you decide to dive in for a cover to cover read, do so at your own risk and don’t say I didn’t warn you.

Goodreads Challenge: 30/72
Popsugar Reading Challenge: a book you picked up because the title caught your attention
Femibooks Nonfiction Reading Challenge: a book about economics

[Russell Fox · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is a fine collection of essays, overwhelmingly addressing themselves to the theoretical and practical issues pertinent to a huge range of democratic socialist policies. The essays I enjoyed the most were Naomi Klein's on climate change, Robert Kuttner's on corporate power, Michelle Chen's on immigration, and Thomas Sugrue's on urbanism. None of them argued anything entirely new, and in some cases the authors were plainly cribbing from work that they'd published before, but that doesn't take away from the good ideas they put forward, even when I disagreed with them (for example, both Sugrue's insistence that DIY/localist-style socialism could never scale up to address macro-level injustices, and Chen's mostly, in my view anyway, empty distinction between "no borders" and "open borders," generated all sorts of questions in my head). A few of the essays took a larger political or historical view of problems and possibilities democratic socialism in America, and I really would have liked to have read more of that. My great interest right now is understanding if democratic socialism, as it has revived in America over the past five years, has really come to contribute anything distinct to the ideological construct itself; Bill Fletcher's and Harold Meyerson's essays probably come closest to doing this, but ultimately that's not their focus, so my highest hopes for the volume were not satisfied. Still, any book that includes Michael Walzer's classic and deeply important essay on socialist theory, "A Day in the Life of a Socialist Citizen," is worth owning, so I'm glad I have this one.

[Ron Peters · Rating 4 out of 5]

People don’t get the governments they say they want. As Aronoff et al. point out, “According to a 2019 Gallup poll, 43 percent of Americans, and 58 percent of Americans between 18 and 34 years old, believe that socialism would be a good thing for the country.” Polls on global happiness show that Scandinavian democratic socialist nations are consistently the happiest on earth.

If you want an idea of what democratic socialism is about, this is a good book to read. It has an American slant, but it can be usefully read by anyone, and it covers a broad swath of social, economic, and democracy-enhancing policy issues. As in any edited collection, some contributions are of greater interest than others.

While few people will agree with every policy recommendation in We Own the Future, I believe most people will agree with most of the policies described. If nothing else, the data and arguments the writers provide are good and will give you much to think about, provided your mind is open to facts and logic.

In Canada, this book should be read by New Democratic Party supporters. Nationally, but especially in places like British Columbia, the NDP is drifting from its roots – e.g., in 2013 the national party voted to remove the word ‘socialism’ from its constitution (https://tinyurl.com/4jneyknd). This month in BC, the NDP ousted a leadership candidate who pushed strongly for traditional NDP values so they could keep a more conservative leader and cabinet in power (https://tinyurl.com/536m68fk).

When you see news about government policies and programs or listen to politicians describe their election platforms, you can dip into this book to garner ideas about what alternatives exist and arguments in their favor. The Notes also link you to other interesting readings.

We need a more equitable world. The goals of democratic socialism are ones that, I think, describe the government most people say they want: “to salvage humanity’s prospects for a livable future from the jaws of the 1 percent; to finally reckon with our nation’s racist past and present; to wrest true democratic control over the institutions that control our world; and to create a society of joy and contentment instead of anxiety and insecurity.”

[Soph Nova · Rating 4 out of 5]

Although this collection didn’t dive as deep into specific questions of strategy as I would have liked, and although I disagree with many of the goals laid out by the social democrats in the collection, there’s still enough history and vision to make this a very compelling introduction to democratic socialist politics that should be in conversation with everything else floating around at the Marxism 101 level in DSA and other organizational political education work today.

“Radical politics radically increases the amount and intensity of political participation, but it does not (and probably ought not) break through the limits imposed on republican virtue by the inevitable pluralism of commitments, the terrible shortage of time, and the day-to-day hedonism of ordinary men and women.”

[Peter Z. · Rating 1 out of 5]

Someone who reads this book could use it instead of toilet paper. That would save money to help pay for all the taxes socialists are going to raise so they can have everything you already paid be given away free to someone else.

[David Selsby · Rating 3 out of 5]

I’m going to keep with my policy of reviewing books on Goodreads without physically looking back at the book in question. I think this is important because it shows what I actually remember of the book and more important how the book has stayed with me as months and years pass. This book hasn’t stayed with me. In fact, I can’t remember any of the essays individually, which isn’t to say I didn’t enjoy them when I read them just that I can’t remember them now. What I do remember is the editor of the anthology (“We Own the Future” is an anthology of essays) taking Bhaskar Sunkara (the publisher of Jacobin) to task for Sunkara’s essay in The Guardian about the problematic nature of voting for Biden. Sunkara wasn’t particularly strident (telling people they shouldn’t vote for Biden or shaming them not to) but rather problematizing what liberals present as a no-brainer vote. The editor of “We Own” wrote a response that was published in The Nation presenting it as a no-brainer and trying to shame Sunkara and the “New New Left” that would even consider not voting for Biden.

