What do you think?
Rate this book
In Defense of Elitism: Why I'm Better Than You and You're Better Than Someone Who Didn't Buy This Book
The night Donald Trump won the presidency, our author Joel Stein, Thurber Prize finalist and former staff writer for Time Magazine, instantly knew why. The main reason wasn't economic anxiety or racism. It was that he was anti-elitist. Hillary Clinton represented Wall Street, academics, policy papers, Davos, international treaties and the people who think they're better than you. People like Joel Stein. Trump represented something far more appealing, which was beating up people like Joel Stein.
In a full-throated defense of academia, the mainstream press, medium-rare steak, and civility, Joel Stein fights against populism. He fears a new tribal elite is coming to replace him, one that will fend off expertise of all kinds and send the country hurtling backward to a time of wars, economic stagnation and the well-done steaks doused with ketchup that Trump eats.
To find out how this shift happened and what can be done, Stein spends a week in Roberts County, Texas, which had the highest percentage of Trump voters in the country. He goes to the home of Trump-loving Dilbert cartoonist Scott Adams; meets people who create fake news; and finds the new elitist organizations merging both right and left to fight the populists. All the while using the biggest words he knows.
In a full-throated defense of academia, the mainstream press, medium-rare steak, and civility, Joel Stein fights against populism. He fears a new tribal elite is coming to replace him, one that will fend off expertise of all kinds and send the country hurtling backward to a time of wars, economic stagnation and the well-done steaks doused with ketchup that Trump eats.
To find out how this shift happened and what can be done, Stein spends a week in Roberts County, Texas, which had the highest percentage of Trump voters in the country. He goes to the home of Trump-loving Dilbert cartoonist Scott Adams; meets people who create fake news; and finds the new elitist organizations merging both right and left to fight the populists. All the while using the biggest words he knows.
Audiobook
First published January 1, 2019
216 people are currently reading
2748 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 242 reviews
October 14, 2019
I'm not sure how well I'd get along with most anyone in this book, the author included. Most of them seem all right enough though, despite some big disagreements.
My biggest problem with the book is the idea that populism = Donald Trump and going with your gut, and that elitism = treasuring facts and trusting experts. There is an absurd amount of gray in between those two (in my opinion, contrived) absolutes. I have no desire to live in a small racist town, yet the idea of a security company hired to patrol my neighborhood also disgusts me. I hold things like reading and being open to new ideas in high regard, and I'd also be perfectly fine making more money with no power whatsoever attached to it. So which faux camp do I fall into? Neither of course.
Not to mention the fact that Donald Trump ran as a populist (as in one who wants to improve the lives of the working person) on the surface but isn't actually a populist of any kind if you’re not using the term as an automatic pejorative. He's also certainly a member of the elite. This throws the dichotomy off kilter from the word go. Stein tries to smooth over this contradiction by delineating between actual elites and "boat elites", with highly arguable success. I'm sorry if I don't differentiate between two groups of people who both have tons of money and advantages that most of us don't. He mentions that being elite isn't necessarily about money, citing a certain elite conference-attending professor as an example. Sure, there's an exception to every rule, but we all know it's mostly about money and advantages.
I think Stein is a funny, honest writer for the most part. The jokes seemed really strained a lot of the time but I enjoyed the easy, often self-reflecting prose. I also think he nailed what people on the left side of the aisle have to do if we're going to convince anyone to cross over (hint: stop being a dick to people that disagree with you). My biggest problem, as describe above, is the premise. To me it just starts the conversation off on the wrong foot and angles it in the wrong direction for the duration.
PS: The advanced reader had quite a few minor errors, but I assume they've been shored up for the final release.
My biggest problem with the book is the idea that populism = Donald Trump and going with your gut, and that elitism = treasuring facts and trusting experts. There is an absurd amount of gray in between those two (in my opinion, contrived) absolutes. I have no desire to live in a small racist town, yet the idea of a security company hired to patrol my neighborhood also disgusts me. I hold things like reading and being open to new ideas in high regard, and I'd also be perfectly fine making more money with no power whatsoever attached to it. So which faux camp do I fall into? Neither of course.
Not to mention the fact that Donald Trump ran as a populist (as in one who wants to improve the lives of the working person) on the surface but isn't actually a populist of any kind if you’re not using the term as an automatic pejorative. He's also certainly a member of the elite. This throws the dichotomy off kilter from the word go. Stein tries to smooth over this contradiction by delineating between actual elites and "boat elites", with highly arguable success. I'm sorry if I don't differentiate between two groups of people who both have tons of money and advantages that most of us don't. He mentions that being elite isn't necessarily about money, citing a certain elite conference-attending professor as an example. Sure, there's an exception to every rule, but we all know it's mostly about money and advantages.
I think Stein is a funny, honest writer for the most part. The jokes seemed really strained a lot of the time but I enjoyed the easy, often self-reflecting prose. I also think he nailed what people on the left side of the aisle have to do if we're going to convince anyone to cross over (hint: stop being a dick to people that disagree with you). My biggest problem, as describe above, is the premise. To me it just starts the conversation off on the wrong foot and angles it in the wrong direction for the duration.
PS: The advanced reader had quite a few minor errors, but I assume they've been shored up for the final release.
December 17, 2024
For a self-claimed elite, Joel Stein lacks insight or even a good acerbic wit. He's like the Jimmy Fallon of humor: I grin slightly out of politeness but won't remember anything tomorrow. Or maybe Stein is like a Subway sandwich. Will I eat a Subway sandwich? Sure. Do I ever desire a Subway sandwich? Not really. Is a Subway sandwich someone I would go to for important critiques of American political discourse? Definitely not. Is there a Subway restaurant on the Stanford University campus, which is the alma mater of Joel Stein in case you missed it the three thousand times he mentions it? Yes. The parallels are uncanny.
October 17, 2019
Twenty-nineteen America: some of the country wonders what the hell happened, and how the hell we got to this point. Others wonder what took so damn long. ‘The real struggle for America is not between Democrats and Republicans, but between the mainstream American… populists and the ruling political elites,’ argues humorist and journalist Joel Stein in his new book, In Defense of Elitism: Why I’m Better Than You and You’re Better Than Someone Who Didn’t Buy This Book. It is a smart, incisive, and very funny collection of Stein’s adventures and revelations as he attempts to bridge the gap between the country’s divided parties while shedding light on the values that fuels each side.
Stein defines elites as people who think, and populists as people who believe. He labels himself an elitist based on his Ivy-league education, his well-known and oft-influential community members, and his privileged lifestyle. But he does a fine job of connecting with his audience by using a combination of self-deprecating humor and a Stephen Colbert-like outsized persona that both mocks and teaches about this social divide.
The first section of the book details Stein’s week-long trip to Miami, Texas where 95% of the county voted for Trump. His ‘goal’ was to convert the residents away from their non-educated, uninformed, and potentially racist line of thinking towards a more elitist mindset. (I do not think Stein truly believes this statement, but rather it is part of the puffed-up elitist character he personifies for the sake of argument.) Although there are some regressive values about the deep south that are witnessed first-hand, he discovers that the locals are more trusting, considerate, and connect with each other on a more personal level than Stein’s elitist suburban neighbors back in Hollywood Hills, California.
