It Could Happen Here: America on the Brink

by Bruce Judson

In It Could Happen Here, Bruce Judson, author of Go It Alone!, explains why revolution is possible in the United States—and makes the most disturbing case yet for why our economics are leading us inevitably toward a just such a crisis. Underscoring the historically dangerous levels of inequality in our country today, It Could Happen Here “will cause you to think about the risks for a nation divided between haves and have nots.” (Walter Isaacson)

Genres: Politics, Nonfiction

240 pages, Hardcover

First published January 1, 2009

Reviews

[Will Byrnes · Rating 4 out of 5]

Bruce Judson - image from Harper

This was originally written in 2010, after release of this book in 2009. It certainly seems worth a look here in 2024 (nearly 2025) as we approach the arrival of Trump 2.0.

Could the USA be ripe for revolution? Judson looks at the big historical picture and sees that conditions are such that this is not a trivial, parlor-game question, but one that bears serious examination. What are the conditions in which mega-change occurs, historically? Major economic upheaval, a toxic distribution-of-wealth imbalance, a loss of confidence that authorities are acting honestly or fairly, and an expectation that things will not get any better, in fact will only get worse. Gee, guess what? This is a very intriguing look at the possible ramifications of the looting of America by the uppers since the Reaganauts came to power in 1980, legitimizing greed. But Judson is not taken particularly with Democrat-Republican issues, per se. His canvas is larger, and more compelling. His analysis is intriguing and should give all sober people cause to reflect on how we can right the way-off-course direction in which our nation is headed.

One chapter offers a look at a possible scenario that might tip the nation from a bad situation to one that results in revolutionary change, but he has framed it in such a way that it serves as a purely theoretical model. I would have liked a bit more speculation on his part about how current trends might manifest. There is plenty of straw that could be spun into gold there.

Just how immune is the USA to revolutionary change? Can Obama (remember him?) alter the underlying problem, namely the increasing marginalization of the middle class by the increasingly top-heavy uppers, or does he even want to, really? One major point of this book is that revolution often happens when failed reform exacerbates existing, and growing tensions. This is a very interesting, thoughtful analysis, and should give us all cause for concern. For even when revolutionary change results in a fairer distribution of wealth, it usually comes at a heavy cost in human life, and there is no guarantee that large scale change will make even the distribution of wealth any fairer than it is today. And, while there is much that is interesting about Judson’s theory, I believe he discounts a few things. Americans are, by and large, inert when it comes to allocating time and resources to doing something about political inequities,and right-wing militias and right-wing folks overall, are far likelier to align with the forces that support oligarchs than the forces that oppose them, and they are the ones who have been accumulating vast numbers of weapons.


==================================QUOTES

P 77 - Here’s how this governance problem can evolve: As inequality rises, two phenomena almost always occur: The wealthy develop a sense of entitlement, and they increasingly seek to insulate themselves from the rest of society. They live in exclusive communities; socialize with each other; send their children to private schools, exclusive, locally funded public schools, and elite colleges; and can afford top-quality healthcare and medical insurance. As a consequence they become less dependent on public services and less connected to the concerns of the rest of society. Inevitably, this leads the bulk of those in the top income strata to oppose tax increases that would fund enhanced public amenities. Instead, they use their wealth to obtain political influence that solidifies their privileges. At this point, the divided nation becomes polarized and the government becomes incapable of decisive action.

[This is a simplistic model—yet a fundamentally accurate description of what has happened in America over the past 35 years. For details of this in action, check out Jane Mayer's Dark Money (review upcoming) ]

p 88 - Revolutions occur—or do not occur—because people believe in something. Mobility in the United States is actually lower than mobility in almost all European countries and Canada, despite being the abiding myth of the Horatio Alger rags-to-riches story. The myth is more important than the reality. As long as we believe that the United States is the land of opportunity, then we will remain loyal. But is that belief collapses, watch out.

