Publication
Metropolitan Books (2020), 320 pages
Description
"From the prophetic author of the now-classic What's the Matter with Kansas? and Listen, Liberal, an eye-opening account of populism, the most important-and misunderstood-movement of our time. Rarely does a work of history contain startling implications for the present, but in The People, No Thomas Frank pulls off that explosive effect by showing us that everything we think we know about populism is wrong. Today "populism" is seen as a frightening thing, a term pundits use to describe the racist philosophy of Donald Trump and European extremists. But this is a mistake. The real story of populism is an account of enlightenment and liberation; it is the story of American democracy itself, of its ever-widening promise of a decent life for all. Taking us from the tumultuous 1890s, when the radical left-wing Populist Party-the biggest mass movement in American history-fought Gilded Age plutocrats to the reformers' great triumphs under Franklin Roosevelt and Harry Truman, Frank reminds us how much we owe to the populist ethos. Frank also shows that elitist groups have reliably detested populism, lashing out at working-class concerns. The anti-populist vituperations by the Washington centrists of today are only the latest expression. Frank pummels the elites, revisits the movement's provocative politics, and declares true populism to be the language of promise and optimism. The People, No is a ringing affirmation of a movement that, Frank shows us, is not the problem of our times, but the solution for what ails us"--… (more)
Collection
User reviews
LibraryThing member DavidWineberg
Thomas Frank has discovered that the term populism is fungible.
Since its invention in the late 1800s, when it meant the native intelligence of the populace at large to correct the ills and corruption of the USA, it has been hijacked numerous times in different eras. Like everything else in the
Populism started out as anger over property taxes, injustice, corruption and inequality in the Gilded Age, all of which were actually worse in the 1890s than they are today. Groups and movements formed. Authors began exposing abuses. The country slowly came around to seeing things weren’t as the founders had envisioned. To boil it down to a phrase, populism valued human rights over property rights.
Inevitably, the rich fired back. They portrayed populists not as reasoned citizens with legitimate positions, but as ignorant hayseeds, unfit to even speak let alone govern. Governing was for the governing class, made up of the rich and the credentialed, not farmers and laborers, women or nonwhites. Academics in particular showed themselves to be narrowminded, selfish and power-mad in their denunciations of populism.
As time wore on, they assigned populism to ever more evil traits. It didn’t matter how crazy the attack was. The elites lashed out in all directions, fighting to keep their exclusive domain of governing and pillaging. They attached it to Nazism, for example, when until that point populism had always been considered a leftist disease. It had been associated with the rise of labor unions, not fascists.
But, despite the battering and the haranguing by newspapers and magazines against it, the movement had a profound effect. It resulted in FDR’s unprecedented four terms as president, in which he established regulating agencies, old age pensions, works projects and numerous other egalitarian institutions for all, much to the continuing horror of the establishment. It was, as Noam Chomsky posited of such movements, a “Democracy Scare”.
The scales tipped back in the 1960s, when populism began to fade. There were numerous reasons, most of which Frank does not go into. People became weary of conformity and equality. They wanted to break out, to move ahead of the pack, not nestle in it. The cult of the individual arose and government receded. Populism became a sneeringly bad concept, assigned to crackpot Argentine dictators and buffoonish Italian prime ministers of the extreme right.
Now, in the Trump era, the concept has mutated into something that makes no sense at all – a corrupt billionaire president making himself and his class even richer, while claiming to represent the long-aggrieved and deceived working class. Frank says “If this is populism, the word has truly come to mean nothing.”
Frank has definitely done the research. He has found long forgotten leaders, long forgotten tracts, and long forgotten events - and rehabilitated them. Even the book’s title, The People, No is a takeoff on a long forgotten 1936 booklength poem by populist Carl Sandburg – The People, Yes.
Today, the term populism is shackled to bigotry, white supremacy, the patriarchy, and nothing at all to do with its roots in human rights and equality. It makes the book a wild ride.
For some reason, this is the season for books on populism. This is at least the fourth one I’ve seen so far, and the second I have read. The other, Robert Putnam’s Upswing, puts populism in perspective instead of exhaustive examination. Putnam shows the record inequality of the Gilded Age, the remarkable pendulum swing to the New Deal, the rise of the individual and decline of protections - as waves. He asks, can America break free of this stranglehold again? Can populism (the original version) return? Frank, on the other hand, is total immersion in the rise and perversion of populism. Two books, each with important messages not to be overlooked.
David Wineberg
Since its invention in the late 1800s, when it meant the native intelligence of the populace at large to correct the ills and corruption of the USA, it has been hijacked numerous times in different eras. Like everything else in the
Show More
universe, it doesn’t stay fixed for long.Populism started out as anger over property taxes, injustice, corruption and inequality in the Gilded Age, all of which were actually worse in the 1890s than they are today. Groups and movements formed. Authors began exposing abuses. The country slowly came around to seeing things weren’t as the founders had envisioned. To boil it down to a phrase, populism valued human rights over property rights.
Inevitably, the rich fired back. They portrayed populists not as reasoned citizens with legitimate positions, but as ignorant hayseeds, unfit to even speak let alone govern. Governing was for the governing class, made up of the rich and the credentialed, not farmers and laborers, women or nonwhites. Academics in particular showed themselves to be narrowminded, selfish and power-mad in their denunciations of populism.
