Merge Left: Fusing Race and Class, Winning Elections, and Saving America

by Ian F. Haney-López

From the acclaimed author of Dog Whistle Politics, an essential road map to neutralizing the role of racism as a divide-and-conquer political weapon and to building a broad multiracial progressive future

"Ian Haney López has broken the code on the racial politics of the last fifty years."—Bill Moyers

Today more than ever, warnings to fear immigrants and people of color bombard us incessantly. Quite simply, the Right’s fundamental strategy has been to divide and distract while rigging the rules to benefit the superrich. No more. It’s time to reject this kind of purposeful division and to join together to demand that government work for all of us, whether we’re white, Black, or brown.

Ian Haney López has spent the last two years collaborating with a team of union activists, racial justice leaders, communications specialists, and pollsters. Based on conversations and interviews with people all over the country, the team discovered that a large majority of the population (people of color included) fall into “the persuadable middle”—they hold both progressive and racist views and can be shifted in one direction or another based on different stories about America.

For decades, while the Right has exploited racial fear-mongering, the Left has splintered. Some have wanted to tackle racism head-on; others have insisted that a race-silent focus on class avoids alienating white voters. Merge Left distills the heartening results of cutting-edge new research: naming racism as a weapon of the rich and calling for cross-racial solidarity builds unity across the base and enlists the broad middle in supporting progressive dreams.

A work of deep research, nuanced argument, and urgent insight, Merge Left is an indispensable tool for the upcoming political season and in the larger fight to build racial justice and shared economic prosperity.

 

Genres: Politics, Nonfiction, Race, History, Social Justice, Political Science

288 pages, Hardcover

Published October 1, 2019

Reviews

[Matthew Richards · Rating 3 out of 5]

The central message of this book: the American Right has been winning elections, gaining supporters, and enriching donors by stoking racial resentment and fear through coded language. The Left has one of four choices to make: they can try to beat the right at their own game of racial dog-whistling (think Clinton's crime bill in the 90s), they can take the "colorblind" approach of staying silent on race and focusing on economic reforms, they can counter racism on the right by "leading with race", or they can take a "race-class" approach of pointing out that the right uses racism to divide people in order to rig the rules and steal from them. Through his work with the Race-Class Narrative Project, which surveyed 1500 Americans in focus groups to test out various methods, he argues that the race-class approach has more promise in winning the "persuadable middle" than the right's message of racial fear, and that many race-class messages surveyed better than either the "lead with race" approach or "colorblind" approach.

The biggest flaw of the book: he spends 18 pages arguing that "leading with racial justice" isn't the best strategy for the left to take, and I find his argument narrow and unconvincing. First of all, it wasn't clear that "leading with racial justice" has ever meant taking class out of the equation. Racial justice activists and civil rights leaders have been talking about races of people uniting against greedy robber barons and immoral capitalists dividing us against each other for over a century. The activism around race this decade has centered around ideas of intersectionality, which emphasizes how people divided by both race and class and have to come together. These are both facts the author acknowledges in the book, but seems to set aside for a tidy dichotomy of a "racial justice" message versus a "race-class" message. And even the impoverished "racial justice" narrative he tests that single-mindedly focuses on face doesn't poll all that poorly in his focus groups! It's a matter of 5-10 percentage points off from the others despite being the weakest, depending on where the polls took place.

What's more, in the final chapter of the book, he acknowledges the point of racial justice movements isn't always to win immediate electoral gains; it's shifting the Overton Window to the left. These are the most inspiring pages in the book, and he highlights how racial justice activists have taken reparations from a fringe issue to something that almost every Democratic presidential candidate endorsed, dragged the Democratic party to the left on immigration and the criminal justice system by making "abolish ICE" and "disarm the police" legitimate political discourse in the halls of Congress, and made calls to redistribute land to indigenous people that this year gained traction in the nation's highest courts. He mentions in other places that white people are much more racially progressive than they were in the Clinton era; Pew Research shows how much this is attributable to the Black Lives Matter movement. All of this laid the groundwork before he launched the Race-Class Narrative Project in 2019. It's not clear to me that the race-class narrative would have been nearly as well-received if it weren't for the work of these racial justice activists.

