What do you think?
Rate this book
Friendly Fascism: The New Face of Power in America
This provocative and original look at current trends in the United States presents a grim forecast of a possible totalitarian future. The author shows how the chronic problems faced by the U.S. in the late twentieth century require increasing collusions between Big Business and Big Government in order to 'manage' society in the interests of the rich and powerful.
This "friendly fascism," Gross argues, will probably lack the dictatorships, public spectacles and overt brutality of the classic varieties of Germany, Italy and Japan, but has at its root the same denial of individual freedoms and democratic rights. No one who cares about the future of democracy can afford to ignore the frightening possibilities of Friendly Fascism.
This is certainly a strikingly prescient book for a Trump era.
This "friendly fascism," Gross argues, will probably lack the dictatorships, public spectacles and overt brutality of the classic varieties of Germany, Italy and Japan, but has at its root the same denial of individual freedoms and democratic rights. No one who cares about the future of democracy can afford to ignore the frightening possibilities of Friendly Fascism.
This is certainly a strikingly prescient book for a Trump era.
410 pages, Paperback
First published January 25, 1980
234 people are currently reading
2315 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 34 reviews
October 20, 2014
I would've loved this when I was at university. Now, however, it comes across as a bit too speculative, somewhat less rigorous than necessary, substituting inference for analysis of actual statutes and history. It advances a general thesis similar to Understanding the F-Word--that the US is ripe for fascist domination under the cover of democratic veneer. Whereas McGowan regards the US as presently fascistic, Gross considers fascism to be a possible future.
The text is broadly leftwing, though it engages in sectarian bickering with "dogmatic marxists" on numerous occasions. Cites often to London's The Iron Heel, Huxley's Brave New World, Lewis' It Can't Happen Here, and, of course, Orwell's 1984. These texts are mentioned for comparative or speculative purposes--which makes for lively writing, but not convincing historical or economic argument.
Some inconsistent oddities, such as the call to "true patriotism" in the conclusion (383 ff) and the admission that the author is "afraid of blind anti-fascism" in the introduction (4). Both are WTF moments for me.
Begins with a schematic account of "classical fascism" (11-31), followed by a discussion of corporate power and the ultrarich in the US. Sure, these are summaries, but one might get a better appreciation of classical fascist doctrine from any number of other places; and something like Wealth and Democracy is far superior at tracking the US upper-upper class.
Reveals its age in considering how the capitalist world, at the time of composition, was shrinking (119 ff), which might've been true then, but is manifestly dated now. Not a large problem, as the relative success of communist geopolitics at the time is presented as a factor in the conduct of the US and its ultrarich beneficiaries. Thereafter follows a number of chapters that rehearse, in somewhat speculative form, the now-standard critiques of trilateralism, corporate media, CIA thuggery, workplace exploitation techniques, sexual repression, and other elements of domination that the leftwing has been challenging for decades. Perhaps at the time this text brought it all together in a new synthesis, but 30 years later, it's not wrong, just not news. I suggest Manufacturing Consent as to media politics, Killing Hope: US Military and CIA Interventions Since World War II as to CIA thuggery, Trilateralism: The Trilateral Commission and Elite Planning for World Management, and so on.
Text excels at organizing its ideas in handy charts--there are many of them, and they kick ass.
Author is quick to note at many instances that "fascism" should not be equated, as it is colloquially, with mere violence or caprice. That fails to distinguish it from most historical regimes. Fascism proper is defined: "Unlike the communists, the fascists were not out to destroy the old power structure or to create an entirely new one. Rather, they were heretics seeking to revive the old faith by concentating on the fundamentals of imperial expansion, militarism, repression, and racism" (17). I suppose that's alright, as far as it goes. Friendly fascism, by contrast, ultimately involves an integrated business-government complex used to maintain a world empire, which is militarist, technocratic, with extended stagflation, democratic form without democratic substance, low violence internally, and so on (344). Thinking through it, it's almost as though the main distinction is that there is no fuhrerprinzip as the actual political leaders are mostly irrelevant in friendly fascism--so the electorate mignt vote all they want on politicians who aren't in control of anything important. The levels of violence externally are basically the same in the world empire, though, when compared to classical fascism; there'd just be no holocausts--just bombings, police actions, and whatnot. He paraphrases these ideas by suggesting that "neofascism will have arrived in America whenever most white people are subjected to the kind of treatment to which most black people have long become accustomed" (342).
