52 of 53 people found the following review helpful:
4.0 out of 5 stars
Vanishing Breed, February 19, 2006
This review is from: Attention Deficit Democracy (Hardcover)
It's probably a measure of the author's "attention deficit" thesis that many well-meaning folks mistake Bovard for a liberal because of his unsparing criticisms of the Bush administration. He's not. Instead he belongs to that vanishing school of thought known as traditional conservatism. The work serves as a reminder for true political conservatives-- I don't mean the empire-building, corporate cronies of the Bush administration-- and should come as a breath of fresh air to them.
The text argues vigorously for a minimalist state on the classic grounds that state power inevitably threatens precious individual liberty, while the only democratic check on the rise of a threatening "Leviathan" rests with a knowledgable citizenry. In Bovard's view, the problem with today's citizenry is they lack both an understanding of constitutional principles and a concern with protecting tthem. In short, the democracy suffers from attention deficit. Thus constitutional liberties are being forfeited to an ever-expanding state apparatus, particularly in the aftermath of 9-11.
The book's strength lies in detailing this abandonment, which Bovard executes with style and vigor. As a non-conservative who stands to lose the same rights, I'm glad to see the few remaining traditionalists stand up to the radicals who think that opposing gay marriage and abortion-- at the same time they override constitutional protections, run up huge war-making deficits, and meddle in the internal affairs of other nations-- are enough to merit the title of conservative.
Although there are assumptions readers (including myself) may take exception to, the factual evidence Bovard marshals remains unassailable thanks to follow-up disclosures on headlines of the day. Moreover, whatever the ultimate merits of a minimalist state in an age of corporate dominance and planetary decline, it's time for principled conservatives to stand alongside Bovard in defense of constitutional values. Happily, the book represents a forceful contribution to that effort.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
37 of 40 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
'A NATION OF SHEEP WILL BEGET A GOVERNMENT OF WOLVES" Edward R. Murrow, January 20, 2006
This review is from: Attention Deficit Democracy (Hardcover)
In his latest offering James Bovard does an excellent job of proving that Murrow's warning has come to pass in no uncertain terms.
With his top notch research, an excellent blending of historical as well as up to the moment events; this writer has once again shown that to allow Washington to conduct unsupervised activities is to pass to our children a disgraceful legacy, along with a mortgage that they will never pay off.
Bovard shows THE BIG PICTURE is distracting the people from all of the components of its making. As well as how all of those components effect the lives of all Americans not only today, but for generations to come.
It is a very sobering read.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
26 of 28 people found the following review helpful:
4.0 out of 5 stars
Raises a Serious Problem, February 13, 2006
This review is from: Attention Deficit Democracy (Hardcover)
"Attention Deficit Democracy" addresses what Bovard sees as rising ignorance of the electorate, fear mongering tactics that permeate U.S. presidential elections, and our Messianic Democracy (long history of deceit and foreign manipulation in the name of spreading democracy). In Bovard's opinion "the will of the people" is often simply a measure of how many people fell for which lies, and/or were frightened by which advertisements.
The bulk of the book consists of a seemingly endless series of surveys showing American voters as uninformed, often with major consequences for rational voting. For example, a University of Maryland 10/04 poll concluded "It is clear that supporters of the president are more likely to have misperceptions (eg. linking Saddam to 9/11) than those who oppose him." Another survey found that each time new warnings of terrorist threats became public, Bush's approval rating rose an average 3%.
Clearly modern democracy and representative government are based on faith that the people can control what they do not understand - the myriad of often inter-locking issues of today. While Bovard does not present anything near a compelling case establishing that today's voters are less knowledgeable than their predecessors, it is clear that government complexity and involvement has grown by leaps and bounds. Thus, it does not require any great amount of analysis to conclude that being an informed citizen similarly requires a never-ending increase in learning what is happening. A few factoids are no longer enough; meanwhile, newspaper readership levels have declined from 60% in '92 to 40% in '02. (The significance of this finding, however, is unclear - obviously citizens could also be obtaining increased knowledge via TV and the Internet.) Nonetheless, assuming declining newspaper readership reflects NO INCREASE in citizen awareness, the result is "the will of the people" is an increasingly meaningless phrase.
Bovard skewers politicians from both parties, over the past 50+ years. However, without question Bush II bears the brunt of his often interesting criticisms and points. For example, days after 9/11, only 3% saw Saddam or Iraq as culprits; by 2/03 72% believed Hussein was personally involved. Similarly, by early '04 only 55% had fears of another terrorist attack; however, through adroit manipulation of the media by the FBI, administration officials (especially V.P. Cheney), and Homeland Security leadership - often simply rehashing old information - this was up to 64% by August. This increase was crucial to Bush's re-election since those seeing terrorism as the #1 issue voted almost 7:1 for Bush. (Meanwhile, piles of untranslated potential terrorist documents mounted, scandals in TSA and air marshall security arose, inadequate cargo screening, a porous border, etc. was largely ignored - critics were painted as traitors.
Bovard devotes a relatively long chapter to summarizing U.S. meddling in other nations' affairs - in the name of democracy. Tactics include CIA involvement, military support, and monetary support (eg. the National Endowment for Democracy - funded by the U.S. government, but laundered through other entities). Putting the Shah back in Iran ('53), supporting a military coup in Guatemala ('54), the Vietnam War, over-throwing Allende in Chile ('73) and Chavez in Venezuela ('02), spending $65+ million in the Ukraine '04 election, and interfering with early indigenous Iraqi political efforts after taking over the country were but a few of the examples - involving many Presidents and both parties.
Bovard's recommendations, however, were rather weak. Emphasizing "representative government (creating "less mass delusion" - somehow), and restoring the rule of law (almost laughable in today's climate of dubious spying, withholding information at will, enforcing tight party discipline to muscle support and stifle dissent, and packing the Supreme Court with supporters) were his two top ideas. To be honest, I don't have anything better to offer - other than we need to be re-thinking the appropriateness of our governmental system given the impossibility of acting as an informed electorate in our so-called democracy. Simply reforming lobbying abuses (not addressed by Bovard) is by no means sufficient.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
