Enjoy fast, free delivery, exclusive deals, and award-winning movies & TV shows with Prime
Try Prime and start saving today with fast, free delivery

Kindle
$4.99

Available instantly

Paperback
$15.95

Get Fast, Free Shipping with Amazon Prime FREE Returns

FREE delivery Thursday, February 1 on orders shipped by Amazon over $35

Select delivery location

Only 12 left in stock (more on the way).

$$15.95 () Includes selected options. Includes initial monthly payment and selected options. Details

Ships from

Amazon.com

Ships from

Amazon.com

Sold by

Amazon.com

Sold by

Amazon.com

Returns

Eligible for Return, Refund or Replacement within 30 days of receipt

Returns

Eligible for Return, Refund or Replacement within 30 days of receipt

This item can be returned in its original condition for a full refund or replacement within 30 days of receipt.

Read full return policy

Payment

Secure transaction

Payment

Secure transaction

We work hard to protect your security and privacy. Our payment security system encrypts your information during transmission. We don’t share your credit card details with third-party sellers, and we don’t sell your information to others. Learn more

Details

Add a gift receipt for easy returns

Get Fast, Free Shipping with Amazon Prime

FREE delivery Friday, February 2 on orders shipped by Amazon over $35

Select delivery location

Used: Good | Details

Sold by Jenson Books Inc

Fulfilled by Amazon

Access codes and supplements are not guaranteed with used items.

Other Sellers on Amazon

Added

Not added

$14.20
& FREE Shipping

Sold by: TommyBee

Added

Not added

$14.20
& FREE Shipping

Sold by: Carbenmadness Books

Added

Not added

$15.95
FREE Shipping on orders over $35.00 shipped by Amazon.

Sold by: Resource Warehouse

In Defense of Elitism Paperback – August 1, 1995

by William A. Henry III (Author)

4.4 95 ratings

See all formats and editions

{"desktop_buybox_group_1":[{"displayPrice":"$15.95","priceAmount":15.95,"currencySymbol":"$","integerValue":"15","decimalSeparator":".","fractionalValue":"95","symbolPosition":"left","hasSpace":false,"showFractionalPartIfEmpty":true,"offerListingId":"GJa3F5UDtYshkISF5pwYA7l3D3ZvLcLELIzZh4iv3DPrBPr6xRQhMV4wmXwkUAfBeT2rubByS28W1K5rZwC1e6AuMwX%2FCzo5b0B6l77dyTyPv8mTu%2BQU8fAz0TxVmodcYbxMgzF9S%2Fg%3D","locale":"en-US","buyingOptionType":"NEW","aapiBuyingOptionIndex":0}, {"displayPrice":"$6.34","priceAmount":6.34,"currencySymbol":"$","integerValue":"6","decimalSeparator":".","fractionalValue":"34","symbolPosition":"left","hasSpace":false,"showFractionalPartIfEmpty":true,"offerListingId":"GJa3F5UDtYshkISF5pwYA7l3D3ZvLcLEtD6sMmbe6NFRGBlvqS09Q0fHxhVr%2BrL0h3iY3VDIdBIAB9rLQbR8TlSdkMbE2YAzWA3OGXLDpsHw5K9pvFYKoDCd1%2BF0k32o77eB%2BbHF81yEeBfnz10%2B9Bif%2Fu2ga7mk5xN%2FrIjmGlyHq%2FPouf0u7KyKPlCs%2Fg1P","locale":"en-US","buyingOptionType":"USED","aapiBuyingOptionIndex":1}]}

Purchase options and add-ons

From the Pulitzer Prize-winning culture critic for Time magazine comes the tremendously controversial, yet highly persuasive, argument that our devotion to the largely unexamined myth of egalitarianism lies at the heart of the ongoing "dumbing of America."