None of this is to say that I disagree with the conclusions, but rather that this is not the best argument to get there.
The text is broadly leftwing, though it engages in sectarian bickering with "dogmatic marxists" on numerous occasions. Cites often to London's The Iron Heel, Huxley's Brave New World, Lewis' It Can't Happen Here, and, of course, Orwell's 1984. These texts are mentioned for comparative or speculative purposes--which makes for lively writing, but not convincing historical or economic argument.
Some inconsistent oddities, such as the call to "true patriotism" in the conclusion (383 ff) and the admission that the author is "afraid of blind anti-fascism" in the introduction (4). Both are WTF moments for me.
Begins with a schematic account of "classical fascism" (11-31), followed by a discussion of corporate power and the ultrarich in the US. Sure, these are summaries, but one might get a better appreciation of classical fascist doctrine from any number of other places; and something like Wealth and Democracy is far superior at tracking the US upper-upper class.
Reveals its age in considering how the capitalist world, at the time of composition, was shrinking (119 ff), which might've been true then, but is manifestly dated now. Not a large problem, as the relative success of communist geopolitics at the time is presented as a factor in the conduct of the US and its ultrarich beneficiaries. Thereafter follows a number of chapters that rehearse, in somewhat speculative form, the now-standard critiques of trilateralism, corporate media, CIA thuggery, workplace exploitation techniques, sexual repression, and other elements of domination that the leftwing has been challenging for decades. Perhaps at the time this text brought it all together in a new synthesis, but 30 years later, it's not wrong, just not news. I suggest Manufacturing Consent as to media politics, Killing Hope: US Military and CIA Interventions Since World War II as to CIA thuggery, Trilateralism: The Trilateral Commission and Elite Planning for World Management, and so on.
Text excels at organizing its ideas in handy charts--there are many of them, and they kick ass.
Author is quick to note at many instances that "fascism" should not be equated, as it is colloquially, with mere violence or caprice. That fails to distinguish it from most historical regimes. Fascism proper is defined: "Unlike the communists, the fascists were not out to destroy the old power structure or to create an entirely new one. Rather, they were heretics seeking to revive the old faith by concentating on the fundamentals of imperial expansion, militarism, repression, and racism" (17). I suppose that's alright, as far as it goes. Friendly fascism, by contrast, ultimately involves an integrated business-government complex used to maintain a world empire, which is militarist, technocratic, with extended stagflation, democratic form without democratic substance, low violence internally, and so on (344). Thinking through it, it's almost as though the main distinction is that there is no fuhrerprinzip as the actual political leaders are mostly irrelevant in friendly fascism--so the electorate mignt vote all they want on politicians who aren't in control of anything important. The levels of violence externally are basically the same in the world empire, though, when compared to classical fascism; there'd just be no holocausts--just bombings, police actions, and whatnot. He paraphrases these ideas by suggesting that "neofascism will have arrived in America whenever most white people are subjected to the kind of treatment to which most black people have long become accustomed" (342).
None of this is to say that I disagree with the conclusions, but rather that this is not the best argument to get there.
November 1, 2019
You won't learn anything about fascism if you read this book, but you will learn about a very popular analysis of emerging neoliberalism from 1979. What the author is really explaining is the reduction of democracy as a result of corporate-friendly govt. policies and increasing economic inequality at the end of the 70s. The process he's describing also fits what some political scientists in later years aptly describe as a "hollowing out" of democratic institutions. The general drive of the book is toward increased democracy, and many of the predictions he makes about things like surveillance and media seem prescient when read in retrospect. However, the book also redefines both fascism and corporatism in ways that are not helpful for anyone who seriously wants to understand what either of these things mean. "Corporatism" in the sense that Mussolini meant is not simply corporate friendly govt. friendly policy, which is how it is often colloquially used by Americans today. It means the actual replacement of existing govt. bodies, independent labor unions and political parties, with industrial councils. In other words, corporatism in the fascist sense is a kind of ultra-nationalist syndicalism. This matters because fascism is a form of right wing populism, and while this book argues that this "classic' version of fascism will never return, we can see around the world today that fascist movements can indeed spring up to oppose what they call "corporatism" by which they often mean 'big business"which they perceive in conspiratorial terms. In libertarian lingo today "corporatism" often means "govt. regulation of business, and in this case, they are simply repeating incorrect arguments associating welfare-state policies and social democracy with fascism in the way that many right-wing activists did in the 1930s during the New Deal. In order to effectively combat fascism it is important to be able to address how and why right wing ultra-nationalists are able to effectively win people over with what often seem like left wing and anti-establishment sentiments against capitalism, that simultaneously turn these arguments toward authoritarian, radically anti-regulatory capitalism, and/or even genocidal remedies.