While the many jokes and witticisms on each page made the reading experience fun, it was more valuable to experience America through the lens of different communities that subvert the various stereotypes to which they’ve been portrayed. It is apparent that many deep-seated problems exist within the populist and elitist mindsets, and Stein tackles some of these issues by exposing himself to some of the more extreme situations found on each side. He visits Dilbert cartoonist Scott Adams who argues that the power of his own beliefs is more valuable than the knowledge gained by actual experts in their professional field. He shares several conversations he’s had with Tucker Carlson, a conservative elitist who has a history of hypocritical and controversial opinions, but also offers views on why the populist movement has nearly deified Trump, regardless of Trump’s countless transgressions. We spend time in elitist conferences surrounded by headstrong company executives who believe they have the power to change the world. We also sit down for lunch with amiable southern Christians who try to convince Stein to leave Judaism and find Jesus.
By the end of the book, the focus of the writing is more analytical than anecdotal, presenting how populism and elitism have evolved over the centuries, and what their impact is today. But the clear, straightforward prose and rampant humor ensures that the book never veers too far from the beaten path. It is a wise move to prevent the non-elitists among us from having our uneducated minds overloaded with too many fancy words. Overall, Stein’s first-hand experiences combined with his sly humor and journalistic eye for detail elevates this book into an exceptional read. Whether or not you agree with Stein’s methodology or viewpoints, there is value in its well-researched information that can prepare you for the next family dinner debate. And isn’t that why we read books like this in the first place?
Stein defines elites as people who think, and populists as people who believe. He labels himself an elitist based on his Ivy-league education, his well-known and oft-influential community members, and his privileged lifestyle. But he does a fine job of connecting with his audience by using a combination of self-deprecating humor and a Stephen Colbert-like outsized persona that both mocks and teaches about this social divide.
The first section of the book details Stein’s week-long trip to Miami, Texas where 95% of the county voted for Trump. His ‘goal’ was to convert the residents away from their non-educated, uninformed, and potentially racist line of thinking towards a more elitist mindset. (I do not think Stein truly believes this statement, but rather it is part of the puffed-up elitist character he personifies for the sake of argument.) Although there are some regressive values about the deep south that are witnessed first-hand, he discovers that the locals are more trusting, considerate, and connect with each other on a more personal level than Stein’s elitist suburban neighbors back in Hollywood Hills, California.
While the many jokes and witticisms on each page made the reading experience fun, it was more valuable to experience America through the lens of different communities that subvert the various stereotypes to which they’ve been portrayed. It is apparent that many deep-seated problems exist within the populist and elitist mindsets, and Stein tackles some of these issues by exposing himself to some of the more extreme situations found on each side. He visits Dilbert cartoonist Scott Adams who argues that the power of his own beliefs is more valuable than the knowledge gained by actual experts in their professional field. He shares several conversations he’s had with Tucker Carlson, a conservative elitist who has a history of hypocritical and controversial opinions, but also offers views on why the populist movement has nearly deified Trump, regardless of Trump’s countless transgressions. We spend time in elitist conferences surrounded by headstrong company executives who believe they have the power to change the world. We also sit down for lunch with amiable southern Christians who try to convince Stein to leave Judaism and find Jesus.
By the end of the book, the focus of the writing is more analytical than anecdotal, presenting how populism and elitism have evolved over the centuries, and what their impact is today. But the clear, straightforward prose and rampant humor ensures that the book never veers too far from the beaten path. It is a wise move to prevent the non-elitists among us from having our uneducated minds overloaded with too many fancy words. Overall, Stein’s first-hand experiences combined with his sly humor and journalistic eye for detail elevates this book into an exceptional read. Whether or not you agree with Stein’s methodology or viewpoints, there is value in its well-researched information that can prepare you for the next family dinner debate. And isn’t that why we read books like this in the first place?
November 9, 2019
About a decade ago, I received an email from Joel Stein. It was suspicious as it was from a Yahoo address but he sold himself as "The" Joel Stein so I read on.
The first thing "Joel" did was point out that we overlapped at Stanford (he had done some research). Of course, he was an undergraduate and I was a graduate student so, despite his intention to form a connection, I took it as a sign of his inferiority. You see, graduate students have nothing to do with undergraduate students at Stanford as they only do things like leave bikes around and pay the bills. One year the student government -- trying to reallocate the budget -- realised that graduate students didn't exactly participate in things like voting and had the bright idea to cancel the funding to the graduate student drinks events. That may have been sensible but this was 1992 and it was the first year that voting was online. So a few emails later, the entire graduate student population who had never voted before voted for a ticket that promised to abolish the student government.
One of the things that I learned from this book is that this wiped out the budding political career of Joel Stein and he ended up the humour columnist who contacted me in 2009. He was writing a column about advertising and had determined (via I assume a Google search) that I was the person to check a theory he had for 'facts.' I thought he was contacting me for my expertise but having read the book I now realise that it was the Stanford thing that had done the deal. It turned out his 'facts' were wrong and I told him that. I also asked him to plug my book, Parentonomics, which had just come out. He was enthusiastic but never actually did that.
Onto this book, In Defense of Elitism. It is, put simply, a joy. It is surprisingly deep, actually has facts and statistics in it, and makes a great case. What case is that? That elites are ridiculous but necessary. That is, they are necessarily ridiculous and ridiculously necessary. And he does this by not just asking elites -- which would have been my instinct -- but asking people who used to be elites like Scott Adams as well as non-elites, specifically, the entire township of Miami Texas.
In the end, you have a book that is right for our times. It gets on the central issue facing the world between relying on experience/expertise or not. The "or not" had never really been a serious option for debate but experience tells us, it is up for grabs now.
Joel Stein is like Dave Barry with a point. It is a mix I didn't think possible. More surprisingly, it came from a person who was an undergraduate at Stanford in the 1990s. Something I also didn't think was possible.
The first thing "Joel" did was point out that we overlapped at Stanford (he had done some research). Of course, he was an undergraduate and I was a graduate student so, despite his intention to form a connection, I took it as a sign of his inferiority. You see, graduate students have nothing to do with undergraduate students at Stanford as they only do things like leave bikes around and pay the bills. One year the student government -- trying to reallocate the budget -- realised that graduate students didn't exactly participate in things like voting and had the bright idea to cancel the funding to the graduate student drinks events. That may have been sensible but this was 1992 and it was the first year that voting was online. So a few emails later, the entire graduate student population who had never voted before voted for a ticket that promised to abolish the student government.
One of the things that I learned from this book is that this wiped out the budding political career of Joel Stein and he ended up the humour columnist who contacted me in 2009. He was writing a column about advertising and had determined (via I assume a Google search) that I was the person to check a theory he had for 'facts.' I thought he was contacting me for my expertise but having read the book I now realise that it was the Stanford thing that had done the deal. It turned out his 'facts' were wrong and I told him that. I also asked him to plug my book, Parentonomics, which had just come out. He was enthusiastic but never actually did that.
Onto this book, In Defense of Elitism. It is, put simply, a joy. It is surprisingly deep, actually has facts and statistics in it, and makes a great case. What case is that? That elites are ridiculous but necessary. That is, they are necessarily ridiculous and ridiculously necessary. And he does this by not just asking elites -- which would have been my instinct -- but asking people who used to be elites like Scott Adams as well as non-elites, specifically, the entire township of Miami Texas.
In the end, you have a book that is right for our times. It gets on the central issue facing the world between relying on experience/expertise or not. The "or not" had never really been a serious option for debate but experience tells us, it is up for grabs now.
Joel Stein is like Dave Barry with a point. It is a mix I didn't think possible. More surprisingly, it came from a person who was an undergraduate at Stanford in the 1990s. Something I also didn't think was possible.