The theory of rising expectations also explains a second seemingly puzzling aspect of revolutions: As in the Soviet example, they often occur during or immediately following periods of reform. Times of reform are actually destabilizing. When the leadership of society acknowledges that changes are needed, and people come to expect something new and better, the reforms had better deliver. If this process is derailed for any reason, overwhelming anger and frustration can lead to revolution. A period of significant reform is therefore a moment of potentially maximum risk.

[Matt · Rating 3 out of 5]

There are a lot of places critics could poke holes in Judson's arguments, reasoning, and academic references (or lack thereof) in his critique of income inequality in the US. It's a sensational hypothetical to posit that an anti-government revolution could be sparked in the near future by the fallout of the economic crisis and income inequality, so the author is going to lose a lot of credibility right off the bat for most readers.

Nevertheless, he had a few interesting bits of analysis illustrating how many historical revolutions commonly thought of as social-political were in fact stemmed from economic crisis. The French Revolution was preceded by a large-scale crop failure in France, the fall of the USSR was preceded by a 75% drop in world oil prices (a main source of revenue for the Soviet government), etc. The populace suffered, lost faith in the ability of their governments, and with a few other steps there was a revolution.

Populist farmer's movements and unions striking and rallying during the Great Depression make for an interesting analogy vs political sentiment today, but I've got to think that many of the author's arguments would not have even made it to print if the book had been written even a year later. Sure, there are angry and vocal populist movements today, ie: the Tea Party, but their loudest protests - against a mandated expansion of health care benefits, against the "public option", against 2-3% higher tax rates for families making >$250K per year - are on the other end of the spectrum from true populism. They aren't calling for a redistribution downwards, but public policies that would lead to a greater concentration of wealth at the top.

All-in-all, I give this book an "eh" - interesting conversation starter and a quick read, but light on original insight and credibility.

[Savinipop Savini · Rating 3 out of 5]

A very clear and well thought out look at what conditions are needed in a nation to start a revolution.
Bruce Judson is a well read writer, who has led me to reading a couple other books, and I applaud him for that. Every fact is well footnoted and some of them do make your jaw drop.
Though a fascinating subject, this book leans more towards a text book, IE, a bit dry.
This is not to say it doesn't read easily, or that it's a bore to get through, but after reading the likes of Malcolm Gladwell, it's just not as well crafted. Reading the first chapter, which is a fictional tale of a revolution starting here in the states, was the lackluster part of the book for me. It focused you on his weaknesses; story craft and designing drama within a text.
I'd like to give it a 4 star rating, but when I think for a moment if I truly enjoyed reading this book, I have to say no, but I'm very happy I did.

[David · Rating 4 out of 5]

Judson's warning -written in 2009 at the start of the Obama administration- sounds practically prophetic now. The argument boils down to: nations with large amounts of economic equality are historically prone to revolutions (examples are cited from ancient Greece to the Great Depression), and with inequality in the US worse than it's ever been we are looking due for some profound changes in government and society. If the Obama administration is not able to clean up some of the issues that lead to the 2008 financial disaster, there may be some scary changes to come...

Whelp. So far it's looking like he's right.

Nothing strictly new or mind shattering is introduced here, but Judson makes a compelling argument with the facts available and it's a quick easy read. Strongly recommended.

[T Dale]

That the economic inequities I have often obliquely referred to when I rail against the pay of CEOs is actually a sign of a real danger to our republic. That historically a society's rich and poor can only get so far apart before revolution or collapse occur. I didn't realize just how close we are and for how long it had been building up. Scary, but well reasoned, by a senior fellow of the Yale School of Management.

[Joel Roberts · Rating 2 out of 5]

with the Occupy movement ongoing... a timely read. the book served its purpose, reminding us that inequality (social, racial, financial, economic, etc al... the focus here was on income/wealth) is usually the root of civil unrest and revolution. a bit sensationlist in its approach, and i wonder whether some of the statistics were dressed up a little... but overall, i thought it was a decent read.

[Brian · Rating 3 out of 5]

I'm not sure that revolution in America is all that likely, but this book gives you some things to think about.

[Monica Willyard Moen · Rating 4 out of 5]

I would have dismissed this book ten years ago. Now? I'm not so sure.

[Belinda]

pretty extreme