September 1, 2017
Gross in his review of fascistic tendencies in American Politics from the early 80s was on the "right" track and the book is valuable for giving a 30-40 year old perspective on right wing political thought and how it has developed to influence today's current environment. The countervailing forces that altered Gross' future vision are still with us, however and the more important question doesn't seem to be political fascism, but rather a type of corporate fascism which is sold to us in bouncing advertisements and smiles.
February 11, 2008
Excellent presentation of the "marriage" between corporations, the US government and its foreign policy.
November 14, 2019
The thin gray line separating private enrichment and the slow-turning efficacy of democracy's swollen gears grows thinner and grayer with each generation of doctrinal capitalists and each iteration of nation-state narcissists. There is nothing one can do. But in Gross's assessment, FRIENDLY FASCISM: THE NEW FACE OF POWER IN AMERICA, western civilization — that is to say, conceitedly, the United States of America — one can nonetheless hold a mirror to the miserly divination of a country's future that has thus far pursued greatness in spite or because of its many social and political misgivings.
FRIENDLY FASCISM is a monumental effort whose contemporary lessons-learned twist and fidget with more curiosity than pretentiousness. In many ways, the book is a product of its time (late 1970s): documenting the causes and consequences of stagnant economic growth and uncontrolled inflation for a populace ill at ease and increasingly exhausted by war, corruption, and bigotry in local, national, and international settings.
Many criticisms have weathered frighteningly well: observing the familiarity with which citizens ally with despotism, both actual and ornamental; documenting the profiteering of the sinfully wealthy; detailing the increased likelihood of a technocratic or garrison state; and deconstructing the culpability of triple-speaking specialists at the head (or anus) of modern industry and economic development.
Unfortunately for Americans, their arrogance runs deeper than any newfound disposition for the aspirational remaking of a nation-state worthy of having its arms of power meaningfully separated and distributed among the lower and middle classes. Gross does a tremendous job articulating the flaws most fundamental to crafting egalitarian democracy in a nation-state so large and diverse (and so very capitalist), but to his credit, he never gives up. The narrowing and limiting of professional authority means multi-class support is absolutely necessary to ensure market sustainability.
The author also focuses on how the levers of domestic human activity, cultural and economic, may be manipulated so as to purchase more reliable or more efficient tools for ideological mythmaking and abuse of privilege. However, FRIENDLY FASCISM also spends important time on the Faustian bargains of domestic politicians who squeal and snarl and cheat to benefit from a system that benefits from their anxieties — too bad exploitative abundance is a trap. The benevolence of nation-state authority is on borrowed time.
Militarism, too, is of substantive emphasis in this book. It is unfortunate that political science literature observing the thin, gray intersection of military idolatry and domestic fascism is limited to very specific keyholes in foreign engagement (e.g., conclusion of the war in Vietnam), but Gross assails the military industrial complex with a feverish if oftentimes inconsistent tenacity. At the top level, Gross highlights the reckless profiteering and feral groupthink native to warmongering, while at much lower tiers, debates how legal violence and ritualistic favoritism (nationalism) each contributes to and resolves social fragmentation on a daily basis.
As for how and from where a turning of the page might reckon, the author posits, unequivocally, that social responsibility must rise from the individual — communal — level. The working individual must not be contented with conditional satisfactions. Organizations beholden to collective productivity must yield to a broadening of their power to those whose lives are most directly affected or at risk. Civility is not determined by the domestic benefits conferred as a test of loyalty to a system of stratified productivity — Nietzsche's bureaucratic labyrinths; rather, civility is a measure of integrated skepticism, of information, of rewards, of punishments, of opportunities, of all manners of systemic, professional complexity.
FRIENDLY FASCISM is a monumental effort whose contemporary lessons-learned twist and fidget with more curiosity than pretentiousness. In many ways, the book is a product of its time (late 1970s): documenting the causes and consequences of stagnant economic growth and uncontrolled inflation for a populace ill at ease and increasingly exhausted by war, corruption, and bigotry in local, national, and international settings.