December 13, 2019
I've been a big fan of Joel Stein's for decades and will read anything he publishes. I found this book equal parts hilarious and horrifying. I straddle the worlds he analyzes in the book: I grew up in rural Iowa, the daughter of an ultra-conservative Baptist minister, farmer and truck driver, and now I live in a city and identify more with the elite POV. Most of what Stein describes of Miami, Texas, wasn’t a surprise to me, and I appreciate the way he carefully notes the genuine hospitality and kindness he finds, and his understanding of how this way of life, with one cop who knows everyone in town and an entirely white population, makes it hard for them to understand the very real problems that exist outside this bubble. But there are some fairly obvious questions that I don’t see answered. For example, he never seems to ask any of the Miami residents (all but 30 of whom voted for Trump) explicitly why they voted for a man who seems the opposite in nearly every way of their most cherished values: draft dodger, flagrant adulterer, white-collar scion of inherited wealth. Is it only their shared racism and fear of losing power? I wish Stein would have probed more deeply into this. He posits some theories later in the book that make sense (one person describes Trump supporters liking him less for his policies and more as a social disrupter and middle-finger to the elites), but I’d like to have heard the Miami residents answer this for themselves.
In the remaining 2/3 of the book, Stein analyzes his own tribe of liberal elites and then populist elites he calls Boat Elites (exemplified by Tucker Carlson and Scott Adams). Stein is clearly more in his comfort zone with these groups (e.g., he’s known Carlson and Adams for years), and this section is consequently much stronger, with deeper and more nuanced analysis. He understands what questions to ask and what blind spots to poke. I appreciated how he noted that his tribe of liberal elites can be undeniably smug and condescending, and that much of the populist anger is at being ignored by these people running much of the country. He also notes that liberal elites are just as susceptible as the populists they consider ignorant to fake news and following their guts instead of experts (e.g., anti-vaxers who ignore research and medical advice in favor of articles on the Internet).
Ultimately, this book makes an effective case for putting our trust in experts and fighting our tendency toward the Meteorological Fallacy. Yes, experts get things wrong, sometimes disastrously. But they’re still far better equipped to address the overwhelming complexities involved in governing 400 million diverse people than random guy off the street, the way Scott Adams wants. This is a book I think people across the political spectrum should read and discuss.
In the remaining 2/3 of the book, Stein analyzes his own tribe of liberal elites and then populist elites he calls Boat Elites (exemplified by Tucker Carlson and Scott Adams). Stein is clearly more in his comfort zone with these groups (e.g., he’s known Carlson and Adams for years), and this section is consequently much stronger, with deeper and more nuanced analysis. He understands what questions to ask and what blind spots to poke. I appreciated how he noted that his tribe of liberal elites can be undeniably smug and condescending, and that much of the populist anger is at being ignored by these people running much of the country. He also notes that liberal elites are just as susceptible as the populists they consider ignorant to fake news and following their guts instead of experts (e.g., anti-vaxers who ignore research and medical advice in favor of articles on the Internet).
Ultimately, this book makes an effective case for putting our trust in experts and fighting our tendency toward the Meteorological Fallacy. Yes, experts get things wrong, sometimes disastrously. But they’re still far better equipped to address the overwhelming complexities involved in governing 400 million diverse people than random guy off the street, the way Scott Adams wants. This is a book I think people across the political spectrum should read and discuss.
October 28, 2019
Total Waste of Time.
I have read and enjoyed Tom Nichols’ The Death of Expertise. After seeing the Author of this book interviewed, I thought he might be plowing the same field, but one that we need to appreciate as an underlying rationale for the current state of American Culture and Politics.
I was wrong. The whole work is an exercise in cutesy snark and vain attempts at humor unworthy of a semi-literate nine year old. Apologies to nine year olds. They’re funnier than Stein.
The whole book can be summarized in two sentences:
1. Even people in Small Town America can be nice.
2. Avoid smugness.
Sorry for the Spoiler but, when you get your money back after returning the book, you’ll thank me. You would have learned nothing from the experience. Trust me.
I have read and enjoyed Tom Nichols’ The Death of Expertise. After seeing the Author of this book interviewed, I thought he might be plowing the same field, but one that we need to appreciate as an underlying rationale for the current state of American Culture and Politics.
I was wrong. The whole work is an exercise in cutesy snark and vain attempts at humor unworthy of a semi-literate nine year old. Apologies to nine year olds. They’re funnier than Stein.
The whole book can be summarized in two sentences:
1. Even people in Small Town America can be nice.
2. Avoid smugness.
Sorry for the Spoiler but, when you get your money back after returning the book, you’ll thank me. You would have learned nothing from the experience. Trust me.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
April 13, 2020
This book is hilarious, from introduction to acknowledgments. It's droll, and witty, and its best quality is that the author is ruthless (and right) in making fun of himself and people like him (read: you). By the end, he makes a case that's nearly lynch-worthy in today's world: to have empathy for people on both sides of the political spectrum, and LISTEN to them and their concerns and experiences. And yet, he still believes in science, in making decisions based on evidence not feelings, in vaccinating his children, in letting people who have experience and knowledge run the country instead of just whoever seems the most relatable, which is how you choose who to have a sandwich with, not who should be in charge of complicated things you don't understand.
It's an important lesson for our times, but more importantly, it's entertaining as hell and let's be honest, the second is what's going to keep you reading to the last page.
It's an important lesson for our times, but more importantly, it's entertaining as hell and let's be honest, the second is what's going to keep you reading to the last page.
April 6, 2020
After finding out Waco-McLennan County Public Library doesn't have a copy of "Capital" by Karl Marx in circulation, I settled for "The Communist Manifesto." And I saw this book on the same shelf of economic, political, and social commentaries. So I grabbed it, thinking it was a satire. This book isn't satire. Stein is genuine in his smug elitism. I use the word "smug" because that is his self-descriptor. The last page of the book he waxes poetic about tamping down his smugness and trying to listen to the populists and the non-elites, but he admits in the last sentence it might be rather difficult. I don't begrudge Stein his Stanford-education, his large community of in-the-Loopers, his home in the Hollywood Hills, or his syndicated column in Times (even though it doesn't exist anymore), all things that contribute to his smugness. I don't begrudge him because, at least, he's self-aware of his elitist smuggery. Or, he's just an asshole.
I know I sound like I really didn't like this book. I actually enjoyed it. I laughed once. I "hmmmmmed" several times. And I left this book with a better understanding of why people like Joel Stein are so terrifed of Trump supporters. Mainly, I just don't like Joel Stein. His jokes just aren't funny. I did enjoy the fact he interviewed so many people with whom he obviously disagreed. And he doesn't mind telling you, constantly, that he disagrees with them. He is an incredibly condescending person about people who he thinks are uneducated and stupid. I felt like I was reading 300 pages of a rich white guy who is afraid he's going to lose power. Except, for once, this rich white guy is a Democrat.
I realize that I'm not the target demographic for this book. I'm not actually a member of the Intellectual Elite. I have a Bachelor's degree from a small liberal arts college (hardly Ivy League), I have worked primarily service industry jobs (hello, working class!), and I am from Texas (so that probably automatically precludes me from membership in The Loop). I didn't vote for Hillary, but I also didn't vote for Trump. I grew up middle class and am one of those people who have slid into the upper ranks of the working poor. I am not rich enough, educated enough, nor smug enough for entry into Stein's tiny little world of Elites. I am probably one of those people he would term a "far left populist." As I was reading this I couldn't help but think of Phil Och's wonderful song "Love me, I'm a Liberal." Joel Stein is definitely a liberal, except when it interferes with his cushy way of life. He's a liberal in the way that still thinks Martin Luther King, Jr. and Ghandi were the paramounts for non-violence. He doesn't always know what he is talking about, but he votes for the Democratic candidate and pats himself on the back that at least he's not racist like Trump supporters. He even states that it's intellectually lazy to write off Trump supporters as simply "racist." Because it is. But Stein blunders past these moments of clarity back into his little Elitist hole.
