Customer Reviews

Right-Wing Populism in America: Too Close for Comfort

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

 

 

A balanced historical account of a skein of American political thought that the authors argue persuasively is far more mainstream than most observers would want to believe.

It's interesting to read down some of the other contributions in the "Reader Reviews" and see how defensive some of the responses are. The reason this type of reaction is surprising is that there is nothing accusatory or inflammatory in this book's rhetoric and it is exhaustively and accurately researched. Demagogues of the left like the "populist" Andrew Jackson (here debunked as a genocidal Indian fighter and tool of private banking interests) and Louisiana's Depression era Kingfish Huey Long share page space with more recent anti-government bogies of the modern American right like David Duke and Pat Buchanan, and the co-opting of themes sounded by Right Wing populists like (Democrat) George Wallace by modern Republican presidents like Richard Nixon is honestly depicted.

What this book does not do is paint all people on the Republican side of the ledger as extremists. But when its chronology reaches contemporary times, it does recognize that the Republican Party has become a haven for or at least a tolerant silent partner in many of the ideas -- hatred of government, immigrant-bashing, the elevation of business interests at the expense of individual liberties, apocalyptic Christianity that seeks to impose a religious ideal on secular American society -- that have fueled anti-democratic Right Wing populist movements since the 1830s. Not to recognize this would be less than honest, since the whole point of this book is to demonstrate the continuity of Right-Wing Populism as an organizing principle of American political discourse.

A sober, exhaustive and excellent piece of work for readers on BOTH SIDES of the political fence. If left-wingers can read "The Closing of the American Mind" as a challenge to their assumptions, those of the right should consider doing the same with this fine piece of work.

The schematic that Berlet and Lyons propose to categorize various right wing populist movements throughout American history in the beginning of this exhaustive and exhausting survey is a fairly reasonable analytical tool. The problem is that it tends to constrain the historical analysis because each group, introduced in sequence, must be fitted into it's proper place within the scheme. It wears thin pretty fast.

They've done their research, they cite the right authors, they dig deeply into the past, but soon it's all merely additive, not insightful. It works like this: first a description of this movement, then this one, both of which shared some traits, then this one which developed a new means of expressing their xenophobia, etc. What it all adds up to is that any insights about these groups, or their proliferation, tend to be located within a fairly narrow range of observation.

Still it's a good reference work, and, if you're interested in the learning some of the tactics used by these groups to destroy the last vestiges of the neoliberal orthodoxy, to draw boundaries around groups who are not white, not male, not Christian, not true Americans, this book is a good place to start.

As a sympathetic reader, I was somewhat disappointed by this book. The first 8 chapters, which are a historical outline of right-wing populist movements, attempt to cover so much material that many controversial assertions are unsupported by examples or documentation. Lyons seems to find evidence for right wing movements among any group that ever expressed a racist thought (which includes most groups in earlier American history).

The second half of the book, dealing with modern developments, is much better, partly because Berlet has a more narrow focus and more space to develop his ideas. Still, he goes too far occasionally when he implies that everyone who holds traditional American Christian beliefs (such as traditional, heterosexual families, the return of Christ to the earth, divine inspiration in the writing of the Constitution) is part of this right-wing movement. It is important to distinguish between people whose Christian values lead them to oppose abortion, reform welfare and decry the degeneration of popular culture,while supportive of our nation,and those who are out to eliminate our pluralistic society and replace it with much more theocratic leadership.

In spite or these reservations, this book should frighten anyone who follows American politics today. These authors persuasively argue that the anti-democratic ideas we normally associate with extremists have integrated themselves into the mainstream, and have a suprisingly large influence in our politics. Hillary Clinton's comment about a 'vast, right-wing conspiracy' may have been overstated, but readers of this book will see that she wasn't that far off the mark.

Right Wing Populism in America is a tonic for thinking people whose minds are stuffed with too much bad sociology. Chip Berlet has been a front line reporter, editor and lay scholar of rightist movements in the U.S. for a generation. Berlet and Lyons' prodigious knowledge of conservative movements in the U.S. puts to shame so many academics whose dusty theories have little relevance to the dynamics of modern conservative movements.

This book will help wring out of the fearful academy the kind of lively, informed and fair-minded dialog and debate that liberal education is supposed to be about. The faculty member who teaches from this book will find his or her classes growing in popularity. For the supplementary reading list, add: Eternal Hostility: The Struggle Between Theocracy and Democracy, by Frederick Clarkson, and books by Russ Bellant, Sara Diamond, Robert Boston, and Jean Hardisty -- and deadly classrooms will be lively, well informed, and deeply engaged in the stuff of which education is made.

Unfortunately, cheap accusations and smear tactics are being used against this worthy text. Don't believe them. Read it, and arrive at your own conclusions. The rabid unthinking attacks on this book may very well be sourced to the kind of narrowly demagogic rightwing populism that the book so accurately and clearly describes.

This book has become all the more essential in the wake of 9/11. Anti-immigrant and religious bigotry are significant ripple effects that we will be dealing with for years to come. This book helps place in perspective the rightist movements fueled by such reactionary sentiments.

Anti-intellectualism has always driven the right-wing of American politics. Coupled with "Nativism", racism, and a whole host of chauvinistic "-isms", the right-wing has always been a dangerously regressive movement that threatens to undo the work of the founders and destroy the Constitution.

