This is a dreadful excuse for a serious book. the author's research was nearly non-existent. When I read and review any book, I always look at the footnotes and the bibliography. Suffice it to say that Mr. de Boer's research was severely wanting. He is a popular author, but you may skip this book.

I just can't take this guy seriously. He uses anecdotes instead of data, and shows his cards by claiming that the left should focus on economic inequality instead of social and cultural injustices (which he derides as divisive, as if wealth inequality isn't as well).

If you look at the successful leftist movements of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, one thing they had in common was the ability to stay on message. Photos of rallies for the 8-hour day show placards calling for 8 hours of work, 8 hours of recreation, and 8 hours of rest. They do not show people carrying signs for a bunch of other unrelated issues. Yet if you look at protests today, they’re somehow all about everything. Even the Women’s March (which in theory had the potential to focus on one issue: women) managed to also be about global warming, immigration, and trans rights....

Prolific substacker and self-identified Marxist Fredrik deBoer has returned after his first book, The Cult of Smart, to examine the pathologies that plague social justice movements in America. He contends that progressive and socialist movements have been captured by a particular flavor of affluent, urban liberal. David Brook famously labeled these liberal type with revolutionary aesthetics but bourgeois ethics as bohemian bourgeois or bo-bos.

But deBoer's map of liberal elite capture extends beyond cultural confusion (many have argued that PoMo and identitarian ideas alone have stunted left-wing political activism), he argues that the structure and incentives of social media, nonprofits, the Democratic party, and corporations (woke capital) have rendered radical politics impotent. I think deBoer's diagnosis makes several shrewd points. He does a reasonable, if superficial, job of explaining the competing web of incentives and the different ways that institutional parameters end up diffusing rather than concentrating radical energies. The issue with his critique is that it is somewhat premised on the idea that there is actual authentic radical energy to concentrate. I don't really see any good evidence of this. Similar in situation to deBoer, who now is in his 40s and makes six figures writing at Substack, radical politics are indeed primarily an aesthetic and not something held in the heart of hearts of even those who most vociferously profess such beliefs. This is why deBoer's praise for left wing radicalism rings so hollow in this text. In some ways, this makes for a great read as it illustrates just how the prosperity and leisure available in 21st century America make the expression of radicalism quaint - more a nostalgic reverie than an urgent desiderata.

This book, of course, is not only diagnosis. The prescription is an anachronistic plea to return to a class-based, more yeoman version of Left activism. However, deBoer seems quite aware of the impossibility of such a return for the Left. It is no longer composed of the working class, and those of working class stripe on the Left tend toward more moderate and conservative political outlooks. In sum, deBoer may have delivered a nice eulogy for a bonafide Left in American politics. The aesthetics and rhetoric will remain but liberalism will be all there is.

https://wordpress.com/post/greatbutunknownperformances.wordpress.com/478

I placed the review up on my blog Cobleskill Commentaries. If you wish to go there, the URL is above. Thank you.

DOUG

I really wanted to like this book, but in the end I just didn’t. There were very few things that I found myself agreeing with the author on; very few. This book was just not what I was expecting. It is informative and gives good statistics and is informative.
Some may really like this book, I just didn’t enjoy it.

I graciously received an advance e-copy from netgalley to review. All opinions are my own.

An excellent book, deBoer has always done a great job calling out the Left for not living up to the potential he sees. Fact-based but easy to read.

“It’s important to say that when I speak about liberals, I’m not talking about the average Democrat.”

Carl Sagan said that every question is a cry to understand the world. So, what does DeBoer mean? Perhaps this sums it up: “Some lucky centrists out there could have the country they desire with a few minor tweaks, but the leftists need systemic change.”

DoBoer is clearly passionate, an activist and self-identified Marxist since adolescence, but he discusses his vision and the impediments to change in a manner that does not feel off-putting. “I have no fetish for civility,” he says, but he recognizes that the way to achieve his social justice goal, “is to create a discourse that’s more careful, more welcoming.”

DeBoer covers a lot of ground analyzing the make up of those on the left and the various approaches in addressing social issues. He covers the use of violence early on, arguing against it; the nonprofit “industrial complex,” which he sees as inefficient and a drain on resources; and online efforts such as #MeToo and why, he says, the unprecedented emotional propulsion faded. Throughout the book, he builds a case for change and offers ways to achieve his goal of rehabilitating far-left American politics.

“I think most people want to come together across difference for the good of all, rather than to be divided into smaller and smaller slices based on identity categories they don’t control.”

This book will be released September 5, 2023. Thank you to NetGalley and Simon & Schuster for allowing me to read this eARC.

This was amazing and I can’t wait to get my physical copy so I can annotate it. Great writing, easy to follow and understand. Topic is super important especially right now. This book was great

Good overview of the topic for interested parties. A combination of historical study and practical advice for those interested in creating change without overtaking a grassroots movement.