As time wore on, they assigned populism to ever more evil traits. It didn’t matter how crazy the attack was. The elites lashed out in all directions, fighting to keep their exclusive domain of governing and pillaging. They attached it to Nazism, for example, when until that point populism had always been considered a leftist disease. It had been associated with the rise of labor unions, not fascists.
But, despite the battering and the haranguing by newspapers and magazines against it, the movement had a profound effect. It resulted in FDR’s unprecedented four terms as president, in which he established regulating agencies, old age pensions, works projects and numerous other egalitarian institutions for all, much to the continuing horror of the establishment. It was, as Noam Chomsky posited of such movements, a “Democracy Scare”.
The scales tipped back in the 1960s, when populism began to fade. There were numerous reasons, most of which Frank does not go into. People became weary of conformity and equality. They wanted to break out, to move ahead of the pack, not nestle in it. The cult of the individual arose and government receded. Populism became a sneeringly bad concept, assigned to crackpot Argentine dictators and buffoonish Italian prime ministers of the extreme right.
Now, in the Trump era, the concept has mutated into something that makes no sense at all – a corrupt billionaire president making himself and his class even richer, while claiming to represent the long-aggrieved and deceived working class. Frank says “If this is populism, the word has truly come to mean nothing.”
Frank has definitely done the research. He has found long forgotten leaders, long forgotten tracts, and long forgotten events - and rehabilitated them. Even the book’s title, The People, No is a takeoff on a long forgotten 1936 booklength poem by populist Carl Sandburg – The People, Yes.
Today, the term populism is shackled to bigotry, white supremacy, the patriarchy, and nothing at all to do with its roots in human rights and equality. It makes the book a wild ride.
For some reason, this is the season for books on populism. This is at least the fourth one I’ve seen so far, and the second I have read. The other, Robert Putnam’s Upswing, puts populism in perspective instead of exhaustive examination. Putnam shows the record inequality of the Gilded Age, the remarkable pendulum swing to the New Deal, the rise of the individual and decline of protections - as waves. He asks, can America break free of this stranglehold again? Can populism (the original version) return? Frank, on the other hand, is total immersion in the rise and perversion of populism. Two books, each with important messages not to be overlooked.
David Wineberg
Show Less
LibraryThing member swmproblems
Unbelievable and highly recommended to anyone interested in history, political science, or our current events taking shape right now.
LibraryThing member Paul_S
You cannot write a whole book in a snarky tone of voice. Let me rephrase that, you should not write a whole book in a snarky tone of voice. In between the sarcasm and the author's self described tender feelings about certain topics which he refuses to discuss I am disappointed this is now
Still, I have learned something new. Didn't know about the historic origins.
I hope the author can see the irony of him decrying the modern day populists in the same way he bemoans the elite to have decried them in the past (in the same exact manner!).
Show More
acceptable (nay, common) for books.Still, I have learned something new. Didn't know about the historic origins.
I hope the author can see the irony of him decrying the modern day populists in the same way he bemoans the elite to have decried them in the past (in the same exact manner!).
Show Less
LibraryThing member ericlee
Thomas Frank is best known as the author of What’s the Matter with Kansas?, which was a brilliant analysis of why working class people in America — and not only in Kansas — so often vote against their own class interests. A sequel to that book, Listen, Liberal was a powerful critique of the
Frank’s new book, which is about both populism and its critics, tackles head on the mis-labelling of politicians like Donald Trump as ‘populists’. Describing the history of populism from the early days of the People’s Party in the US through the 1930s New Deal, Frank identifies a strand of left-wing, anti-corporate, pro-democratic sentiment that should be known as ‘populism’.
By the time he reaches the 1960s it becomes clear who Frank’s heroes are — because they are mine as well. He quotes approvingly from Michael Harrington, A. Philip Randolph and Bayard Rustin. Rustin in particular is shown — correctly — as a visionary, with a clear strategy for social transformation, more relevant today than ever.
And Donald Trump? Just a charlatan millionaire, one in a long line of such characters who don’t deserve to be called populists.
Highly recommended.
Show More
pro-corporate neoliberals who had taken over the Democratic Party. The two books taken together can be seen as making the case for the Bernie Sanders’ campaigns of 2016 and 2020.Frank’s new book, which is about both populism and its critics, tackles head on the mis-labelling of politicians like Donald Trump as ‘populists’. Describing the history of populism from the early days of the People’s Party in the US through the 1930s New Deal, Frank identifies a strand of left-wing, anti-corporate, pro-democratic sentiment that should be known as ‘populism’.
By the time he reaches the 1960s it becomes clear who Frank’s heroes are — because they are mine as well. He quotes approvingly from Michael Harrington, A. Philip Randolph and Bayard Rustin. Rustin in particular is shown — correctly — as a visionary, with a clear strategy for social transformation, more relevant today than ever.
And Donald Trump? Just a charlatan millionaire, one in a long line of such characters who don’t deserve to be called populists.
Highly recommended.
Show Less
ISBN
1250220114 / 9781250220110