I do think he was right on the money when he laid out the Right's electoral strategy of racial fear, division, and dog-whistling to destroy the left. I think he's right that their racist narrative needs to be directly challenged and robbed of its power as a tool of division, and that does involve telling white people what they have to gain from racial justice and constructing positive narratives of race-class solidarity. The actual "race-class narrative" statements he tested in the focus groups felt a bit bland, toothless, and watered down. For example, "we need elected leaders who will reject the divide-and conquer tactics of their opponents and put the interests of working people first, whether they're white, Black, or brown." There were a lot of statements similar to this tested that felt vague and platitude-y, without getting to the heart of what racism and hardship people are experiencing and specific policies to remedy them.

This doesn't mean that vague and platitude-y statements don't have their place! I think his race-class narratives and examples are very useful for politicians, specifically in swing districts. If his research can convince politicians running on a colorblind platform that mentioning race in a race-class approach can be just as effective an electoral strategy, I think it's served its purpose very well. On the other hand, I think the activist base and racial justice activists are already doing well in their approach, and this book will be less useful for them.

[David Watts · Rating 4 out of 5]

Took awhile to get through this book but it had valuable insights into the persuadeable middle - what made them lean one way or another. Also helped provide a retrospect per se of the persuadeable middle and why they voted for Trump - giving explanations more in-depth than I had previously read. Recommend as a retrospect over the Trump election and how political messaging drives elections.

[Mehrsa · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is a very good practical follow-up to Dog Whistle Politics and I wish pundits and politicians in the "moderate" camp would read it. People pointing out racism ro dog whistles are not the ones dividing the consensus--it's the racism itself and the people who don't mind it at all.

[Abdulrahman Ateya · Rating 5 out of 5]