Many criticisms have weathered frighteningly well: observing the familiarity with which citizens ally with despotism, both actual and ornamental; documenting the profiteering of the sinfully wealthy; detailing the increased likelihood of a technocratic or garrison state; and deconstructing the culpability of triple-speaking specialists at the head (or anus) of modern industry and economic development.
Unfortunately for Americans, their arrogance runs deeper than any newfound disposition for the aspirational remaking of a nation-state worthy of having its arms of power meaningfully separated and distributed among the lower and middle classes. Gross does a tremendous job articulating the flaws most fundamental to crafting egalitarian democracy in a nation-state so large and diverse (and so very capitalist), but to his credit, he never gives up. The narrowing and limiting of professional authority means multi-class support is absolutely necessary to ensure market sustainability.
The author also focuses on how the levers of domestic human activity, cultural and economic, may be manipulated so as to purchase more reliable or more efficient tools for ideological mythmaking and abuse of privilege. However, FRIENDLY FASCISM also spends important time on the Faustian bargains of domestic politicians who squeal and snarl and cheat to benefit from a system that benefits from their anxieties — too bad exploitative abundance is a trap. The benevolence of nation-state authority is on borrowed time.
Militarism, too, is of substantive emphasis in this book. It is unfortunate that political science literature observing the thin, gray intersection of military idolatry and domestic fascism is limited to very specific keyholes in foreign engagement (e.g., conclusion of the war in Vietnam), but Gross assails the military industrial complex with a feverish if oftentimes inconsistent tenacity. At the top level, Gross highlights the reckless profiteering and feral groupthink native to warmongering, while at much lower tiers, debates how legal violence and ritualistic favoritism (nationalism) each contributes to and resolves social fragmentation on a daily basis.
As for how and from where a turning of the page might reckon, the author posits, unequivocally, that social responsibility must rise from the individual — communal — level. The working individual must not be contented with conditional satisfactions. Organizations beholden to collective productivity must yield to a broadening of their power to those whose lives are most directly affected or at risk. Civility is not determined by the domestic benefits conferred as a test of loyalty to a system of stratified productivity — Nietzsche's bureaucratic labyrinths; rather, civility is a measure of integrated skepticism, of information, of rewards, of punishments, of opportunities, of all manners of systemic, professional complexity.
February 19, 2017
This book provides an interesting thought experiment into how fascism might look were it to take root in America today. The main point is that it would be very different from the fascism that overtook the world in the early 20th Century, with a variety of stakeholders holding power over citizens, rather than one all-encompassing, violent government. I read about two-thirds of it and skimmed the other third since it was slightly out of date. The writing also is a little academic, which slows it down in parts. A worthwhile read but not a lifechanger.
December 2, 2016
This book was very informative (even though, because it was published in 1980, too soon to discuss it specifically) about the Reagan regime which was in power at the time I read it.
February 1, 2020
Filmmaker Michael Moore referred to this book on the Morning Joe the morning after the 2016 presidential elections. The late Bertram Gross was a professor of political science as well as the author of the Roosevelt-Truman-Full Employment bills of 1945 & 1946, and served on the president's Council of Economic Advisors. He offers a fascinating analysis of what he views as the slow and steady move toward fascism in the U.S. as it stood back in 1980, the time of the book's publication. According to Gross, the move toward fascism is characterized by the unprecedented consolidation of capital with political and military power in manner akin to, but much broader and deeper than, the Military Industrial Complex that President Eisenhower warned the country about in his farewell address. His strength lies with the degree to which he makes his case with a fascinating historical analysis of the marriage between German, Italian, and Japanese fascism with capital and big industry. However, his analysis often gets bogged down in an impressive, but tangential, amount of social detail. As a career federal bureaucrat, his knowledge of the workings of federal government is impressive, but it often gets in the way of his basic argument. In addition, there is much that is dated about this book (his concentration on the 2nd world communism, which made sense in his time, but has declined in relevance, with the marked exception of China) and a few remarks are questionable and irrelevant e.g., the "observation" that "blacks fight harder" against the police during demonstrations than do members of the white counterculture. Nonetheless, there is much here that is insightful and refreshing. Unfortunately, although Professor Gross died in 1997 long after the break up and fall of much of the communist world, and the absorption of certain elements of capitalism within communist China, I do wish that he had published his thoughts on this new world order of the new millennium. Although aspects of his book are now dated, his warnings are, nonetheless, still trenchant and are thus worth reading as we look forward to a new presidency and much global unrest.