I honestly found myself agreeing with him at times. I do think that we need leaders who know what the fuck they're doing. But I don't know if the right way to go is keeping power condensed on the hands of the small Intellectual Elite who, as Stein admits, are so closed ranked that it's nigh impossible to break into The Loop. The reason why Trump voters and those Stein terms "populist" don't like the Elites is precisely because of this attitude he's throwing off in his book. Joel Stein wants me and others like me to step back and allow him and others to continue to try save us. No, thank you.
I know I sound like I really didn't like this book. I actually enjoyed it. I laughed once. I "hmmmmmed" several times. And I left this book with a better understanding of why people like Joel Stein are so terrifed of Trump supporters. Mainly, I just don't like Joel Stein. His jokes just aren't funny. I did enjoy the fact he interviewed so many people with whom he obviously disagreed. And he doesn't mind telling you, constantly, that he disagrees with them. He is an incredibly condescending person about people who he thinks are uneducated and stupid. I felt like I was reading 300 pages of a rich white guy who is afraid he's going to lose power. Except, for once, this rich white guy is a Democrat.
I realize that I'm not the target demographic for this book. I'm not actually a member of the Intellectual Elite. I have a Bachelor's degree from a small liberal arts college (hardly Ivy League), I have worked primarily service industry jobs (hello, working class!), and I am from Texas (so that probably automatically precludes me from membership in The Loop). I didn't vote for Hillary, but I also didn't vote for Trump. I grew up middle class and am one of those people who have slid into the upper ranks of the working poor. I am not rich enough, educated enough, nor smug enough for entry into Stein's tiny little world of Elites. I am probably one of those people he would term a "far left populist." As I was reading this I couldn't help but think of Phil Och's wonderful song "Love me, I'm a Liberal." Joel Stein is definitely a liberal, except when it interferes with his cushy way of life. He's a liberal in the way that still thinks Martin Luther King, Jr. and Ghandi were the paramounts for non-violence. He doesn't always know what he is talking about, but he votes for the Democratic candidate and pats himself on the back that at least he's not racist like Trump supporters. He even states that it's intellectually lazy to write off Trump supporters as simply "racist." Because it is. But Stein blunders past these moments of clarity back into his little Elitist hole.
I honestly found myself agreeing with him at times. I do think that we need leaders who know what the fuck they're doing. But I don't know if the right way to go is keeping power condensed on the hands of the small Intellectual Elite who, as Stein admits, are so closed ranked that it's nigh impossible to break into The Loop. The reason why Trump voters and those Stein terms "populist" don't like the Elites is precisely because of this attitude he's throwing off in his book. Joel Stein wants me and others like me to step back and allow him and others to continue to try save us. No, thank you.
December 2, 2019
I enjoyed this book. I got it from the library so I conclude, per the subheading, I’m not an elite. It was funny and thoughtful. As a Christian I was laughing and intrigued by all of the author’s thoughts about Christianity and the people of Miami, Texas. Some of the ideas and quotes were over my middlebrow head but overall I come away supporting intellectual elites who know what they’re doing being in charge.
July 13, 2020
It’s hard to imagine that you could write a book I would disagree with more. It seems possible this is really really good satire and I just ate the trollbait hook, line, and sinker.
The author essentially creates an ideal of what elitism is. it’s not close to what most would understand elitism to actually be. The he talks about how we need elitism with mediocre examples and generalizations.
The intellectually honest approach when describing a group of people is to acknowledge that you are generalizing in some cases but to attempt to approximate the general trades of that group. This author tosses “everything positive about the world” into a bucket and calls it elitism. Yes people with years of education become engineers and programmers and created most of the cool stuff you see Around you. They also created weapons of mass destruction, huge disparities in wealth, a generally fucked criminal justice system, and much more.
It’s not a strawman or a steel man argument because the author doesn’t actually criticize it, he essentially creates a false appeal to something that doesn’t exist and lauds the virtues of that with bad research and shotty conclusions.
It would be like me making an argument that soccer is the best sport. How I love it when they pick up the ball and tackle each other. The free concessions when you go to a game are so wonderful and thoughtful. And don’t you love the big halftime show with the beautiful cheerleader’s and the rock music with the giant trucks doing jumps over flamethrowers.
I imagine the reaction from most reasonable people would be, “Sure Rick, that sounds wonderful, but what the fuck are you talking about?“ And that’s basically how I feel about this book.
The author essentially creates an ideal of what elitism is. it’s not close to what most would understand elitism to actually be. The he talks about how we need elitism with mediocre examples and generalizations.
The intellectually honest approach when describing a group of people is to acknowledge that you are generalizing in some cases but to attempt to approximate the general trades of that group. This author tosses “everything positive about the world” into a bucket and calls it elitism. Yes people with years of education become engineers and programmers and created most of the cool stuff you see Around you. They also created weapons of mass destruction, huge disparities in wealth, a generally fucked criminal justice system, and much more.
It’s not a strawman or a steel man argument because the author doesn’t actually criticize it, he essentially creates a false appeal to something that doesn’t exist and lauds the virtues of that with bad research and shotty conclusions.
It would be like me making an argument that soccer is the best sport. How I love it when they pick up the ball and tackle each other. The free concessions when you go to a game are so wonderful and thoughtful. And don’t you love the big halftime show with the beautiful cheerleader’s and the rock music with the giant trucks doing jumps over flamethrowers.
I imagine the reaction from most reasonable people would be, “Sure Rick, that sounds wonderful, but what the fuck are you talking about?“ And that’s basically how I feel about this book.
December 21, 2019
The high rating is for the laughs. I LOL'd throughout the entire book and more than a few times needed to take a moment to get myself together. Hilarity always gets high praise from me and in that regard, it's five-star stuff.
Underlying the humor are some really good points, and some are made poignantly within the context of his meetings with various dullards (albeit, very hospitable ones).
However, I took some issue with some of where he went after some of the good points were made. For example, he makes the (to many of us, obvious) point that we need experts and should defer to them more often than slag them for thinking they are superior to us, but cites Bill Kristol as an example of a guy that should still be part of the elites making big decisions. There is something to the idea that some of the elite need to be replaced (with new elite...not idiots you could have a beer with). Bill Kristol is definitely someone who is worthy of being on the cover of Tucker Carlson's ship of fools book. Anyone that has steered a ship into the Iraq War and other disastrous decisions should lose their elite card...Bill's bloody hands should be away from anything impacting the rest of us. To me, the Meterologist Fallacy has an exception where you get no pass when what you were wrong about cost lives and threw an entire region into further chaos.
I'm not sure this moves the political ball forward very much, but it was nice to laugh about all the BS for a bit and that's no small thing.
Underlying the humor are some really good points, and some are made poignantly within the context of his meetings with various dullards (albeit, very hospitable ones).
However, I took some issue with some of where he went after some of the good points were made. For example, he makes the (to many of us, obvious) point that we need experts and should defer to them more often than slag them for thinking they are superior to us, but cites Bill Kristol as an example of a guy that should still be part of the elites making big decisions. There is something to the idea that some of the elite need to be replaced (with new elite...not idiots you could have a beer with). Bill Kristol is definitely someone who is worthy of being on the cover of Tucker Carlson's ship of fools book. Anyone that has steered a ship into the Iraq War and other disastrous decisions should lose their elite card...Bill's bloody hands should be away from anything impacting the rest of us. To me, the Meterologist Fallacy has an exception where you get no pass when what you were wrong about cost lives and threw an entire region into further chaos.