Americans have always stubbornly clung to the myth of egalitarianism, of the supremacy of the individual average man. But here, at long last, Pulitzer Prize-winning critic William A. Henry III takes on, and debunks, some basic, fundamentally ingrained ideas: that everyone is pretty much alike (and should be); that self-fulfillment is more imortant thant objective achievement; that everyone has something significant to contribute; that all cultures offer something equally worthwhile; that a truly just society would automatically produce equal success results across lines of race, class, and gender; and that the common man is almost always right. Henry makes clear, in a book full of vivid examples and unflinching opinions, that while these notions are seductively democratic they are also hopelessly wrong.

Print length

212 pages
Language

English
Publisher

Anchor
Publication date

August 1, 1995
Dimensions

5.23 x 0.5 x 7.97 inches
ISBN-10

9780385479431
ISBN-13

978-0385479431
See all details

Frequently bought together

$15.95

Get it as soon as Thursday, Feb 1

Only 12 left in stock (more on the way).

Ships from and sold by Amazon.com.

+

In Defense of Elitism: Why I'm Better Than You and You are Better Than Someone Who Didn't Buy This Book

$15.48

Get it as soon as Thursday, Feb 1

Only 3 left in stock - order soon.

Sold by Impact Sales Force and ships from Amazon Fulfillment.

Total price:

To see our price, add these items to your cart.

Try again!

Details

Added to Cart

One of these items ships sooner than the other.

Show details Hide details

Choose items to buy together.

Joel Stein
459
Hardcover
74 offers from $1.25

Editorial Reviews

From Publishers Weekly

Pulitzer Prize-winning cultural critic Henry debunks ideas of inherent equality, arguing that not all achievements are the same.
Copyright 1995 Reed Business Information, Inc.

Review

"A  passionate yet reasoned argument for the proposition  that some people simply contribute more to society  than others. It challenges head-on the  presumptions and platitudes of government, academia, and  even private industry." -- The  Atlanta Journal Constitution.

"A wide-ranging, free-swinging commentary that will  raise the hackles of nearly everyone." --  New York Times.

"Bracing... eloquent testimony that what killed  liberalism in this country is a deeply misguided  egalitarianism." -- The New York Times  Book Review.

From the Publisher

From the Pulitzer Prize-winning culture critic for Time magazine comes the tremendously controversial, yet highly persuasive, argument that our devotion to the largely unexamined myth of egalitarianism lies at the heart of the ongoing "dumbing of America."

Americans have always stubbornly clung to the myth of egalitarianism, of the supremacy of the individual average man. But here, at long last, Pulitzer Prize-winning critic William A. Henry III takes on, and debunks, some basic, fundamentally ingrained ideas: that everyone is pretty much alike (and should be); that self-fulfillment is more imortant thant objective achievement; that everyone has something significant to contribute; that all cultures offer something equally worthwhile; that a truly just society would automatically produce equal success results across lines of race, class, and gender; and that the common man is almost always right. Henry makes clear, in a book full of vivid examples and unflinching opinions, that while these notions are seductively democratic they are also hopelessly wrong.

"A passionate yet reasoned argument for the proposition that some people simply contribute more to society than others. It challenges head-on the presumptions and platitudes of government, academia, and even private industry." -- The Atlanta Journal Constitution.

"A wide-ranging, free-swinging commentary that will raise the hackles of nearly everyone." -- New York Times.

"Bracing... eloquent testimony that what killed liberalism in this country is a deeply misguided egalitarianism." -- The New York Times Book Review.

From the Inside Flap

From the Pulitzer Prize-winning culture critic for Time magazine comes the tremendously controversial, yet highly persuasive, argument that our devotion to the largely unexamined myth of egalitarianism lies at the heart of the ongoing "dumbing of America."

Americans have always stubbornly clung to the myth of egalitarianism, of the supremacy of the individual average man. But here, at long last, Pulitzer Prize-winning critic William A. Henry III takes on, and debunks, some basic, fundamentally ingrained ideas: that everyone is pretty much alike (and should be); that self-fulfillment is more imortant thant objective achievement; that everyone has something significant to contribute; that all cultures offer something equally worthwhile; that a truly just society would automatically produce equal success results across lines of race, class, and gender; and that the common man is almost always right. Henry makes clear, in a book full of vivid examples and unflinching opinions, that while these notions are seductively democratic they are also hopelessly wrong.

