<< 1 >>
Rating: 
Summary: Not for the stupid or the impatient.
Review: A dense, well-researched, heavily end-noted book.
If you have an interest in advertising, marketing and or American sociology within the modern "consumer" context, this book is for you. Further, regardless of your political/ideological leanings, if you are intelligent and prize facts regardless of how they make you feel (assuming you have an interest in the subject area of the book), you will appreciate this book.
Rating: 
Summary: A must-read critique for our obession with hyper capitalism
Review: Before I say anything else about this book, I want to address the very strange claim made by a couple of reviewers that Thomas Frank doesn't understand economics. What is bizarre about that statement is that nowhere in the book does Frank talk about economics. If you look at most of the books by people like George Stigler or Gary Becker or Kenneth J. Arrow or any of a host of economists, you will find none of the issues discussed in this book. What is closer to the truth is that Frank discusses some of the assumptions that people make about business and the market. But this is unrelated to economics. When Martin Friedman argues for a radically free market economy, he has ceased speaking as an economist and has become a political philosopher, just as when Amartya Sen ceases writing about economics and begins talking about issues of justice and fairness in a political system, he has become a political philosopher. One speaks as an economist when stating what the effect of strong central regulation has on foreign investment, but one speaks as a political scientist when saying that deregulation is a bad or a good thing.
Nonetheless, Frank is very definitely concerned with the assumptions that underlie much market-oriented policy of the past decade or so. In a sense, Frank is trying to revive questions that progressives such as Teddy Roosevelt, William Jennings Bryan, Woodrow Wilson, and Franklin Roosevelt asked about the fairness of a society in which the needs of the many could be ignored in favor of the needs of the few. These individuals, like Frank, were deeply concerned with issues of economic equality. In the past two decades, a revival of Social Darwinism has occurred, with the result that we are in the midst of the most dramatic concentration of wealth in the hands of a tiny elite at the expense of the middle class and the impoverished. A whole litany of statistics can be marshaled here. Frank notes that according to Federal Reserve numbers in 1979 20% of the wealth was in the hands of the top 1%, a number that strikes me as far too large. Yet by 1999 37% of the wealth was in the hands of the top 1%. After several rounds of tax cuts for the wealthy and investor classes, what would that percentage be today? 43%? 45%? 48? Clearly it is a pattern that has that been reversed. All economic indicators reveal that in the past twenty-three years there has been a dramatic shift in the wealth of the nation from the middle class to a small economic elite. Real wages for the middle class have fallen, while we are experiencing a dramatic increase in the number of millionaires and billionaires. Frank clearly thinks this is completely messed up, and I doubt if many Americans would disagree.
ONE MARKET UNDER GOD deals with the panoply of problems that result from the allied beliefs in market populism (which is one of the ultimate oxymorons) and extreme capitalism. The passion for making all roads straight for rampant capitalism, the mania for deregulation, the utter disregard for all criteria for the economic health of any nation other than how the markets are doing, are all unquestioned manias that dominate current social and political discourse. Yet FDR insisted that it was a shameful situation where we as a nation considered that the nation as a whole was doing well if the majority of the citizens were not doing well. But in the market craze of the past two decades, most Americans have not done well. Frank implies that we might want to rethink a society that thinks that America benefits from a company laying off 20,000 workers because their stock goes up as a result. As Frank points out, consideration for workers and the masses has largely dropped out of the picture.
Frank chronicles the obsession with extreme capitalism that characterizes our society (and continues to do so even after the bubble collapse suffered in 2001), and the vast array of prophets that harkens not its desirability (in fact, no one even thinks to argue that the hyper capitalism that has gripped our society is a good thing; they merely assume this as a given) but to its inevitability. Frank finds all this more than a little nutty and the obvious point of the book is to make us all stand back a bit and reconsider whether this turbo capitalism will truly result in a kind of world that we truly want.
Frank brings a number of strengths to the table in this book. First, he is a fine historian, with a much deeper grasp of trends and developments in American history than is needed for this study. Second, he is a fabulous writer. He isn't quite as funny as a comic such as Al Franken, but he is the equal of a Molly Ivins. So, in addition to being incredibly informative and to being crucial in making us rethink our national goals, it is also a pleasure to read.