I'm not sure this moves the political ball forward very much, but it was nice to laugh about all the BS for a bit and that's no small thing.
November 20, 2019
Not super substantive and I disagree strongly with the thesis that the likes Bill Kristol and other elites like him should team up with elites on the left to make all the decisions. However, this book was laugh out loud funny at parts and I do appreciate that he does make a full-throated defense of the elite. I think it's an important counter to all the people that go out to non-elite places and come back to tell the elite how "real Americans" think and how we should listen to them. No thanks.
The best part of this book is the interview with Scott Adams (dilbert Mens right activist guy)--that guy is the worst.
The best part of this book is the interview with Scott Adams (dilbert Mens right activist guy)--that guy is the worst.
November 17, 2019
I LOVED this book. I listened to it on audio as read by the author which was a great choice. There were many points at which I appreciated hearing the joke delivered as the author intended. It was so interesting to hear about the different politics, socioeconomic subgroups, and other variables that define an elite—not just education or income as I had thought. Stein both defends and takes down elitism and does it all with a sense of humor. I highly recommend this to everyone.
March 11, 2020
I think Joel Stein may have finally gotten it right, but he's likely still wrong. So long as elites continue to maintain that they are better than the rest of us there will be calls for Trump - for which we all likely ought be thankful. There was quite a bit here that was entertaining, and made it worth the listen even if I thought some of his conclusions were a bit off.
July 8, 2021
I thought this was a great read, typical Joel Stein as I remembered him from his Time magazine columns – using humor to expound on the frustrations and insanities of a serious issue, while finding ways to illuminate those issues in a humorous and digestible manner. Very much like Trevor Noah and Jon Stewart before him, he’s biting, satirical, sarcastic, poignant, and argues his case very well, lobbing jokes at everyone’s expense (but no one’s more than his own) in his typical self-deprecating style. (I was also getting a real Jon Ronson vibe with this as he places himself at the center of his “adventure,” journeying to Miami, Texas, to see why 95% of them voted for Trump, thinking than maybe he could convince them that the Elitism so many are deriding is actually necessary.) I thought it was a hysterical read, from the dedication and table of contents right through to the acknowledgements, with so many laugh-out-loud moments I couldn’t even count them if I wanted. Not only does he have a joke per paragraph, but it was the constant sarcasm and self-deprecating voice of every sentence that had me grinning the whole time I was reading.
It’s a very short read – 300 pages with rather large print – but he takes on a surprising number of topics with a rather wide scope. His general focus tackles the pitfalls of following populists and espousing the benefits of following the Elite, and he follows his first 100-page section that details his journey to Miami with a number of other chapters/sections that focus on other people/experiences – interviewing the creator of Dilbert, Tucker Carlson, Bill Kristol, the meeting of Elites at a friend’s dinner party – as well as dropping numerous references to other writers, researchers, studies, polls, quotes, and of course a healthy dose of Trump as he seeks to explain and combat the anti-Elitist attitudes that helped fuel the 2016 election.
But I don’t know how much else to write in this response. There are definitely buttons pushed, criticisms to be had, counterarguments to be made, and bones to be picked; and it’s impossible to get through all of them in something like this, and after seeing how strongly people have reacted to a thought that Dog of the South wasn’t funny or a response to the question “Do you want Gilead to be a real place,” I don’t feel like saying anything that’s going to start a “Comment Section War.” It’s kind of like watching the Daily Show or Bill O’Reilly – with a title like this, and knowing Joel Stein – you kinda know what you’re going to get. That said, I think Stein does a nice job focusing on his thesis while at the same time acknowledging when he has a bias, when he is surprised, when he learns something, admits his own failings, grows to love those he met in Miami, spends the time to talk with Tucker and Scott Adams (even when he doesn’t agree with what they say), and tries to come to some conclusion by the end, even if it feels like a bit of an anti-climactic letdown (Listen? Be humble? Be understanding? Respect one another? I guess to an intelligent individual, these seem like obvious conclusions, but do we all practice them? They might not be shocking conclusions, but to actually realize them and put them into every day practice – that’s the challenge.)
I’ve seen some people here criticize his quotes and sources, but I thought he had a wide variety of supporting information – polls, quotes, sociologists, older studies, founding fathers – and I think it’s important to keep in mind that this is also a short, humorous, satirical writing, not the definitive 600 page sociological study by a professor at Princeton seeking to study populism throughout the years (and along with Stein’s point, would any of the laypeople today actually read that?). I’m also sure that there are some people out there who either won’t read this because of who he is as a former (elitist! mainstream!) Time magazine writer or because of what it’s about (the title alone probably alienates a number of people) or who don’t care for his tone, but it’s really something that anyone can (*and should!*) read. And although this book clearly preaches to the choir, unlike any 20 seconds of listening to Tucker’s show or Laura Ingrahams’s, Stein tries to make his points to all readers without resorting to “You just hate America!” or “They are trying to destroy this country!”, instead keeping it light, trying to go talk to the people who see things differently than he does, and then argues against or for certain things – and he admits that he is smug and people hate it when someone talks to them smugly. I guess that’s the problem sometimes with humor and irony and sarcasm – it can turn people off when they feel like it is at their expense. But I think that Stein’s tone here is intended for humor at the situation, the topic, not maliciously deriding the individuals, and he writes at his own expense as well.
I feel like almost any sentence in the book could be cited as an example of something hysterical or something that could be argued and debated, so I won’t replicate anything here – that’s for each reader to digest and debate. But I loved his explanations of Confirmation Bias and Cognitive Dissonance in explaining how people mistrust experts, predictions, opinions of the elites. I loved his “trademarked” metaphor of the Meteorological Fallacy and how easily people fall back on that: a meteorologist predicts a 60% chance of rain the next day and then over one person’s head somewhere in Middle America is doesn’t rain, so the person says “What an idiot! They don’t know anything!” Or after a running back gets stuffed for a negative one yard loss, a person sitting on the couch screams “Why did the coach call that play? What an idiot!” Looking back in hindsight, maybe the play didn’t work, but are we really more smart than a professional football coach / offensive coordinator with 20 years experience in the league? Predictions aren’t foolproof, and percentages and educated guesses are based on facts but aren’t guaranteed; if the rain cloud blows five miles south, it still rained, it just blew a bit this way or that way. But people use one failing as a way to deride and distrust all experts. (A great section with the creator of Dilbert describing a medical issue with his trembling finger that his doctor missed helps to exemplify this fallacy.) And he has many sentences that put things so perfectly. In one section he writes about how one of his interviewees said with regards to elitists, they don’t feel respected, and you’re not going to be convinced by anyone you don’t feel respects you. Totally true. And despite the jokes and the tone, he respects everyone.
It’s inherently a political book, and people can get fired up with politics. Every sentence provokes a response, but it’s good stuff to think about and respond to. Even if you don’t agree with his assessments of things or want further research elsewhere without the humor, tell me you can’t read this without pissing yourself laughing at his page of fear when discovering a scorpion in his Texas B&B or his reaction to a Bible verse on the wall: “’Be not forgetful to entertain strangers. For some have entertained angels unaware.’ Though I like this line a lot, I don’t understand it. We should only be nice to people because they might have hung out with angels? How great can these people be if angels were sent to spy on them? What kind of idiot has an angel over for dinner and doesn’t notice the wings or halo? What types of entertainment do angels prefer? Should you put on Handel’s Concerto in B-Flat Major for Harp or would that be racist? We hadn’t even started Bible study group and I already had a lot of questions.”