The editor’s response was notable for an important reason. If the “New New Left” (as the editor called them) has any chance of creating a mass working-class coalition that could bring to fruition universal, redistributive programs then the 21st century iteration doesn’t have as many lessons to learn from the “Old New Left” as the signatories of that open believe. From what I’ve learned there were only a few times when the New Left tried to forge allegiances with organized labor or the working class in general. My understanding of the dynamic is that the New Left reacted against the anti-communism manifested in institutional organized labor; this combined with the New Left’s cultural politics (radical identitarian dispositition) and support of international liberatory movements (usually Marxist or Maoist adjacent) accelerated the New Left’s posture away from electoral, broad-based, power politics towards a cultural, aesthetic and performative politics. The advice the editor should have given Sunkara was not to adopt the accommodationist posture the New Left did in ‘68 and vote for Humphrey (the Biden in the analogy) but that the New New Left should be careful not to get side-tracked from creating a broad-based coalition that leads with class-centered material interests and not get bogged down with pseudo-revolutionary, performative politics.

I’m glad I read this book even though I can’t remember the essays. I picked it up the same day at my local bookstore that I bought Nathan J. Robinson “Why You Should be a Socialist.” I was excited to go home with two books about socialism. I just cheated and looked at the table of contents before I finished this review. And I don’t like what I saw. I’ve read too much Adolph Reed Jr., Cedric Johnson, and Walter Benn Michaels and listened to too much Aimee Terese and Benjamin Studebaker and What’s Left, and I’ve read Michael Tracey and Angela Nagle’s excellent post-mortem in American Affairs of the Bernie campaign. There needs to be a re-thinking moving forward about how to bring materialist economic arguments to red states. The institutional power of the DNC and many of the leading lights of the Democratic Party are an impediment to that project. It’s interesting that since Bernie’s campaign ended Bernie Sanders has virtually disappeared from political discourse. He is “just” a senator from Vermont. In other words he isn’t nor was he ever a power broker in the Democratic Party. And this was his strength as a presidential candidate--someone who was seen as outside the clutches of the two-party, corporate duopoly. Bernie’s mist-like receding to the back bench of the Senate since March highlights how much he was right when he said it wasn’t about him but about “us.” The extraordinary passion he ignited (200 million dollars in contributions) showed that millions of American were crying out for something different than the neo-liberal project both parties have had on tap for forty years. Bernie offered a platform that emphasized universal, progressive programs. He also sparked and then rode a wave of class analysis politics that hasn’t been seen in the US for decades. The fact he wasn’t a powerful senator and didn’t have a litany of neo-liberal, anti-worker, pro-war votes on his record was to his credit, not a sign of ineffectiveness in office. His votes and conduct in office--the things he did fight for, the votes he did make--spoke of a man who had principles and commitments that went back to his time as mayor of Burlington, Vermont in the early eighties.

I recommend this book if you are interested in getting an understanding of where socialism connects with racial and social justice movements and intersectionality in general. It can’t hurt to read it, and you’ll have an understanding of the current political landscape and how “socialist” movements operate. I put that in scare quotes because there is a brand of socialism (Jacobin and Current Affairs when they’re not at their best) that lean into identitarian politics and hashtag activism to a degree that negates a materialist, class analysis’s attractiveness to a broad, interracial (read white workers too), working class coalition.

[celestine · Rating 3 out of 5]

A merely decent collection of essays focused on policy prescriptions of a social democratic tendency. I would argue that in this stage of hellworld these ideas are not enough, but they are nevertheless things that should all be implemented barring a genuine people’s revolution. A big problem of the book is that you can tell, essay to essay, that some of the authors are merely radical liberals, some social democrats, some socialists. It’s ideologically swampy. For the godforsaken American people that probably does not matter much.

[neah · Rating 2 out of 5]

Good “socialism 101” type book. Besides that, not super engaging & a little too focused on electoralism. I love that it’s written by DSA members!

[Claire Binkley · Rating 5 out of 5]

Some of the articles in here: "A Three-legged Stool For Justice"
"Defending and Improving Public Education"
"What About a Well-fed Artist?"

