What do you think?
Rate this book
Engaged: A Citizen's Perspective on the Future of Civic Life
Why do so few of us trust our government, take interest in politics, or assume active roles in our communities? Engaged provides a unique perspective on the state of our civic life today and why it matters to democracy. It explores key aspects of engagement through personal stories, vignette’s from the Shaw neighborhood in Washington, DC, and inspiring examples of those who are trying to make a difference. Our political gridlock and the election of 2016 have revealed growing levels of mistrust and disengagement. Participating in civic life is just not made easy for many us but has demonstrable impact to the world around us. This book makes the case for investing more of our time and energy into our civic lives, both as a country and individuals. Engaged speaks to all Americans — veterans, entrepreneurs, religious leaders, community organizers, educators, parents, and everyday citizens — who want to make a difference in the country we all love.
172 pages, Kindle Edition
Published February 21, 2020
6 people are currently reading
9 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 of 1 review
November 30, 2020
The basic idea here is pretty good--that one of the best ways to strengthen US democracy and make it work more effectively is for people to get more engaged in politics broadly conceived, not just by voting but through civic engagement, volunteering, joining local organizations, etc. Sommers pulls together a pretty solid foundation of information to support this central contention.
My big critique is that he generally downplays the systemic reasons working against people taking an active role in politics. Things like the two party system increasingly controlled by big moneyed interests (e.g., universal healthcare has popular bipartisan support according to polls and it would be cheaper and more effective than our current system, but neither mainstream Party is willing to deliver it because the insurance and pharma lobbies oppose it), increased worker precarity and decreased real wages meaning that many (especially working class and young) people cannot afford the time for political engagement or even for voting, and patently undemocratic governmental structures like gerrymandering or the Electoral College that ensure some people's votes count for more than others. Sommers' focus is largely at the level of what the individual can do, which is not inherently bad, but it does spin the crisis of democracy as a problem of the individual rather than the system, which is incredibly problematic because it buys into the neoliberal logic of individual responsibility rather than collectivity--which is part of the reason US democracy is in its current crisis.
There are also a lot of types, grammar mistakes, etc. I'm not usually that bothered about that, but the press really should have done a better job copy-editing.
My big critique is that he generally downplays the systemic reasons working against people taking an active role in politics. Things like the two party system increasingly controlled by big moneyed interests (e.g., universal healthcare has popular bipartisan support according to polls and it would be cheaper and more effective than our current system, but neither mainstream Party is willing to deliver it because the insurance and pharma lobbies oppose it), increased worker precarity and decreased real wages meaning that many (especially working class and young) people cannot afford the time for political engagement or even for voting, and patently undemocratic governmental structures like gerrymandering or the Electoral College that ensure some people's votes count for more than others. Sommers' focus is largely at the level of what the individual can do, which is not inherently bad, but it does spin the crisis of democracy as a problem of the individual rather than the system, which is incredibly problematic because it buys into the neoliberal logic of individual responsibility rather than collectivity--which is part of the reason US democracy is in its current crisis.
There are also a lot of types, grammar mistakes, etc. I'm not usually that bothered about that, but the press really should have done a better job copy-editing.
Displaying 1 of 1 review