I'll close with a personal anecdote. As I was reading this book (which I interrupted to read his more recent and equally superb book, WHAT'S THE MATTER WITH KANSAS?), I mentioned to some friends over Thai food that I was reading a great book by Thomas Frank. One of my friends remarked, "Oh, I had a friend at the U of C who had a brother named Tom Frank. They roomed together and threw some really great parties. He edits THE BAFFLER now." Well, the author of this book is the founder, of course, of THE BAFFLER, and I find it somehow comforting that such a pertinent and morally powerful book was written by someone who knows how to party.
Rating:
Summary: Good Work
Review: Good work, Thomas Frank. This book is a revealing transcoding of the corporate mythology of the 90's, a rabidly hyped symbolic order cooked up by admen, marketers, and management gurus at the behest of the top 1%. It goes by the name market populism. If you've read Fredric Jameson, you will recognize the practical, real-world analyses of the 're-narratavized' cultural fragment. Capital takes cultural artifacts which may have opposed it previously, (e.g. revolution, class war, freedom, democracy), and re-appropriates it for use in its' own narrative, to justify its own ends (the inflation of securities and paper wealth). Thus historical data, or ideological conflict or even Marxist utopianism is re-narrativized by big money in the mass media. Plenty of explanation of how Capital effaces the differences between all those dialectical poles,like a home-grown Baudrillard with easy-to-follow examples. Where the book lacked was in it's not drumming home what exactly the costs were, especially in terms of the destructive effects of international finance capital, the dis-lodging of a billion people into shanty towns by Global Capital, and the environmental destruction rent by Trans-national Capital. You might take a look at one of David Korten's book for this, or George Soros' On Globalization. But most important about the book is the fact that it questions what has been so vigorously sold as 'inevitable' to the rest of us, it maintains the possibility of negating what seems so Universal on CNN or Fox News. It is a supreme act of historical transparency, pointing to a way we might go from a way we've already been.
Rating: 
Summary: Three words for the price of one: what a bargain---not!
Review: Having read Frank's "What's the matter with Kansas?"---which I quite liked---I started this book. I looked forward to reading a critique of the "Emperor's New Economic Paradigm": that the almighty *Free Market* is the answer to all of America's problems. However, after struggling to stay awake through the first 50 pages, I cried "uncle". Frank is not content to make a point but must go on to remake it again and again ad nauseum. And to add injury to insult, the book's tiny, thin-line font is rather hard on the eyes even with my normal reading glasses.
Rating:
Summary: Great intentions
Review: I am very grateful that someone like Thomas Frank is writing, being published, and being relatively widely read. The voices that question The Almighty Market are few and far between. I would recommend this book to anyone interested in politics, economics, cultural studies, marketing, or journalism, as well as anyone who enjoys an interesting argument made in an accessible, engaging, often funny style. The two pages on the horrible "Who Moved My Cheese" book alone are worth cracking open One Market Under God. That said, however, this book could be a lot stronger. He returns repeatedly to a narrow group of sources (Wired magazine, the movie Pleasantville, management gurus, etc) in making his argument about the new rule of the idea he calls "market populism." I'm not convinced it's as ubiquitous as he makes it sound. In addition, I was intrigued by his obvious displeasure with anyone who put down the Frankfurt School, but I never heard why he thinks they are still relevant. Also, the disparagement of unions is another key theme in the book but we never find out what exactly everyone's gripe is with them or why Frank believes those gripes are unfounded. I hope that he will address these in his next book with more detail.
Rating:
Summary: What's the fuss all about?
Review: I guess I was hoping this would be an updated version of Robert Kuttner's Everything for Sale: The Virtues and Limits of Markets. But this book treats the Clinton Democrats as if they were the far right wing of the political spectrum. After 3 years with Bush, I have little tolerance for left wing attacks on Clinton's New Democrats. I have not read beyond the first chapter, but potential readers should know that the author is focusing his complaints on the pro-business policies of the Democrats, seemingly without cognizance of the Republicans. Perhaps in early 2000 the author felt they were irrelevant. Big surprise! Extreme lack of perspective here! This says it all: the author chooses to cite Paul Krugman as the typical economist promoting the triumph of markets. If you are looking for a book that provided a backdrop for the downfall of Gore at the hands of the Nader left, this will read well. But these days, accusing the Democrats of being too pro-business seems quaint.