Want to read
December 29, 2016Predicted Reagan "power elite" politics, and helps explain Trump.
May 20, 2016
I wish I could give this book a higher rating because I agree with many of the ideas in the book. I give kudos to the idea of the series the Forbidden Bookshelf because sometimes I do feel that corporate America is controlling the information we receive.
However, I found huge sections of the book unreadable and outdated. Large sections of the book deal with stagflation and the cold war which are no longer problems. The book appears to be written for academics which always are hard reading for lay people. It is also largely about political theory which does not interest me.
The books does have some good points, which I thought would be better served as a selection from the book in an anthology of some kind. Mr., Gross predicts f what many people call now "crony capitalism" and the "one percent". Furthermore Mr. Gross is an interesting person in that he appears to have worked in the Truman administration as an advocate of "full employment”; the book describes how the public is being manipulated to accept an increasingly higher unemployment rate by a Democratic administration. I for one thought the public was receiving propaganda from the US government and academics hoping for government appointment when in 2009 I started to hear the terms "jobless recovery" and the "new normal" of high unemployment
I received a copy of this book from Netgalley in exchange for a honest review.
However, I found huge sections of the book unreadable and outdated. Large sections of the book deal with stagflation and the cold war which are no longer problems. The book appears to be written for academics which always are hard reading for lay people. It is also largely about political theory which does not interest me.
The books does have some good points, which I thought would be better served as a selection from the book in an anthology of some kind. Mr., Gross predicts f what many people call now "crony capitalism" and the "one percent". Furthermore Mr. Gross is an interesting person in that he appears to have worked in the Truman administration as an advocate of "full employment”; the book describes how the public is being manipulated to accept an increasingly higher unemployment rate by a Democratic administration. I for one thought the public was receiving propaganda from the US government and academics hoping for government appointment when in 2009 I started to hear the terms "jobless recovery" and the "new normal" of high unemployment
I received a copy of this book from Netgalley in exchange for a honest review.
June 20, 2018
As old as this book is, it's remarkably prescient. It foretells the trump era with a frightening amount of specificity and if anything makes me more worried about what comes next. The advice against fascism is pretty simple: organize locally and don't get complacent. It lost some stars for being horribly dry and thus difficult to engage with.
January 20, 2020
Interesting if sometimes over-thorough explanation of one possible future of fascism. Instead of the jackbooted versions of WW2, for example, Gross argues that future iterations of fascism will be more palatable, more friendly in their presentation, and that they will come about due to an unholy alliance between Big Business and Big Politics. Well, we can see today how often business seems to pay off government in order to get their own way, and how some businesses have grown to have an economic power greater than some countries, so this isn't off-base on Gross' part.
However this book does, I think, suffer somewhat though from being a product of its time. It was written, I believe, in the late 1970s, and is is extremely America-focused. Which is not in itself a flaw, but what Gross hasn't foreseen, for example, is the growth in technology and how this affects his thesis. There are sections of the book dealing with technology, and how it can (and will) be used in surveillance, and in this as with the often corrosive influence of Big Business Media (thank you Mr. Murdoch, you climate-denying anti-science hack) Gross is certainly prophetic. Nonetheless, a lot of the media consumed nowadays, especially by the younger sections of the population, is social. This has an effect on news coverage. When a current event catches my attention, for example, I get a lot of information on that event from the internet, which frequently has real-time responses and videos from those living through the event. There's a growing trend in the democratisation of media, is what I'm saying, that will eventually, I trust, counter the Murdochs of the world. Now Gross can't have been expected to predict this sort of thing, but it does affect his argument... even though a lot of that argument remains valid and concerning.