[Robert Lewis · Rating 1 out of 5]

I'm not a socialist. Not even close. However, I'm the kind of person who likes to read about what other people think. I like to study the arguments in favor of political positions other than my own. Sometimes I can be convinced. Other times, I relish the opportunity to sharpen my own arguments through some friendly intellectual sparring. I read this book in the hopes that it would provide me with such an opportunity. After all, I'm not going to sit here and claim there are no good arguments in favor of socialism. I happen to disagree with them--often vehemently--but I've heard arguments that at least can't be immediately dismissed out of hand. Unfortunately, none of them are in this book.

Probably the first thing you'll notice is that nothing contained in this book could be considered serious scholarship. Arguments are often made without any supporting evidence and in the rare instance when one of the authors does cite either statistics or history, it has been so cherry-picked and misinterpreted as to be completely useless. Almost to a person, the authors seem more interested in reducing opposing viewpoints to straw-man arguments than in actually convincing the reader of anything. Conservatives (and libertarians, centrists, and other non-socialists) are indeed referenced from time to time, but I don't know a single person belonging to any of those categories who would recognize his or her own arguments or positions in the word salad presented by this book's essayists.

Perhaps even worse, there's barely a coherent thought presented anywhere within the book's text, and certainly no original ones. I'm not going to say there's not a single word with which I can agree. While I certainly don't agree with much of anything in here, I suppose even a stopped watch is right twice per day. However, what I can say unequivocally is that in the entire text of the book I didn't encounter a single argument that struck me as original scholarship. The vast majority of it reads like the late-night Facebook musings of my left-leaning friends. But while my friends' off the cuff ramblings are at least entertaining, this book is all but unreadable because it takes the same level of unstudied brain dropping and pretends that it's serious scholarship. It's not.

When I picked this book up, I had hoped to be able to recommend it even to my fellow non-socialists as a good way to learn about what "the other side" is thinking. Alas, all you'll get here is tired old arguments that you've already seen and debunked years ago. The only update seems to have been the inclusion of some of the names of current players in American politics. I award one star only because lower ratings aren't possible.

(Note: per site policy I must declare that I received a free copy of this book for purposes of review.)

[Mason Wyss · Rating 3 out of 5]

We Own The Future is a book that seems temporally specific to the wake of the Bernie 2020 campaign. It is basically a very well articulated set of policy proposals for a democratic socialist coalition to pass through the US Congress and municipalities. Unfortunately, Bernie was not elected and the likelihood of these reforms being enacted seems slim. Though, we could use these proposals for an outline of a campaign platform, or if a democratic socialist caucus does gain some power in the US, then we could look back at these proposals. This book was not terribly interesting to me and parts of it assumed democratic socialist governance in the US, something that is remote.

However, the afterword is well written and very interesting. I’m glad I finished this book solely because it means that I read that essay. It asks some questions that it leaves unanswered, such as the role of activists in the movement that only participate infrequently. And the essay is muddied by the conflation of citizenship in a socialist society and participation in a socialist movement, but overall it presents a good critique and the beginnings of a solution to lack of participation in socialist self-governance. What’s left less clear is how this problem is solved in currently existing socialist movements to overthrow capitalism. A democratic society can reproduce itself with only partial participation, but reproduction is wholly different from revolution. This is a discussion I find highly interesting, even if the author has no clear solutions.

Overall, though, the book is relatively uninteresting.

[Taylor M · Rating 5 out of 5]

I found this book extremely insightful. I love how it goes into almost every facet of the American life and then describes how socialism would work. I really appreciated how much history was included throughout the essays, I never knew socialism had such a complex history in this country! I especially love how other countries were referenced, but the solutions were American oriented. I also loved how almost every essay had solutions proposed! So yes I really loved this book. As someone who is fairly new to democratic socialism, I found it revealing and inspiring on how simple of a concept it really is. Things I never thought as “socialist” — health care and housing for all, elimination of racism and sexism, public transportation, government jobs, voting rights — are a main proponent of this ideology. Socialism isn’t scary, it isn’t unrealistic. It’s about providing people with what they need and the rights they deserve. While some ideas I do find a bit utopian (eg. abolition, open borders), I agree with the sentiment and believe *everything* with get better when we put people first. The U.S. government needs to start serving US, the people. Not only the wealthiest, not for-profit, not the GPD. This is a very dense book with some amazing explanations, reasons, and solutions. I hope people will stop politicizing and polarizing issues, and work towards these ideas of a society made for all.

[Rob · Rating 4 out of 5]

A very good primer on the policy positions of the DSA, and one that has convinced me that socialism (in some form) and democracy are a good pairing. The essays are diverse in scope and subject (and readability, though most are solid), leading to an overall sense that while there may be discrete policies that could be enacted to advance DSA values, the writers share a refreshingly holistic sense of the changes that need to be made.

