Customer Reviews

No Mercy: How Conservative Think Tanks and Foundations Changed America's Social Agenda

5 star:		(0)
4 star:		(1)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

"Follow The Money", deep throat told Woodward and Burnstein. No Mercy does exactly that. It traces the spider web of think tanks, endowments, and conservative politics from group to group. The authors provide an excellent path from the eugenics and racist Pioneer fund in the early '30s and how it, and other groups, intermingle. The details on the ultrasecret Council on Foriegn Policy, the Landmark legal foundation, and many, many others.

In fairness to the reader, this book is not a light read. The story is not fluid. It's a book for the serious political researcher, journalist, or political scientist.

This book was helpful in seeing how conservative institutions have influenced numerous issues, but it did have several flaws. I would recommend it, as there are few books on the topic, and due to the quality of the research, but with these disclaimers:

1. The authors come from a decidedly left-of-center perspective, which tilts how they view the world. Hence a moderate group may be described as a mildly conservative one. This is not a major flaw obviously. 2. Much of the material is rather dry, as in most real research. This isn't pleasure reading, and shouldn't be bought as such. 3. Satire is used way too much in title headings - it's not as bad as in some books, but pretty blatant, and it distracts from the quality of the work. 4. The opinion that liberals and others on the left should be an equal part of the debate so that we get a balanced picture is good, but the idea that those groups should rely more on think tanks and foundations is silly. The book's major point that I got is how those vehicles remove thought from the process in favor of ideology, and encourage close-mindedness. If liberals copy think tank stratagems, it's their loss. I personally would hope all ideologies abandon these inherently systems.

Anyhow, I'd recommend buying this or borrowing it from the library, but with these reservations and the caveat that you shouldn't expect too much.

This book is primarily interesting as insight into the mindset of the radical left. Having largely failed in a contest of ideas, many on the collectivist end of the political spectrum have been groping for a palatable reason to explain their waning influence. This book provides the comforting fiction that the far left's failure does not result from internal problems ut rather from an evil cabal of right wing think tanks. The book is an excercise in self-deception that is at points fascinating. It lays out a simplistic worldview where ideological opponents are motivated by money, not conviction. Framed this way, the left can continue to blame its troubles on others while avoiding serious introspection.

Unfortunately, the authors play fast and loose with the facts. Funding data is exaggerated and not placed in context. In addition, the common sense thesis that people tend to fund causes with which they agree -- rather than think tank researchers being willing to say anything for cash -- is never really considered. In short, this book is a fairly clumsy attempt to dehumanize the right while ignoring bias in the authors' own idological home. It may make those on the left feel good, but it won't contribute to your understanding of what makes the opposition tick.