However this book does, I think, suffer somewhat though from being a product of its time. It was written, I believe, in the late 1970s, and is is extremely America-focused. Which is not in itself a flaw, but what Gross hasn't foreseen, for example, is the growth in technology and how this affects his thesis. There are sections of the book dealing with technology, and how it can (and will) be used in surveillance, and in this as with the often corrosive influence of Big Business Media (thank you Mr. Murdoch, you climate-denying anti-science hack) Gross is certainly prophetic. Nonetheless, a lot of the media consumed nowadays, especially by the younger sections of the population, is social. This has an effect on news coverage. When a current event catches my attention, for example, I get a lot of information on that event from the internet, which frequently has real-time responses and videos from those living through the event. There's a growing trend in the democratisation of media, is what I'm saying, that will eventually, I trust, counter the Murdochs of the world. Now Gross can't have been expected to predict this sort of thing, but it does affect his argument... even though a lot of that argument remains valid and concerning.
December 26, 2016
Couldn't get into it.
August 10, 2019
I didn't get too far before I could see it was too dated to seem relevant today (at least to me).
July 7, 2023
Released in the 1980s but still largely relevant.
In 2023 everything Gross wrote about is happening.
Incremental changes that lead to total control by unseen entities ruling through government, media and corporate partnerships .
He refreshes our memory on the previous failed attempts at fascism in Italy, German and Japan and how post World War 2 after the very public and damaging 1950s McCarthyism witch hunts passed it morphed into a new way to control the populace that had evolved into what he saw in the 1970s.
Today it's here and the WEF in Davos is where all the orders flow from.
Let's hope we find a way out before it's too late.
In 2023 everything Gross wrote about is happening.
Incremental changes that lead to total control by unseen entities ruling through government, media and corporate partnerships .
He refreshes our memory on the previous failed attempts at fascism in Italy, German and Japan and how post World War 2 after the very public and damaging 1950s McCarthyism witch hunts passed it morphed into a new way to control the populace that had evolved into what he saw in the 1970s.
Today it's here and the WEF in Davos is where all the orders flow from.
Let's hope we find a way out before it's too late.
September 24, 2016
This book is a little dense in some parts and even though the editor did a good job I think he could've done better. Still, it's an interesting read, especially because of the corporate Propaganda themes, its lobbies and strong ties with the government.
The book is a great source to feel and understand the zeitgeist due to it was first published almost 30 years ago. The author was an insider in the government during those days, so thanks to that, we also get a pretty good context and descriptions of that time.
If I could describe the book then I would say it's a dystopian mix of Orwell and Huxley, but with the Corporation as "villain" instead of the Government. But at the end of the book and in a kind of pessimistic/realistic way, the author gives us a little hope describing some trends that could save the day.
Bertram thinks it's going to be difficult to fight against this "faceless oligarchy" because the average joe will be prey of the creeping normalcy bias (and brainwashed) and that the more prepared, informed citizens (and even the dissidents) will be reduced, deceived and deflected by a co-optation strategy.
There is no doubt that the author was right in some trends, behaviors and descriptions of today, but I think that he was very influenced by the mood and worries of his time, so some of his analysis don't apply anymore or were wrong. Nonetheless, some of his warnings have much relevance today and should be considered.
The positive things he sees (and not without a lack of buts) are the communications technologies, the "humankind’s long history of resistance to unjustified privilege" and the growing proliferation of community and civil groups.
The book is a great source to feel and understand the zeitgeist due to it was first published almost 30 years ago. The author was an insider in the government during those days, so thanks to that, we also get a pretty good context and descriptions of that time.
If I could describe the book then I would say it's a dystopian mix of Orwell and Huxley, but with the Corporation as "villain" instead of the Government. But at the end of the book and in a kind of pessimistic/realistic way, the author gives us a little hope describing some trends that could save the day.
Bertram thinks it's going to be difficult to fight against this "faceless oligarchy" because the average joe will be prey of the creeping normalcy bias (and brainwashed) and that the more prepared, informed citizens (and even the dissidents) will be reduced, deceived and deflected by a co-optation strategy.
There is no doubt that the author was right in some trends, behaviors and descriptions of today, but I think that he was very influenced by the mood and worries of his time, so some of his analysis don't apply anymore or were wrong. Nonetheless, some of his warnings have much relevance today and should be considered.
The positive things he sees (and not without a lack of buts) are the communications technologies, the "humankind’s long history of resistance to unjustified privilege" and the growing proliferation of community and civil groups.
December 7, 2021
This book is meant to be speculative in how the US could become “fascist”. It is very academic and dry at times, but despite being 40 years old, I felt a lot of it aged well. Issues covering mass surveillance, big government/big business ties, and the military industrial complex are still very relevant. One area that is certainly less relevant is the spread of communism, compared to the late 70s. I felt defeated at times reading this, feeling the US has or will become “fascist”, but the book does end on a “positive” note that it hasn’t happened yet and individuals can still prevent the possibility by engaging and not being complacent.