Whether the U.S. is ready for these is another question, not really addressed, and it's may be beside the point--the policies advocated in these essays could end certain types of bureaucratic and institutional hypocrisy and racism that have been shrugged off as unalterable during my entire life. One hopes their specificity and indicated values might help break down the boogeyman label of "socialism" as a scare tactic in our politics, though I'm afraid that's a long hard road.

PS: possibly the best essay is by Francesca Fiorentini, writing about the situation of the arts and cultural workers in the U.S., of which she says, "What we're left with is what I call 'Coors Light Sharia,' a cultural handmaid's tale that looks a lot like the 2017 presidential inauguration, in which country singer Toby Keith sang his hit 'Beer for My Horses.' Cringe." No doubt at all where she stands.

[Ed Barton · Rating 4 out of 5]

A Conservative's Viewpoint. I've run for state level office as a GOP candidate, and won locally. My review isn't an endorsement of the policies in the book - I read it and haven't moved off my positions too far. It is, however, a reflection of a generally well written anthology of essays discussing the positions of the DSA on issues ranging from labor to sports. Because it is a collection, some essays are better written and better researched and supported than others. Reading the book will provide you with a good overview of the positions as well as some prescriptions as to how to address policy concerns. I think even some conservative thinkers might find small plots of common ground. The authors noted that the failed Goldwater campaign in 1964 set up the 80's and 90's. The failed Sanders campaigns may very well be setting the stage for a socialist surge in the coming decades. History has a tendency to operate in patterns, and it would do you well to read the book and understand the positions. You'll learn something, and regardless of your political or policy views, that will serve you well.

[Lucas Miller · Rating 4 out of 5]

Really enjoyed this. Purchased it with the intention of making it one of several optional summer reading books for high schoolers, might be to blunt for that, for now, but still think this is a very helpful anthology that tries to grapple with the multifaceted-ness of the left in America in 2020.

It takes a generous and ecumenical approach to defining Demsoc ideas and identity that feels very based in Dissent's history. I was particularly struck by the first essay on the history of American socialism co-authored by Michael Kazin, and the "Toward a Third Reconstruction Essay" that immediately followed it. The inclusion of a 1968 Michael Walzer essay is fitting and really seems to tie things up.

I'm new to all of this, and still learning all the time. This is a book that is really geared towards me. My more experienced and Sectarian friends will probably roll their eyes at it, but in a well meaning way.

[Tisya · Rating 4 out of 5]

It was really interesting to read this, published in 2020 before the primary ended and before COVID, and remember what seemed possible back then. I feel like our horizons have both contracted and expanded over the past few years, foreclosing some possibilities (the presidency) and revealing others (abolition, Palestine). Still a good read: a comprehensive outlook on what needs to change and more importantly, a positive vision of what all of this would look like in a better world. An excellent variety of writers in this collection with valuable perspectives, although interestingly not all of them identify as democratic socialists (hello to some of my colleagues, who were featured in this book).

[Jim · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is, in part, a “what-if” book. Its collected essays ask serious questions, like the one posed by Kaneila Ing, a member of the Hawaii House of Representatives: “What dreams would you pursue if all your basic needs were met?” Or another from essayist David Zirin: “What would life be like if people - all people - had the time, energy and mental space to devote to shaping our world?” But, mainly, it’s a “how-to” book. It encourages us to go beyond political labels (and our own biases) to begin addressing the root causes of many of the problems we face as a country.

[Ryan O'Malley · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book is a great overview of a lot of aspects of Democratic Socialism. The essays are brief introductions. If that is what you are looking for you’ll like this book. I felt I knew a lot of what this book talked about (I really don’t mean this as a brag haha). I really enjoyed the overview of socialism history in the US.

[Rachelle · Rating 3 out of 5]

We Own the Future... a guide to policies and changes needed for American society to accept Democratic Socialism. Brief history of where Socialism worked and didn't work in world history and focused mostly on suggestions on updating policy that eligible working class voters desire. Calls attention to voting inequality and the top 1% of earners.

[Marnie · Rating 5 out of 5]

good book bro patronizing makes sense

[Alex Powell · Rating 5 out of 5]

An effective entry point for those curious about the DSA and what a Dem Soc future would resemble in America. Brimming with hard truths but abundant in serving up hope. An absolutely necessary read.

[James Myers · Rating 4 out of 5]

We Own the Future: Democratic Socialism--American Style was great for giving a broad understanding of socialism's history in the US and possibilities for moving forward twoards a more socialist society. While I didn't agree with every strategy, each came with a well-researched plan.

[Grant · Rating 5 out of 5]

By having many authors cover each topic in their area of profession, ‘We own the future’ manages to grasp the realities of where real power lies and how to change it, without drifting into broad ideological rhetoric normally spouted on twitter that in a perfect world would be fantastic but is impossible to put into practice.

[Roxy]

Yea, no...I'll pass.