In 2016, Donald Trump won. Not only did he win, but the right wing won – they won back the presidency, defeating the left. In the United States, the left has recently found itself divided. In 2016, the Democratic party found itself at odds with its own members, with different parts of the electorate favoring completely different candidates – at the forefront of this, Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders. After the dust settled, Clinton herself blamed Sanders for her electoral college loss (Ember and Lerer), and the routine repeated itself in the 2020 race. The Democratic Party found itself split yet again, torn between moderates trying to garner centrist votes, like Joe Biden, and hardcore populists like Sanders positioning themselves as candidates who listen to the people. This divide was not mirrored on the Republican side of the ballot, with the overwhelming majority of Republican leaders standing behind Trump. In his book, Ian Haney López, author of Dog Whistle Politics, explains his new theory of how the left can unite and win again, merging the faction of the left that tries to bring about racial justice solely through “economic populism,” and the part of the left that ignores class as an important factor in the fight for equality.
López begins his book by explaining the foundation of his theory, polling and focus group research. He claims that “most Americans —including many who do not consistently vote Republican — are susceptible to coded messages about threatening or undeserving people of color but are not consciously committed to defending white dominance.” (20) Most Americans, he states , simply fall into the trap set by the Republican party of preying on in-built racial fear – even liberals whites are susceptible, he writes (92), and due to its coded nature, even people of color (56). He goes on to say that Republicans exploit their racial fear strategy to further their policies, intertwining race, class, and government masterfully. The right-wing base, as well as persuadables, who Haney López says most of are not moderates (87), are drawn to the narratives the Republicans have been pushing. Racist dog whistles like “welfare queens [that] tool around in Cadillacs and young fellows [who] feast on T-bone steak,” (71) help the Republicans claim that the reason behind poverty and other things that liberals want to fix is a lack of personal initiative, and a not matter of circumstance. The enemy is the government, they say – liberals who want to hinder “you,” the likely white, hard working person – because the government cannot fix personal problems.
Haney López’s claims are far from groundless. With his team, he conducted his own research to test the effectiveness of this racial fear messaging. When presented with a dog whistle racial fear narrative, a majority of Democrats, independents, and Republicans found it convincing or very convincing. Thirteen to fourteen percent of Democrats and Independents tested found it to be very convincing, and twenty-four percent of Republicans (55). It is difficult to argue with his research, but it is not definitive. Haney López only shows one narrative from each of his three schools of political messaging (racial fear, colorblind economic populism, and race-class), and does not investigate nuances within each of these messages. Both right and left wing politics have plenty of variance within them, although it is possible that he believes that at their essence, the differences are the same, and therefore can be dissolved into the same terms, but his current research is not all encompassing.
He draws on Trump and the 2020 election to help explain his point. Trump, he says, “personally espouses many of the racist views that the Right seeks to activate and promote, [and] he understands better than perhaps anyone how to exploit racial division for ulterior ends.” (149) Trump is a master at the “merge right” tactic, stoking white fear and allowing the Overton window to include white supremacist thought, but never crossing into the territory of appearing outright racist to his followers. The examination of Trump is very beneficial to López’s argument, and offers sound reasoning to believe that this age old tactic is still alive today.
Haney López did not write this book to examine the right, however. He uses it as an opportunity to prescribe a new, winning, formula for the left and titles it the “race-class” approach (171-194). Democratic politicians need to lead, not only with racial justice, but also with class inequities. With his new approach, he attempts to balance multiple factions within the Democratic party. He is critical of the 2016 Bernie Sanders campaign, saying that the “class-intensifier theory of race” (141) which attempts to call for racial justice by solving it only through economic, class-based solutions is not enough. On the other hand, he analyzes the race-only approach of the 2016 Clinton campaign – which also did not succeed. He discusses how people of color are not excited to talk about race either, with many participants in the studies refusing to accept racism as a structural issue (108). The race-class narrative consists of three core points (174). The first of them is “joining together across racial lines.” By making racial injustice a problem that includes white people, he states, support not only with whites, but also with people of color as well increases. Here, López makes a possibly fatal error Ignoring deep-rooted connections with white national identity in today’s America is nearly impossible, but it may be the case that for Haney López, the people who still hold those beliefs dear are not integral to the success of his race-class narrative. One notable concession that he does make is using when signaling at racial solidarity; they were able to find more support with the wording “white, Black, and brown,” than with “Black, brown, and white” and significantly more support than not naming groups at all (186-190).
The second part of the narrative is to “distrust greedy economic elites sowing division.” Here, Haney López ignores the seeming reality that many Americans admire rich people, but perhaps this is for good reason. The opposite side of the fence does not claim to love big business, either. President Trump says he is the president of the working man, and that he is not beholden to Wall Street like his opponent. Haney López uses this appeal to distrust the economic elite differently, however. He says that the elites are threatening social programs and blaming it on marginalized communities – completely different from the Republican approach. The final piece of the race-class approach is demanding a government for all – with no exceptions, and not for a greedy minority. He frames these three parts in a triangle with arrows showing that it is a circle, and that all the points are dependent on one another. The research behind the narrative is promising as well. A variant of the aforementioned phrasing was tested by Latino Decisions, which polled voters in 61 of the most competitive House districts – and 85% of respondents agreed (177). Other pollsters found similar results.
As shown by the research of Haney López and others, the race-class narrative shows great promise. However, the race-class narrative and Merge Left itself fail to significantly counter two major parts of what Haney López defines as the core narrative of the Right: “2. Distrust government; 3.Trust the marketplace.” (73) If there is an embedded distrust of the government and belief in the market, there is no way that the Merge Left strategy can take the deep hold that Haney López is calling for. If he provided more of a counter to these two parts of the “core narrative” of the right, his prescription would be much more promising.
Additionally, Haney López seems to have one goal – which is to win elections. But the title of his book promises something much greater: “Saving America.” The strategy his book describes is is well-written to achieve the electoral success the left desires, but without “constant reinforcement and creation of real solidaristic environments,” (Shor 43) calling for class-based racial solidarity will never achieve the transformative effect that Haney López wants – electoral politics are not enough. Haney López comes close to admitting this, discussing briefly how Democratic politicians need to drill down on this message, pushing it harder than the right pushes theirs. The possibility of this causing short-term change is much higher than the possibility of it changing the environment of American politics permanently.
Merge Left leaves the reader with a goal and a set of instructions on how to achieve it, but it does not address some of the larger ills of the American political system – but it is not meant to do that. America has been tied into the two-party political system for ages, and it seems like it will be that way forever. Haney López envisions a victory for the left, and his efforts to achieve it are valiant, but what if they are not enough? If the left truly wants to save America, pinning their politics within the current system may limit the potential for positive reform. American politics may need something larger than just the race-class approach, because although it may work well, there is no telling if it is immune to being corrupted by those same politicians who this approach seeks to counter. Merge Left is not the panacea that some want to exist, rather, it is a promising step to make American politics “of the people, by the people, and for the people.”

[Patrick · Rating 3 out of 5]

One of the stars here is sort of an A for effort; I thought the execution was generally unhelpful, at times even counterproductive. There are for sure some straightforward decent points about political messaging at the heart of the project. I'd prefer to consume a PDF summary of the project's findings or an LLM summary of what they conclude, and I wouldn't mind getting hands on the focus group videos.