Read this book - and know America's internal enemies.

This is a sober, well-reasoned book that deserves a good look. One need only to glance at all the one-star reviews below to see how necessary it is. Scary folks.

Right-wing militia and other anarchist organizations have received renewed attention since the Oklahoma City bombing: Right-Wing Populism in America examines their historical roots and current operations in this country, with two leading political analysis providing the background and insights on conspiracy theory, ethnic scapegoating and other movement trademarks. From the Ku Klux Klan to nationalist cliques, this provides an important consideration of sentiments and motivations.

The authors of this work did their homework on the tumultuous political strife of the 1930s and beyond very well.

'If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear' - Orwell.

Defensive and reactionary negative reviews of this book do not take away from the very relevant and necessary content of it. The fact that it hits a little close to home for some actually validates it, as the a authors argue (and rightly so) that dangerous right-wing populism doesn't just exist in so-called extremist neo-fascist groups such as the KKK (the KKK can hardly be considered a threat to anything anymore, mind you) and skinheads, but also in the back yards of suburban North America. It is now the American norm. Extremism as a mainstream ideology.

Read this book.

_Right-Wing Populism in America: Too Close for Comfort_ (2000) by Chip Berlet and Matthew N. Lyons was written following the Clinton era at the beginning of the Bush era, but before the events of September 11. As such the book fails to predict some of the current situation in light of these events. Further, the book could not have foreseen the apparent left turn of the United States with the election of Obama, nor the apparent right wing backlash to this election.

This book begins by pointing out all the conflicts inherent in American culture. The book discusses such issues as slavery, killing of American Indians, race conflict, opposition to Britain, unbridled capitalism, the conflict between capital and labor, conflicts between populists and elites, and the role of producerism. The book offers some interesting analysis of the rise of populism, explaining how the War of Independence was actually a populist uprising against the British. The book also shows how movements such as Jacksonianism, anti-masonry, and others in the early republic were in fact populist movements in opposition to corporate control and Eastern bankers or other conspirators. The book analyzes right wing populism by contrasting it to other movements maintaining that it is inherently regressive of "fascist". The book considers such movements as the Ku Klux Klan (but maintains problematically for example that the KKK incorporated progressive themes), opposition to immigration and Catholics (the "Know Nothings"), early socialist and labor opposition to Chinese immigrants, and the role of progressive reformers such as Teddy Roosevelt and the Nordic supremacists. The book points out several conflicting issues for right wing populism such as the issue of socialism (expounded by such groups as labor unions opposed to immigration, and individuals such as Huey Long and Father Charles Coughlin during the Great Depression) versus capitalism, the issue of business conflict in the opposition between business nationalists (particularly those who sought expansion into South America and Asia) versus elite multinationals (who sought expansion into Europe and sided with British imperialists), the role of isolationism and anti-communism, the conflict over environmentalism, and the problematic of support for the national security state (especially the conflict between the FBI and the elitist CIA during and after the McCarthy era). The book is better in its early chapters written by Matthew Lyons than it is in its later chapters written by Chip Berlet who indulges in wild conspiracy theories about the "radical right".

However, I found that the book makes a number of particularly absurd claims. Here are a few of them:
1. The British were actually more friendly to the blacks and Indians during the War for Independence than were the American colonists. The authors side with the British against the colonists for this reason. (However, the authors are quick to criticize both blacks and Indians later in the book when the sided with nationalism or isolationism during the Second World War.)
2. Henry Ford was a fascist who had a network of spies and enforced personal hygiene (what's wrong with personal hygiene?) as well as promoting environmentalism.
3. The alternative media is actually a tool of the mainstream and corporate media which is actually biased to the right. Huh?
4. Criticism of bankers, internationalists, or opposition to the welfare state is actually a secret code for anti-semitism and racism.
5. Mainstream right wing writings contain secret codes that refer to racism and anti-semitism even if they don't mention Jews or race.
6. Promoters of Christianity, culture war, or Western civilization are actually white supremacists and no different from "biological racists".
7. Right wing women are "tricked" by men into not supporting feminism.
8. The author Chip Berlet has a downright bizarre obsession with Lyndon LaRouche and in a fantastic leap of logic tried to link Joseph McCarthy with LaRouche. Huh?
9. The book suffers from a genuine confusion between more mainstream conservatives and the Christian right (who support internationalism and Zionism) and traditional conservatives and the hard right who are opposed to both.

A final issue is that of the book itself being an example of what it claims to confront. While the authors are at least willing to admit that those in the radical right are not all suffering from a mental instability (as some liberals maintain) and that the left is not immune to the same sorts of tactics, they end up just defending political correctness and the status quo. Further, this book engages in a pathetic and stupid scapegoating of poor, lower, and middle class whites and small farmers, blaming them for racism, xenophobia, oppression, and a whole host of other evils; while exonerating the activities of political elites, finance capitalists, bankers, globalists, and British imperialists claiming that they are unfairly caricatured and scapegoated. In sum, this book mirrors everything that it claims that the radical right is doing and reverses it. Plus, the authors serve as "gatekeepers" for the left, pushing aside all alternative or radical sources as "conspiracy theories".

With the recent election of Obama, there is the possibility of a genuine right wing backlash which we may be witnessing. As such, I felt the topic of this book was important in light of current events.