Guess for writing that I wasn't going to say too much I went on to do just that... again....
It’s a very short read – 300 pages with rather large print – but he takes on a surprising number of topics with a rather wide scope. His general focus tackles the pitfalls of following populists and espousing the benefits of following the Elite, and he follows his first 100-page section that details his journey to Miami with a number of other chapters/sections that focus on other people/experiences – interviewing the creator of Dilbert, Tucker Carlson, Bill Kristol, the meeting of Elites at a friend’s dinner party – as well as dropping numerous references to other writers, researchers, studies, polls, quotes, and of course a healthy dose of Trump as he seeks to explain and combat the anti-Elitist attitudes that helped fuel the 2016 election.
But I don’t know how much else to write in this response. There are definitely buttons pushed, criticisms to be had, counterarguments to be made, and bones to be picked; and it’s impossible to get through all of them in something like this, and after seeing how strongly people have reacted to a thought that Dog of the South wasn’t funny or a response to the question “Do you want Gilead to be a real place,” I don’t feel like saying anything that’s going to start a “Comment Section War.” It’s kind of like watching the Daily Show or Bill O’Reilly – with a title like this, and knowing Joel Stein – you kinda know what you’re going to get. That said, I think Stein does a nice job focusing on his thesis while at the same time acknowledging when he has a bias, when he is surprised, when he learns something, admits his own failings, grows to love those he met in Miami, spends the time to talk with Tucker and Scott Adams (even when he doesn’t agree with what they say), and tries to come to some conclusion by the end, even if it feels like a bit of an anti-climactic letdown (Listen? Be humble? Be understanding? Respect one another? I guess to an intelligent individual, these seem like obvious conclusions, but do we all practice them? They might not be shocking conclusions, but to actually realize them and put them into every day practice – that’s the challenge.)
I’ve seen some people here criticize his quotes and sources, but I thought he had a wide variety of supporting information – polls, quotes, sociologists, older studies, founding fathers – and I think it’s important to keep in mind that this is also a short, humorous, satirical writing, not the definitive 600 page sociological study by a professor at Princeton seeking to study populism throughout the years (and along with Stein’s point, would any of the laypeople today actually read that?). I’m also sure that there are some people out there who either won’t read this because of who he is as a former (elitist! mainstream!) Time magazine writer or because of what it’s about (the title alone probably alienates a number of people) or who don’t care for his tone, but it’s really something that anyone can (*and should!*) read. And although this book clearly preaches to the choir, unlike any 20 seconds of listening to Tucker’s show or Laura Ingrahams’s, Stein tries to make his points to all readers without resorting to “You just hate America!” or “They are trying to destroy this country!”, instead keeping it light, trying to go talk to the people who see things differently than he does, and then argues against or for certain things – and he admits that he is smug and people hate it when someone talks to them smugly. I guess that’s the problem sometimes with humor and irony and sarcasm – it can turn people off when they feel like it is at their expense. But I think that Stein’s tone here is intended for humor at the situation, the topic, not maliciously deriding the individuals, and he writes at his own expense as well.
I feel like almost any sentence in the book could be cited as an example of something hysterical or something that could be argued and debated, so I won’t replicate anything here – that’s for each reader to digest and debate. But I loved his explanations of Confirmation Bias and Cognitive Dissonance in explaining how people mistrust experts, predictions, opinions of the elites. I loved his “trademarked” metaphor of the Meteorological Fallacy and how easily people fall back on that: a meteorologist predicts a 60% chance of rain the next day and then over one person’s head somewhere in Middle America is doesn’t rain, so the person says “What an idiot! They don’t know anything!” Or after a running back gets stuffed for a negative one yard loss, a person sitting on the couch screams “Why did the coach call that play? What an idiot!” Looking back in hindsight, maybe the play didn’t work, but are we really more smart than a professional football coach / offensive coordinator with 20 years experience in the league? Predictions aren’t foolproof, and percentages and educated guesses are based on facts but aren’t guaranteed; if the rain cloud blows five miles south, it still rained, it just blew a bit this way or that way. But people use one failing as a way to deride and distrust all experts. (A great section with the creator of Dilbert describing a medical issue with his trembling finger that his doctor missed helps to exemplify this fallacy.) And he has many sentences that put things so perfectly. In one section he writes about how one of his interviewees said with regards to elitists, they don’t feel respected, and you’re not going to be convinced by anyone you don’t feel respects you. Totally true. And despite the jokes and the tone, he respects everyone.
It’s inherently a political book, and people can get fired up with politics. Every sentence provokes a response, but it’s good stuff to think about and respond to. Even if you don’t agree with his assessments of things or want further research elsewhere without the humor, tell me you can’t read this without pissing yourself laughing at his page of fear when discovering a scorpion in his Texas B&B or his reaction to a Bible verse on the wall: “’Be not forgetful to entertain strangers. For some have entertained angels unaware.’ Though I like this line a lot, I don’t understand it. We should only be nice to people because they might have hung out with angels? How great can these people be if angels were sent to spy on them? What kind of idiot has an angel over for dinner and doesn’t notice the wings or halo? What types of entertainment do angels prefer? Should you put on Handel’s Concerto in B-Flat Major for Harp or would that be racist? We hadn’t even started Bible study group and I already had a lot of questions.”
Guess for writing that I wasn't going to say too much I went on to do just that... again....
March 1, 2023
A really mediocre book about an important domain; presumably a mediocre author taking the topic unseriously. Strawmen abound -- "Rural Texas folks are all racists" as a prior belief updated with "they're really nice"; "elite" being a specific subset of the "wordcel, coastal, left-wing" community, etc. There is no reason to read this book; I regret having done so. You will learn nothing about the world.
May 29, 2024
The title of this book is a misnomer. It's not about elitism as a concept; it's an attempt to understand the divide between Trump-supporting populists and what Stein calls the "intellectual elite" who despise Trump (he also invents a category of "boat elites" personified by Tucker Carlson who are essentially upper-class people who deserted the intellectuals to support Trumpism).
The way Stein explores the divide is to visit the Trumpiest county in America, Miami, Texas, to meet the people there, 95% of whom voted for Trump. In doing so, he finds that they are both strangely different but also friendly, likable and warmer and more welcoming than the elites. Stein was a long-time humor columnist for Time Magazine and this first half of the book is often quite funny with both self-deprecating and mild jabs at the Miamians. He sensibly concludes that one thing that would help immensely to bridge the gap between the elites and the populists would be for the elites to stop calling them racist, misogynist, homophobic, deplorables when they are well-meaning people with a different view of the world.
And that's everything positive I can say about the book.
The second half of the book is mostly an analysis of the differences between groups and Stein seems to abandon most of the humor. The thesis of the book is that Trump populists are people who ignore the "experts" while the elites listen to the experts. Stein criticizes the view that the experts can be ignored because they are often wrong as the "meteorologist fallacy" of ignoring the weatherman because the forecast is sometimes wrong. This analogy is unwarranted.
First, there is a significant difference between failing to bring an umbrella because an expert inaccurately predicts it won't rain, on the one hand, and listening to experts who direct people to wear masks and take experimental vaccines that don't work as they say they will and who advise the country to shut down schools and the economy in a failed attempt to stop a virus, on the other hand. The experts have to be more accurate than meteorologists if we are going to listen to them on issues that have such a significant effect, and they clearly aren't that accurate.