The book itself suffers from a bunch of issues. Over-interpreting weak results in the data. Constantly working to reverse engineer political support for a preexisting and immovable set of "progressive" policy priorities. Privileging to an absurd degree an academic "intersectional" lens over lessons learned from actual practitioners and organizers, who barely appear.

Overall, this is very much a time capsule of 2017-2021 liberal thinking and it loses a lot of its shine post-2024. (Also, do not listen to the audiobook, the narrator tries and fails to adopt over-the-top character accents for Trump, Sanders, etc.)

[Sarah Flynn · Rating 4 out of 5]

I really like the idea behind this book, and I agree with it 100 percent. As well, the research seems to my un-practiced sensibilities very well and thoroughly done.
The basic premise of the book came out of the author’s observation that even when “persuadable” people - people in the middle, neither wildly left nor right- are aware of concepts like racial division being a tool used by the rich to divide and conquer and enrich themselves, nevertheless they still seem to vote in ways that belie that understanding. It became clear then that colourblind education and moral appeals aren’t the ticket; which, interspersed with periods of left based dog whistling, has largely been the plan of action for the lefty political machine.
Everyone seems to agree that leading with racial justice is a failure. Colourblind economic policy has not been successful.
So what gives?
This book looks at how a combined race-class message fared with those persuadable voters. Not too surprisingly, it fared well according to the research that this team carried out. The final word, then, is that we need to use a race-class message that is not silent about race but does include white people in the beneficiaries of such messaging, along with communities of colour. In short, white people need to understand that racial unity and the economic control that goes with it will benefit not only minorities, but also white people themselves.
Anyhoo, it’s a good book with good ideas. But for some reason I won’t lie I found it very difficult to actually read. As you see it took me almost a month to read it and it’s pretty short and not all that sense. Compare it to Creating Freedom- which was twice as long and twice as dense, with some concepts that were much more deeply challenging to what I understood to be true- and yet which I could NOT put down! I can’t say why this one was so hard to get through for me- I guess I feel like they could have gotten the message across in a shorter document. Idk.
Still I recommend it, it’s an important guide for people thinking about how to build unity among different groups that seem to be at odds.

[Amy · Rating 4 out of 5]

This was a really accessible and hopeful look at how Dems / progressives need to be messaging to persuadable/ swing voters in order to win elections. I loved how fact based it was, and the results of the messaging studies were surprising and instructive.

Anyone who’s interested in questions like these would have a lot to gain from this book:

- Who voted for Trump and why?
- Why do poor white people and some POC vote against their own interest?
- Can we win elections by “waiting for the old racists to die”? (Hint: no)
- How can Dems / progressives truly unite and motivate voters, building a winning coalition?
- Why isn’t messaging like “defund the police” and “abolish ICE” more broadly popular?
- Why can’t we win by only talking about class issues and ignoring race?

This debunked a lot of “common knowledge” among Dems and has definitely made me reframe my thinking about how we will ultimately win as progressives. I also appreciated that it dissected real life messaging examples used by politicians like Trump, Clinton, Sanders and others. And it gave concrete examples of the types of messages we should be using.

My only critique is that I wish it went a step further. This is extremely instructive for how Dems / progressives should use messaging in things like ads and speeches. But it doesn’t address how candidates can incorporate this into their policy framing. And more importantly it doesn’t provide enough tools to have one on one conversations with folks using this messaging, beyond initial talking points.

But this was great and made me feel clear and hopeful.

[Bookworm · Rating 3 out of 5]

Had read the author's book and was very curious about this book. This conversation about trying to reconcile the issues of race, class and more to build winning coalitions for elections and addressing tensions is a timely and ongoing conversation. So I thought this book would be a good read.

If you're familiar with the author's work then you'll know how he talks about the dog whistles of racism and what that means. He talks a little of that here as well, with the how that plays into conversations about race, class, the tensions between the two and the related topics and conversations and more. He then talks about how the two can be discussed in partnership, tandem, combination, however one wants to define it.

I wanted to like it and I think it's a very important conversation to have. But it felt like author López tries too hard to treat the two equally. I wanted to go along with his premise but given the insidious and embedded nature of racism and bigotry, I'm not sure this was the right approach. Racial justice doesn't ignore class or economic concerns--it's part of achieving that justice whereas trying to find economic justice has its faults: even the very wealthy (think Oprah, LeBron James, etc.) still face racism and bigotry.