March 8, 2022
A prescient analysis of creeping corporate-authoritarianism. An admittedly dry but brilliant book. Many of Gross' predictions have been vindicated. With inevitably more to come... Its pretty clear, at least to perceptive citizens, we are heading toward a corporate/state allied plutocracy of sorts. The commodification of everything, the exploitation of everything and everyone, too-big-to-fail corporations, corporate capture of all aspects of government, legacy news manufacturing consent, militarized police, protest crackdowns... christ.
The future looks exceedingly bleak for the masses, exceptionally bright for the "Davos men."
The future looks exceedingly bleak for the masses, exceptionally bright for the "Davos men."
April 2, 2020
Probably the best understanding of how the world works that i have ever read. That being said, it is still a tough read but if you’re willing to hang on through occasional valleys of boredom and getting lost in the writing, there are amazing bits of information and prophecy. Hard to believe this guy had this sort of understanding in 1980. It could have been written tomorrow.
September 5, 2019
L'ouvrage est intéressant avec des idées lumineuses. Toutefois, je trouve que le sujet induit par le titre n'est pas assez creusé. Mes attentes étaient certainement liées à notre époque alors que l'ouvrage a été composé au début des années 80.
October 20, 2019
excellent and eye opening
Mr. Gross has illuminated my suspicions regarding the current political climate in America today. We, as a nation, are headed toward irrevocable disaster and the only hope is the dissenters who say enough is enough!
Mr. Gross has illuminated my suspicions regarding the current political climate in America today. We, as a nation, are headed toward irrevocable disaster and the only hope is the dissenters who say enough is enough!
Read
January 27, 2008I'd have thought it was fiction. My first bite of the forbidden fruit.
June 6, 2017
It is a little out of date.
August 15, 2020
1950s Socialist dogma from Europe rehashed to make the mold less obvious.
September 27, 2021
Interesting and thought provoking - not an easy read but worth the effort. History and its effects and how knowing the mistakes of the past can prevent them reoccurring
March 21, 2022
Very educational
Although a time gone by it still has many ways to educate about a possible future. I enjoyed it very much.
Although a time gone by it still has many ways to educate about a possible future. I enjoyed it very much.
July 17, 2025
Like most people, I decided to pick up this book as a result of the dialogue surrounding the then incoming administration of Donald Trump. As we moved past the first few months of the transition of power across party lines, I think it was pretty apparent to people tapped into the political landscape that we were quickly approaching a culture of political apathy catalyzed by ceaseless propaganda, desensitization to ultraviolence in the form of rhetoric and militaristic operations, and the unstoppable approach towards a Government-Big Business singularity. While this attitude is present in the mainstream of both political parties, the shift was extremely apparent and has no signs of slowing down, with more bills calling for the transfer of resources from the population to the establishment and an everlasting control of the media providing distractions to these plans.
Fascism is a term whose function doesn't fully reflect its definition; it is often used more as an insult or a call to arms to denounce opposition. The vitriol surrounding fascism comes from the characterizations of "classic fascism" from the 1930s and 1940s. This early form of fascism comes from blatant militant takeover, usually with a charismatic front man leading the charge with actionable rhetoric to engulf the masses in fear and violence. Author Bertram Gross acts as the harbinger of "The new face of power in America" with his thesis of 𝘧𝘳𝘪𝘦𝘯𝘥𝘭𝘺 fascism. Gross argues that the political economy of transnational corporations essentially functions to establish the power elite into the corporate, military, and governmental superstructure of the general capitalist establishment. Since multinational corporations operate outside the confines of a single nation, a slow process exists in which corporations subvert democratic accountability and shift it to the individual.
This process comes at a loss of political influence for the individual and the repression of pluralism in societal organization. Allowing the branches of government to serve transnational corporations as an extension of their reach allows the interests of business to influence legislation, execution, and judicial decisions to further their ability to grant power, financial incentive, and control over the expanding police complex to themselves. The aggregate population is polarized using shallow and fabricated culture war talking points to continue a perceived marginalization of "anti-intellectuals" not tied to the liberal elites, who are seen as the controllers of culture and education. The result of fear and anxiety of alienation from the perceived elite shifts the ongoing class war caused by transnational corporations' political erosion to one of culture in the eyes of this "new right". There are no rights given back, only the chance for expression.