Second, what Stein is referring to when he talks about listening to the experts is really following biased media summaries of studies conducted by experts with a political bias. Stein explains away the fact that his own doctor told him that masks were useless (just like Fauci did) until these experts changed their views for political reasons as "new facts became known." While I'd favor more reliance on high quality data, this is not what the experts are basing their opinions on when they advise that masks are vital at Trump rallies but not at BLM rallies. When the experts suppress evidence that the virus came from a Wuhan laboratory because Trump said it did, that's a political action, not "expert advice." Stein views the pandemic as a demonstration of the consequence of failing to listen to the experts. Rather, expert advice was disregarded during the pandemic because it wasn’t based on accurate data but on political motivations. And it has become clear that the experts should be disregarded until they base their advice on data and robust debate rather than on what is consistent with their personal views, while suppressing all dissent. That Stein is still touting the need to listen to experts after they were repeatedly wrong during the pandemic - largely because they ignored the data because of their hatred for Trump - is proof that he still doesn't get it. Until the experts provide unbiased and accurate advice, they should be ignored. This isn’t Trump turning people away from experts; it’s the experts who have lost all credibility through their own actions.
The way Stein explores the divide is to visit the Trumpiest county in America, Miami, Texas, to meet the people there, 95% of whom voted for Trump. In doing so, he finds that they are both strangely different but also friendly, likable and warmer and more welcoming than the elites. Stein was a long-time humor columnist for Time Magazine and this first half of the book is often quite funny with both self-deprecating and mild jabs at the Miamians. He sensibly concludes that one thing that would help immensely to bridge the gap between the elites and the populists would be for the elites to stop calling them racist, misogynist, homophobic, deplorables when they are well-meaning people with a different view of the world.
And that's everything positive I can say about the book.
The second half of the book is mostly an analysis of the differences between groups and Stein seems to abandon most of the humor. The thesis of the book is that Trump populists are people who ignore the "experts" while the elites listen to the experts. Stein criticizes the view that the experts can be ignored because they are often wrong as the "meteorologist fallacy" of ignoring the weatherman because the forecast is sometimes wrong. This analogy is unwarranted.
First, there is a significant difference between failing to bring an umbrella because an expert inaccurately predicts it won't rain, on the one hand, and listening to experts who direct people to wear masks and take experimental vaccines that don't work as they say they will and who advise the country to shut down schools and the economy in a failed attempt to stop a virus, on the other hand. The experts have to be more accurate than meteorologists if we are going to listen to them on issues that have such a significant effect, and they clearly aren't that accurate.
Second, what Stein is referring to when he talks about listening to the experts is really following biased media summaries of studies conducted by experts with a political bias. Stein explains away the fact that his own doctor told him that masks were useless (just like Fauci did) until these experts changed their views for political reasons as "new facts became known." While I'd favor more reliance on high quality data, this is not what the experts are basing their opinions on when they advise that masks are vital at Trump rallies but not at BLM rallies. When the experts suppress evidence that the virus came from a Wuhan laboratory because Trump said it did, that's a political action, not "expert advice." Stein views the pandemic as a demonstration of the consequence of failing to listen to the experts. Rather, expert advice was disregarded during the pandemic because it wasn’t based on accurate data but on political motivations. And it has become clear that the experts should be disregarded until they base their advice on data and robust debate rather than on what is consistent with their personal views, while suppressing all dissent. That Stein is still touting the need to listen to experts after they were repeatedly wrong during the pandemic - largely because they ignored the data because of their hatred for Trump - is proof that he still doesn't get it. Until the experts provide unbiased and accurate advice, they should be ignored. This isn’t Trump turning people away from experts; it’s the experts who have lost all credibility through their own actions.
November 24, 2019
As the title suggests, this book is a funny look at the current populist movement in America. In spite of the tone of the title, I think the book hits on two key areas that I hadn't really thought about that can help to explain what feels like an ever-growing divide in our country:
1) He divides the "elite" into two categories: the Boat Elite (i.e., the rich) and the Intellectual Elite (i.e., the academics, writers, philosophers, think tankers, etc.). Those two categories of "elites" are definitely focused on different things politically.
2) In his visit to the county with the highest percentage of Trump voters in America, he observes that the life experiences of small town America are categorically different from those in urban America--to an extent that those two groups have entirely different takes on what needs to be done. The example he gives is about Black Lives Matter. In this small town, where he didn't mention running into any African-Americans, he noted that the entire town knows the police officers--and vice versa, so the idea of unwarranted traffic stops and/or not obeying police orders is totally foreign to them. THAT'S the experience they've had with regards to police interactions, so they see the incidents that have spurred the Black Lives Matter movement as disobedience to police officers.
1) He divides the "elite" into two categories: the Boat Elite (i.e., the rich) and the Intellectual Elite (i.e., the academics, writers, philosophers, think tankers, etc.). Those two categories of "elites" are definitely focused on different things politically.
2) In his visit to the county with the highest percentage of Trump voters in America, he observes that the life experiences of small town America are categorically different from those in urban America--to an extent that those two groups have entirely different takes on what needs to be done. The example he gives is about Black Lives Matter. In this small town, where he didn't mention running into any African-Americans, he noted that the entire town knows the police officers--and vice versa, so the idea of unwarranted traffic stops and/or not obeying police orders is totally foreign to them. THAT'S the experience they've had with regards to police interactions, so they see the incidents that have spurred the Black Lives Matter movement as disobedience to police officers.
November 19, 2019
I really wanted to like this book more than I did. It was amusing and definitely had some LOL bon mots, but overall it was just meh. I'm not sure what I supposed to take away from the time the author spent in rural Texas. That he met some "fine people"? That even educated people voted for Trump? What I took away from it, which pretty much framed most of the book (since, I'm sorry, but Scott Adams is obviously from another planet), is that even Trump voters living in rural Texas are "elite" but they just keep that part of their lives to themselves (their higher education obtained at a coastal university and prior life as a professor, banker, what-have-you before retiring to a rural community and then bemoaning why their children all move away as soon as they turn 18). I don't believe this book advances the conversation but granted that was probably not the author's intent. After reading all the way to the end, including the acknowledgments, it seems like he just wanted to find something to write about that people would read.
December 29, 2019
With In Defense of Elitism, Joel Stein goes where few elites would dare step foot, intellectually or literally - to the panhandle, bible-thumping, gun-toting town of Miami, Texas. At this first stop on his tour of populist and elite hotspots of America, Stein elucidates a no-brainer: nobody is always right all the time about everybody else. That includes we elites.
What is my takeaway from this marvelous book, besides the fact that Stein is completely hilarious? That elites need a crash course in tolerance. Populists could use a big dose of it too, but at least when they do not demonstrate this virtue, they don’t pretend to possess it. The tragic flaw of elites is that they fail to see the hypocrisy in their own cries for tolerance and equality.
It was the “deplorables” moment that opened my eyes to the current trajectory of America. I fear that intellectual elites, of which I am admittedly one, have not learned from this unfortunate blunder. And time is running out for us. Perhaps all we elites need to start toting Reader‘s Digest crosses.
What is my takeaway from this marvelous book, besides the fact that Stein is completely hilarious? That elites need a crash course in tolerance. Populists could use a big dose of it too, but at least when they do not demonstrate this virtue, they don’t pretend to possess it. The tragic flaw of elites is that they fail to see the hypocrisy in their own cries for tolerance and equality.
It was the “deplorables” moment that opened my eyes to the current trajectory of America. I fear that intellectual elites, of which I am admittedly one, have not learned from this unfortunate blunder. And time is running out for us. Perhaps all we elites need to start toting Reader‘s Digest crosses.