I'm certainly not saying there isn't useful information to think about here. But I'm not entirely sure about the author's approach to it. Best as a library borrow.

[Max · Rating 5 out of 5]

Merge Left contains one of the most important strategic ideas I have encountered during my career in advocacy. This is required reading for democrats because, right now, we are leaving political power on the table. And not just a little bit of power, but enough to go from just barely winning national elections (as we sometimes manage to do), to winning large enough majorities to implement long-held, and widely supported progressive ambitions—profound policies that would lift all boats.

And in the process we can heal old wounds and undo some of the damage from four years of a president who’s almost every utterance sought to divide Americans.

The idea here—a change to the Democrats’ core narrative—isn’t a mere paper proposal. It’s been campaign tested and found to consistently beat right-wing messages—significantly more often than our old narratives. It does so by directly countering the right wing’s propaganda of racial fear and bringing Americans together, black, white, and brown. At a time when right-wing messages are mostly dog whistles, it may be the only message that works.

There’s more I could say, but please excuse me. I need to find a mountaintop from which I can proclaim importance of this book. Read it.

[Andrew Calderon · Rating 2 out of 5]

I am very interested in the topic and I can see how this book can advance the conversation around multiracial coalitions, but it was quite repetive, which made it hard to read. I also got the impression it was written for campaigners and pundits crafting political messaging. Not me.

[Sanchita · Rating 3 out of 5]

The least convincing of all Haney López's books, though the methods in this were clear. Perhaps some case studies of this race-class narrative actually working would have bene more convincing.

[Jason · Rating 5 out of 5]

An insightful and essential book about how to message progressive politics in the age of Trumpism. Racial dog whistles-in combination with other strategies like a culture war around religion and gender--have for decades worked to pull white people away from economic populism. The answer, Haney Lopez says, is neither a color-blind politics of class--which by ignoring racist dog whistling fails to weaken it and overcome it--nor a singular focus on racial justice--which can turn off persuadable whites and some people of color as well by seeming to blame them for inequities. Instead, he proposes to link race and class. This approach explains racism as a tool used by powerful elites to divide and distract, leading to policies that enrich them while hurting everyone else. He proposes communications that name various racial groups explicitly (including whites), describe how those at the top sow division through race to benefit themselves, and describe how people should join together for economic and racial justice. The outcomes of the 2020 elections, in which Trump gained even more support from non-college working class voters *across* races, implies a need for more thinking of this kind.

[Wami · Rating 5 out of 5]

A refreshing perspective on how the majority of Americans fall within the "persuadable" category rather than aligning strictly with the far Left or Right. This book articulated many of the observations I've had from my own experiences and provided valuable insights into how one could lead an effective progressive movement with the right framing.

Politics today is so polarized that it ultimately harms everyone. I've noticed that even those on the far Left and Right often share common ground, yet political division prevents meaningful dialogue. Too often, people talk past each other, assuming bad intentions rather than seeking understanding.

This book offers a compelling strategy for bridging that divide. Instead of focusing solely on ideological extremes, it emphasizes how to craft messages that resonate with the persuadable middle—the majority of Americans who hold a mix of progressive and conservative views. By shifting the narrative and naming racism as a tool of economic manipulation rather than a purely moral failing, Merge Left provides a roadmap for building cross-racial solidarity and advancing a truly inclusive progressive movement.

[Betsy D · Rating 4 out of 5]

Haney Lopez presents important information, based on various kinds of research. A summary might be: the best messaging around the progressive agenda to reach the (approx) 65% of Americans he calls "persuadables" is:
The Right has used "dog whistle" racism as a wedge issue for several decades. but we will do better-thrive--as a people when we make things fairer for brown, Black, and white people, notably the economy.
All kinds of people except deeply committed conservatives of the Trump sort respond well to that message. In the book he demonstrates the truth of the message and conveys the research results that demonstrate its appeal. It got rather tedious for me, but many be more important for those delivering political messaging.
I was introduced to Haney Lopez in viewing an interview of him in which he discussed how this message also applies to climate and environmental justice. People of color are invested in the environment at a higher level than whites.