I found this book to be extremely interesting and most of Gross's predictions on the evolution of Big Business-Government relations to be pretty accurate today. One of the most interesting ideas that was presented in this book was how the introduction of the television enabled the establishment to mobilize people and manage data on the population. I think this issue has become exponentially larger with the introduction of social media platforms and just the sheer amount of data one is able to generate for the purpose of continuing the consumption cycle.
As we continue to move toward a world with more power in the hands of multinational corporations, we continue to relinquish our democratic voice and surrender ourselves to playing the role of the consumer. In the end, Gross emphasizes the importance to not fall for myths of determinism. While it may seem improbable in the short term, It is not impossible for a friendly fascist regime to rise. But, in the same vain, it is not an inevitability. It is not unpatriotic for one to be critical of government policy, representatives, and question the decisions made by lawmakers. It's our country too! Highly recommend this book if you're interested in political science!
Fascism is a term whose function doesn't fully reflect its definition; it is often used more as an insult or a call to arms to denounce opposition. The vitriol surrounding fascism comes from the characterizations of "classic fascism" from the 1930s and 1940s. This early form of fascism comes from blatant militant takeover, usually with a charismatic front man leading the charge with actionable rhetoric to engulf the masses in fear and violence. Author Bertram Gross acts as the harbinger of "The new face of power in America" with his thesis of 𝘧𝘳𝘪𝘦𝘯𝘥𝘭𝘺 fascism. Gross argues that the political economy of transnational corporations essentially functions to establish the power elite into the corporate, military, and governmental superstructure of the general capitalist establishment. Since multinational corporations operate outside the confines of a single nation, a slow process exists in which corporations subvert democratic accountability and shift it to the individual.
This process comes at a loss of political influence for the individual and the repression of pluralism in societal organization. Allowing the branches of government to serve transnational corporations as an extension of their reach allows the interests of business to influence legislation, execution, and judicial decisions to further their ability to grant power, financial incentive, and control over the expanding police complex to themselves. The aggregate population is polarized using shallow and fabricated culture war talking points to continue a perceived marginalization of "anti-intellectuals" not tied to the liberal elites, who are seen as the controllers of culture and education. The result of fear and anxiety of alienation from the perceived elite shifts the ongoing class war caused by transnational corporations' political erosion to one of culture in the eyes of this "new right". There are no rights given back, only the chance for expression.
I found this book to be extremely interesting and most of Gross's predictions on the evolution of Big Business-Government relations to be pretty accurate today. One of the most interesting ideas that was presented in this book was how the introduction of the television enabled the establishment to mobilize people and manage data on the population. I think this issue has become exponentially larger with the introduction of social media platforms and just the sheer amount of data one is able to generate for the purpose of continuing the consumption cycle.
As we continue to move toward a world with more power in the hands of multinational corporations, we continue to relinquish our democratic voice and surrender ourselves to playing the role of the consumer. In the end, Gross emphasizes the importance to not fall for myths of determinism. While it may seem improbable in the short term, It is not impossible for a friendly fascist regime to rise. But, in the same vain, it is not an inevitability. It is not unpatriotic for one to be critical of government policy, representatives, and question the decisions made by lawmakers. It's our country too! Highly recommend this book if you're interested in political science!
May 23, 2023
With many right-wing politicos over reaching the bounds of traditional conservatism towards a new authoritarianism, felt like a good time to revisit Professor Gross's book. Although written in 1980 before Regan's election, its warnings for our democratic republic still pertain. Overlooking the two major threats of the time - Watergate's influence on the executive's power, persistent economic stagnation and rising communism, Professor Gross's analysis and description of the national establishment, policy formation, and classic fascism continue to ring true. Unlike many other books on fascism, this one explores the concentration of wealth and power within an alliance of big business and big government. Linking those factors into a working structure enables a new form of fascism to rise and take hold within America and in other first world countries.
September 20, 2022
Although dry in presentation at times, very much a worthwhile read. It reads like a tragedy, even though that wasn't the original intention.
November 9, 2023
https://open.spotify.com/episode/79Ar...
Mentioned by Vijay Prashad
Mentioned by Vijay Prashad
Displaying 1 - 30 of 34 reviews