Rating: 
Summary: Big Bubble Bursting BUMMER
Review: This book is devastating. I struggled so hard to read the first 50 pages. I learned about his thesis: Market Populism.BUT, the witty, tongue-in-cheek, op-ed type voice is extremely difficult to read and unbelievably redundant. Its like reading a million witty, sharp-tongued op-ed pieces. Great point he's trying to make, but amazingly frustrating to read.
Rating:
Summary: What's the fuss all about?
Review: This thoughtful, well researched, highly praised, and cogently written book was published three years ago, so why all the recent vitriol from negative reviewers? In fact, these harshly negative reviewers are *really* annoyed at the favorable response to the author's new book (see the just-published WHAT'S THE MATTER WITH KANSAS?). And in their zeal to trash the author and his useful discussion of how conservative voters have ceded their own true economic interests to calculated -- but essentially dead-end -- appeals to conservative values, these frustrated rightwing critics have extended their campaign to all things Tom Frank-related. If they actually read any of Frank's books, they might find much in his work that is sympathetic and fair-minded. Unfortunately, they have yielded to the right-wing preference for shrillness and black and white thinking over nuanced argument and real debate (but alas, that's what's the matter with liberals). Ignore the bombast and read this book -- and decide for yourself.
Rating:
Summary: Bursting the bubble
Review: Thomas Frank's One Market Under God is an important book and offers interesting insights into the stock market hysteria of the nineties while capturing the sense of delusion of those who remained bewildered in the economic sidelines. Frank academically dissects the New Economy and reveals its emptiness. It's a sort of "Extraordinary delusions and the Madness of Crowds" of the modern age. While Frank's style may be pedantic at times, he reveals a pungent and welcome sarcasm that we'll have you laughing in revenge at all the hype of the market and its instruments form 'lifestyle' magazines to over-produced television commercials. One of his biggest and most effective targets is the magazine "Fast Company". The main argument of the book is that in the nineties the public at large has been convinced that markets were the ideal solution to all ills, social and economic. This occurred to such a degree that the market champions became popular heroes, while the snobs were those who criticized or were skeptical of the market's all-powerful mantra. Frank presents the media and corporate manufacture of the rhetoric and - let's say it 'frankly' propaganda'- that fueled the market bubble and myth as the Keynesian economic system was rapidly being dismantled under our noses. I recommend reading this entertaining as well as thorough analysis with another fascinating look at the emergence of market economics dominance, "Turbo Capitaliosm" by Edward Luttwak and "Globalization and its Discontents" by Jospeh Stiglitz - ironically one of Bill Clinton's top economic advisers. Also look for Thomas Frank's articles in the magazine he edits "The Baffler".
Rating:
Summary: Valuable Counter-Point to Blind Faith in "Markets"
Review: While I disagree with Thomas Frank a lot, I am forced to admit that there is more than a grain of truth in his criticism. At times polemic, other times ranting, sometimes he just says something that blows away a lot of the "conventional wisdom" that we are fed and many times accept. The largest strength of this book is not that it offers any sort of alternative (It really doesn't), it is that he is criticizing things that need to be criticized. Over the last 20 years or so, critical writing and commentary has lapsed, and offered little voice of reform or change. It is nice to see that someone offers dissent to many cultural values that have become solidified and crusty (even if it is at 90+dB). In an age of blind faith in "The Market" there is a voice of skepticism in Thomas Frank's _One Market Under God_. If you are a God fearing, Capitalist-loving, Market Driven, person, this book may be especially valuable to read -- if for no other reason, to hear from someone who disagrees with you and has no fear in stating it clearly! I disagree with a lot of his thesis, but I cannot give this book anything less than 5 stars!
<< 1 >>
|
