|
|
246 of 272 people found the following review helpful:
3.0 out of 5 stars
Well intentioned, but defeats its own purpose, April 6, 2004
Two chapters into this book, I thought, "wow, everyone should read this!" Two chapters further, I wondered if the publisher had accidentally mixed pages from another book into my copy. The premise of "The Progress Paradox" is that all the gloom and doom forecasters are not only currently wrong, but have been wrong for generations. By every measurable standard, things are getting better, not just for Americans in general, but for the world at large. There is more prosperity, less hunger, a better environment, etc. The introduction, chapter one, and chapter two are true to this theme. They outline in remarkable detail exactly how our lives are better than those of our forebearers and what kind of work our ancestors had to do to make oure lives better. In chapter 3, Easterbrook outlines reasons why Americans fail to believe the proof before their eyes. But in chapter 4, he starts a high handed moral lecture. After telling the reader things are better, we should be more grateful for what we have, and we should learn to appriciate life, more, he then attacks the reader for not doing anything about poverty in America, for not insuring all American citizens, and for allowing hunger to exist in the world. Now, if Easterbrook had any suggestions, even ridiculous ones, this would not be so bad, but he goes from telling the reader "everything is better than you think it is" to telling the reader, "no! I lied! Everything IS going to hell in a handbasket and it's ALL YOUR FAULT!" This does not sell his initial message. He continues to lecture his middle class American readers (who can afford to spend $25 on a hardback book) about buying SUVs, talking on cell phones, and other technological advances he sees as nothing more than displays of immorality. After telling us that not only our lives are better, but the lives of the poor worldwide are better, he lecures us for not making massive governmental and sociatal sweeping changes - but never once suggests HOW we are supposed to do so. Somewhere towards the middle of the book, he starts referncing his belief in Christianity, then instructing "good Christians" on their moral duties. Towards the end of the book, he says people will be unhappy until "the Lord returns to Earth." A book which started as a scientific analysis of progress and perception ends as a very unscientific sermon. Easterbrook insists the reader should personally cure AIDS in Africa, insure the American poor, eliminate world hunger, and all while working with international agencies. Other than sending a check to the charity of your choice, he never suggests HOW to enact these sweeping changes. Easterbrook insists to not do so is immoral, but average Americans who can not get more than a form letter in response from their senators are left with no suggestions as to how they can enact these changes. The end result is, instead of empowering the reader to feel good about our place in world history and offering reasonable suggestions for how we can help elliviate the suffering of others, this book turns into a moralistic lecture on hedonism. In the last chapter, he tries to sweep all the lecturing under the rug with a short happy ending. This defeats the book's alleged purpose. I would highly recommend the introduction and first two chapters, and would guardedly recommend chapters 11 and 12, but can not in good concience recommend this book as a whole.
|