[Dave Pier · Rating 4 out of 5]

The simple argument of this book, based on focus group and polling experiments is that political messaging on the left should address race, but include whites as one of the races who will benefit, as part of a multiracial working class coalition. This as opposed to focusing solely on pocketbook issues and not directly discussing race. Also, racial justice messaging that focuses on the racism of whites or a white system tends to poll badly, especially among "persuadables" -- who are people who gyrate inconsistently between Trump and Sanders style politics (vast in number). I thought the book was fine in presenting this research. Provides evidence-based insight into how most Americans think about race, or at least how they express themselves about it in polling or
focus group situations.

[George Kasnic · Rating 2 out of 5]

Funny thing, I agree with this book.

Unfortunately it is a 20 page article stretched into a 200+ page book for a paycheck. The statistical analysis is shallow and would have benefitted from deeper mathematical data given the length of the book.

The author belabors their thesis ad nauseum, but then fails to bring it home. A much more effective book would have presented the solutions more cohesively and in detail.

It also gets stuck as a “process story” shedding interest and engagement. The author is also obviously a policy wonk and comes from that place.

The return on investment- my knowledge- of the time dedicated to this book was unsatisfactory to me.

[Santiago Rosales · Rating 5 out of 5]

I really liked this book. This book is for organizers who want to learn more about messaging that can move persuadable people to action. The lessons in this book are important pieces of the puzzle of how we organize to build progressive majorities after the election of Joe Biden.

I appreciate that the book dives into the research and methodology behind the Race Class Narrative. I also appreciate that the book dissects the origins of the Right's narrative and explains its effectiveness. The thoroughness of this book made it a long read, but the author's narrative style keeps you engaged. I will definitely reference this book in conversations going forward.

[Michelle · Rating 3 out of 5]

I won this book as a Goodreads Giveaway. The book provides a lot of insight into both the Republican and Democratic parties, and his race has played a role in both parties to help win elections. Overall, I found this book educational and thought provoking. Slight hesitation about the accuracy of some of the facts due to an error on page 150 regarding Donald Trump’s age (was off by almost a decade). However, overall an insightful book.

[Nora · Rating 4 out of 5]

Not my first experience with Race-Class Narrative messaging but helpful as always to spend a full book's time with the context and research. Read it for work but felt immediately applicable to some local non-work organizing. It's fairly academic and the language can feel indelicate as a result but if you're good with that it's a solid primer on this vein of effective leftist messaging strategy.

[Tania · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book was interesting and convincing, and I strongly recommend it. Merge Left breaks down in easy-to-follow terms (backed by research) how messaging that addresses race and class together can reach critical voters and change outcomes of elections.

[Margaret Rosen · Rating 3 out of 5]

Super insightful about dog-whistle politics and ineffective responses, but I was hoping to hear more about effective ways to respond, particularly as an individual rather than a political group as a whole.

[Tom · Rating 3 out of 5]

An essay-length argument stretched out to 230 pages. It's most stimulating when presenting new research or perspectives from Americans – and the data is invaluable for activists – but Haney-Lopez never manages to justify publishing this as a book.

[Shahrzad · Rating 5 out of 5]

Super helpful and hopeful, and written straightforwardly, which I always appreciate when discussing such complex, nuanced issues. I think this is an important analysis for any progressives interested in messaging and narrative-change.

[Mark Schulz · Rating 4 out of 5]

I am glad I read it and I definitely learned some things about electoral politics and messaging. My main complaint was how the quantitative stuff was presented. The results were encouraging but I would have needed a lot more detail to find it truly convincing.

[Andrew Lohmeier · Rating 5 out of 5]

An enlightening analysis of the current US political crisis and the dilemma of reformers, with great insights on how right-wing propaganda remains effective and possible responses that a diverse coalition might use to have greater success.

[Linda · Rating 4 out of 5]

Lots of good ideas. I really like the messaging suggested by the author.

[Ann · Rating 5 out of 5]

Excellent exposition of dog whistle politics and how to fight it.

[Gavin · Rating 4 out of 5]

There's a lot here and I found it fascinating, especially in light of 2020 and dog whistling. I don't entirely agree with the premise, but it certainly requires thinking and reassessing your beliefs.

[Roger · Rating 5 out of 5]

Supurb! Great followup to Dog Whistle Politics, offering hopeful strategy

BOOK REVIEW/Roger Bybee ..www.populist.com › 26.08.bybee.html

https://progressive.org/dispatches/ia...

[Arne · Rating 4 out of 5]

Well researched and insightful