September 1, 2020
laugh out loud funny, with a target market of elites, duh. 3.5 stars because there were enough typos to bother me and the book has its limitations. like his social circle and the few groups we went to interview. if you're seeking straight up content about how elites must adapt to get more people on board, joel stein himself quotes him enough to know that you should just listen to reid hoffmann, who pretty much has this shit figured out and we just need to get on board. basically, be humble, listen and stop polarizing behaviors. a lot of advice is truly to acknowledge privilege and see how it colors the perspective of elites.
all that said, a book hasn't made me laugh so much in a long time. the author's outrageous, insightful and you just want to come alongside him for the journey. it's an especially timely read with the election coming up and america in the horribly polarized and populist situation it's in.
all that said, a book hasn't made me laugh so much in a long time. the author's outrageous, insightful and you just want to come alongside him for the journey. it's an especially timely read with the election coming up and america in the horribly polarized and populist situation it's in.
October 28, 2021
I'm not sure what lead me to this book but it is a very enjoyable read, by a writer with a very entertaining turn of phrase. The characters who Stein meets in his investigation of the two elites he identifies (the Intellectual Elite and the Boat Elite) are fascinating, as are the insights he provides into the "culture wars" of the US. I'd ike to see him turn his gaze across the Atlantic and analyse UK society in the same way! I did feel the occasional cringe when I found myself laughing at more serious issues b ut that's what good satire does.
September 7, 2020
I would describe this genre as "humorous political observation" with a touch of satire and a lot of tongue in cheek, even though his explorations of differences in our polarized nation are fundamentally in earnest. While limited in scope as the book is presented as case studies with several individuals, I appreciated the observations and insights Stein conveys. And lots of very funny moments, especially as delivered by the author in the audiobook version.
March 22, 2020
Easiest five stars. Joel Stein's style and humour is at times unparalleled. Even the Acknowledgements section was a hoot and worth a read. Aside from all of that however, this is an incredibly important book.
October 1, 2021
Loved his Time magazine column. Similar tone here for first 2/3s... then I think he truly tries to sum up/figure out the un-figure-out-able. Wish there would be a postscript... all written pre-pandemic.
July 28, 2020
Wickedly smart and funny. Joel Stein brilliantly reflects on our current life and times and is able to look in the mirror and laugh (and occasionally cry) at himself as well. So glad I read it.
August 10, 2020
Uproariously funny, delightfully quirky and somewhat introspective. Every liberal should read it if they don’t want to go under the figurative guillotine at one point or other :)
November 6, 2019
I agree with parts of the author's arguments, but I wish it were more back by statistical evidence. Don't get me wrong I would much rather listen to an elite over a non-elite in an area I know nothing about and an area they are supposed to be the expert.
The author makes a lot of arguments against populism because people backing populism tend to operate off how they feel. Despite making this argument though, the author doesn't have a lot of objective evidence to support his arguments that the elites actually do a better job than non-elites. He more or less just points out some logical fallacies about why people overestimate things or remember the one time the experts were wrong.
I also wished the author would have talked more about being born into elitism vs attaining elitism on the basis of meritocracy. It would be interesting to see performance of top tier students from non-Ivy League schools compared to the average performing students of Ivy League schools. Specifically looking at students accepted to Ivy League schools based on legacy status or family contributions to a school and how they compare post graduation.
The author makes a lot of arguments against populism because people backing populism tend to operate off how they feel. Despite making this argument though, the author doesn't have a lot of objective evidence to support his arguments that the elites actually do a better job than non-elites. He more or less just points out some logical fallacies about why people overestimate things or remember the one time the experts were wrong.
I also wished the author would have talked more about being born into elitism vs attaining elitism on the basis of meritocracy. It would be interesting to see performance of top tier students from non-Ivy League schools compared to the average performing students of Ivy League schools. Specifically looking at students accepted to Ivy League schools based on legacy status or family contributions to a school and how they compare post graduation.
March 1, 2023
This book isn’t very good or thoughtful. But it’s funny at times and I like that the author’s son’s name is Laszlo.
January 21, 2020
A Review of the Audiobook
Published in October of 2019 by Grand Central Publishing.
Read by the author, Joel Stein.
Duration: 7 hours, 18 minutes.
Unabridged.
Joel Stein's In Defense of Elitism: Why I'm Better Than You and You're Better Than Someone Who Didn't Buy This Book is an interesting book. The title suggests that it is a tongue-in-cheek look at politics, but it is much more than that. To be sure, there are plenty of jokes, wisecracks, puns and witty observations of varying quality throughout the book. But, there is also a lot of solid political analysis, especially in the last third of the book.
Stein's primary argument is that populism, embodied by both Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders for the last 4 years, is a road to nowhere except authoritarianism. Stein, like most elites, is worried more about Trump than Sanders (makes sense - he is President, while Sanders is a Senator).
Trump is well-known for his anti-intellectual tenancies. He discounts expertise and people that might have been called eggheads a few years ago. He As evidence for this, just note the number of things that President Trump has claimed that he knows more about than anyone else: drones (January 2019), technology (December 2018), renewable energy (April 2016), the visa system (March 2016), ISIS (November 2015). In July 2016 he said he even knows more about Senator Cory Booker than Senator Cory Booker does ("I know more about Cory than he knows about himself." )*
No one can be an expert on everything. That is where Elites come in, according to Stein. Stein explains this part rather poorly (in the first 10% or so of the book), because he insists on talking about his Elite friends. He name drops a ton of people who seem to be experts on everything - which is exactly what Stein is decrying. I recognized none of them except for Rob Reiner, who is not an expert on anything except making movies. He's very good at that, but I wouldn't go to him for his thoughts on tax policy.
The book gets so much better from this point on. Stein decides to...
Read more at: https://dwdsreviews.blogspot.com/2020...
*The claims in the paragraph about President Trump's claimed areas of expertise are taken from this article: https://www.axios.com/everything-trum...
Published in October of 2019 by Grand Central Publishing.
Read by the author, Joel Stein.
Duration: 7 hours, 18 minutes.
Unabridged.
Joel Stein's In Defense of Elitism: Why I'm Better Than You and You're Better Than Someone Who Didn't Buy This Book is an interesting book. The title suggests that it is a tongue-in-cheek look at politics, but it is much more than that. To be sure, there are plenty of jokes, wisecracks, puns and witty observations of varying quality throughout the book. But, there is also a lot of solid political analysis, especially in the last third of the book.
Stein's primary argument is that populism, embodied by both Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders for the last 4 years, is a road to nowhere except authoritarianism. Stein, like most elites, is worried more about Trump than Sanders (makes sense - he is President, while Sanders is a Senator).
Trump is well-known for his anti-intellectual tenancies. He discounts expertise and people that might have been called eggheads a few years ago. He As evidence for this, just note the number of things that President Trump has claimed that he knows more about than anyone else: drones (January 2019), technology (December 2018), renewable energy (April 2016), the visa system (March 2016), ISIS (November 2015). In July 2016 he said he even knows more about Senator Cory Booker than Senator Cory Booker does ("I know more about Cory than he knows about himself." )*
No one can be an expert on everything. That is where Elites come in, according to Stein. Stein explains this part rather poorly (in the first 10% or so of the book), because he insists on talking about his Elite friends. He name drops a ton of people who seem to be experts on everything - which is exactly what Stein is decrying. I recognized none of them except for Rob Reiner, who is not an expert on anything except making movies. He's very good at that, but I wouldn't go to him for his thoughts on tax policy.
The book gets so much better from this point on. Stein decides to...
Read more at: https://dwdsreviews.blogspot.com/2020...
*The claims in the paragraph about President Trump's claimed areas of expertise are taken from this article: https://www.axios.com/everything-trum...
Displaying 1 - 30 of 242 reviews