Next book

AN END TO POVERTY?

A HISTORICAL DEBATE

Enthusiastically argued, but so intertwined with original sources and rhetorical mannerisms that it’s not terribly...

Up-close examination of how Adam Smith and industrial advancement sparked furious debates on the future of the impoverished.

Jones (History/Cambridge Univ.) examines the rise of political economy in England and France after the French Revolution, seeing in early responses to Smith’s writings several unacknowledged precursors of socialism. During the early Industrial Era, many thinkers felt poverty could be eased by technology, were it not for the intractable attitudes of the aristocracy and the notorious Tudor-era Poor Laws, which penalized debtors. The French Revolution’s reverberations led Condorcet and Thomas Paine to call for “socializing” the poor through public subsidy. The response in Britain towards such proposals was severe and, Jones argues, concealed attacks on Smith’s reimagining of labor as a valued commodity. This backlash was epitomized by Malthus’ Essay on the Principle of Population, loosely interpreted ever since to support various repressive ideologies. As for the French, their early proto-welfare experiment was ultimately destroyed by “Jacobin megalomania.” Jones also explores how the accelerating Industrial Revolution affected the lives of the poor. In Britain, “interest in the possibilities of machinery was overshadowed by Malthusian anxieties about population increase and Ricardian fears about diminishing returns.” As the so-called “entrepreneur class” developed, technology actually widened the “moral and economic breach” between them and the unskilled poor; the ghost of this division seems perceptible in today’s backlash politics. By the mid-1800s, liberals and reactionaries alike concluded that, far from ending poverty, industry and the free market would hobble the “industriousness and frugality” that European observers had admired in the United States. Ultimately, Jones asserts, “it was not Smith but the conservative reaction of the 1790s which produced the divorce between political economy and progressive politics.”

Enthusiastically argued, but so intertwined with original sources and rhetorical mannerisms that it’s not terribly accessible.

Pub Date: Nov. 1, 2005

ISBN: 0-231-13782-6

Page Count: 288

Publisher: Columbia Univ.

Review Posted Online: May 19, 2010

Kirkus Reviews Issue: Sept. 1, 2005

Next book

A PEOPLE'S HISTORY OF THE UNITED STATES

For Howard Zinn, long-time civil rights and anti-war activist, history and ideology have a lot in common. Since he thinks that everything is in someone's interest, the historian—Zinn posits—has to figure out whose interests he or she is defining/defending/reconstructing (hence one of his previous books, The Politics of History). Zinn has no doubts about where he stands in this "people's history": "it is a history disrespectful of governments and respectful of people's movements of resistance." So what we get here, instead of the usual survey of wars, presidents, and institutions, is a survey of the usual rebellions, strikes, and protest movements. Zinn starts out by depicting the arrival of Columbus in North America from the standpoint of the Indians (which amounts to their standpoint as constructed from the observations of the Europeans); and, after easily establishing the cultural disharmony that ensued, he goes on to the importation of slaves into the colonies. Add the laborers and indentured servants that followed, plus women and later immigrants, and you have Zinn's amorphous constituency. To hear Zinn tell it, all anyone did in America at any time was to oppress or be oppressed; and so he obscures as much as his hated mainstream historical foes do—only in Zinn's case there is that absurd presumption that virtually everything that came to pass was the work of ruling-class planning: this amounts to one great indictment for conspiracy. Despite surface similarities, this is not a social history, since we get no sense of the fabric of life. Instead of negating the one-sided histories he detests, Zinn has merely reversed the image; the distortion remains.

Pub Date: Jan. 1, 1979

ISBN: 0061965588

Page Count: 772

Publisher: Harper & Row

Review Posted Online: May 26, 2012

Kirkus Reviews Issue: Jan. 1, 1979

Next book

HOW DEMOCRACIES DIE

The value of this book is the context it provides, in a style aimed at a concerned citizenry rather than fellow academics,...

A provocative analysis of the parallels between Donald Trump’s ascent and the fall of other democracies.

Following the last presidential election, Levitsky (Transforming Labor-Based Parties in Latin America, 2003, etc.) and Ziblatt (Conservative Parties and the Birth of Democracy, 2017, etc.), both professors of government at Harvard, wrote an op-ed column titled, “Is Donald Trump a Threat to Democracy?” The answer here is a resounding yes, though, as in that column, the authors underscore their belief that the crisis extends well beyond the power won by an outsider whom they consider a demagogue and a liar. “Donald Trump may have accelerated the process, but he didn’t cause it,” they write of the politics-as-warfare mentality. “The weakening of our democratic norms is rooted in extreme partisan polarization—one that extends beyond policy differences into an existential conflict over race and culture.” The authors fault the Republican establishment for failing to stand up to Trump, even if that meant electing his opponent, and they seem almost wistfully nostalgic for the days when power brokers in smoke-filled rooms kept candidacies restricted to a club whose members knew how to play by the rules. Those supporting the candidacy of Bernie Sanders might take as much issue with their prescriptions as Trump followers will. However, the comparisons they draw to how democratic populism paved the way toward tyranny in Peru, Venezuela, Chile, and elsewhere are chilling. Among the warning signs they highlight are the Republican Senate’s refusal to consider Barack Obama’s Supreme Court nominee as well as Trump’s demonization of political opponents, minorities, and the media. As disturbing as they find the dismantling of Democratic safeguards, Levitsky and Ziblatt suggest that “a broad opposition coalition would have important benefits,” though such a coalition would strike some as a move to the center, a return to politics as usual, and even a pragmatic betrayal of principles.

The value of this book is the context it provides, in a style aimed at a concerned citizenry rather than fellow academics, rather than in the consensus it is not likely to build.

Pub Date: Jan. 16, 2018

ISBN: 978-1-5247-6293-3

Page Count: 320

Publisher: Crown

Review Posted Online: Nov. 12, 2017

Kirkus Reviews Issue: Dec. 1, 2017

Close Quickview