From the Back Cover

From the Pulitzer Prize-winning culture critic for "Time magazine comes the tremendously controversial, yet highly persuasive, argument that our devotion to the largely unexamined myth of egalitarianism lies at the heart of the ongoing "dumbing of America."
Americans have always stubbornly clung to the myth of egalitarianism, of the supremacy of the individual average man. But here, at long last, Pulitzer Prize-winning critic William A. Henry III takes on, and debunks, some basic, fundamentally ingrained ideas: that everyone is pretty much alike (and should be); that self-fulfillment is more imortant thant objective achievement; that everyone has something significant to contribute; that all cultures offer something equally worthwhile; that a truly just society would automatically produce equal success results across lines of race, class, and gender; and that the common man is almost always right. Henry makes clear, in a book full of vivid examples and unflinching opinions, that while these notions are seductively democratic they are also hopelessly wrong.

About the Author

William A. Henry III was a culture critic for Time magazine whose writing earned two Pulizer Prizes: one in 1980 for criticism and one he shared in 1975 for coverage of school desegregation in Boston. His books include Visions of America, Jack Benny: The Radio and Television Years, The Great One: The Life and Legend of Jackie Gleason, and In Defense of Elitism. Mr. Henry passed away in June 1994.

Product details

ASIN ‏ : ‎ 0385479433
Publisher ‏ : ‎ Anchor (August 1, 1995)
Language ‏ : ‎ English
Paperback ‏ : ‎ 212 pages
ISBN-10 ‏ : ‎ 9780385479431
ISBN-13 ‏ : ‎ 978-0385479431
Item Weight ‏ : ‎ 7 ounces
Dimensions ‏ : ‎ 5.23 x 0.5 x 7.97 inches

Best Sellers Rank: #1,045,648 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)
- #634 in Poverty
- #3,074 in Political Philosophy (Books)
- #4,268 in Literary Criticism & Theory

Customer Reviews:
4.4 95 ratings

Important information

To report an issue with this product or seller, click here.

Customer reviews

4.4 out of 5

95 global ratings

How customer reviews and ratings work

Sort reviews by

Top reviews from the United States

There was a problem filtering reviews right now. Please try again later.

Brian E. Wright

Even more relevant today

Reviewed in the United States on August 6, 2016

Verified Purchase

It’s been twenty-plus years since this book was written, and each of Henry’s examples could easily be updated with current (and more extreme) examples of the American leveling phenomenon. He suggests that this trend began after WWII, but one can look back to the early 1800’s when Alexis de Tocqueville identified extreme egalitarianism as the overarching ethos explaining much of the American character.

Consider these observations from Vol. 1 of Democracy in America:

“There is, in fact, a manly and lawful passion for equality that incites men to wish all to be powerful and honored. This passion tends to elevate the humble to the rank of the great; but there exists also in the human heart a depraved taste for equality, which impels the weak to attempt to lower the powerful to their own level and reduces men to prefer equality in slavery to inequality with freedom. Not that those nations whose social condition is democratic naturally despise liberty; on the contrary, they have an instinctive love of it. But liberty is not the chief and constant object of their desires; equality is their idol: they make rapid and sudden efforts to obtain liberty and, if they miss their aim, resign themselves to their disappointment; but nothing can satisfy them without equality, and they would rather perish than lose it.“

…And from Vol. II:

“Political liberty bestows exalted pleasures from time to time upon a certain number of citizens. Equality every day confers a number of small enjoyments on every man. The charms of equality are every instant felt and are within the reach of all; the noblest hearts are not insensible to them, and the most vulgar souls exult in them. The passion that equality creates must therefore be at once strong and general. Men cannot enjoy political liberty unpurchased by some sacrifices, and they never obtain it without great exertions. But the pleasures of equality are self-proffered; each of the petty incidents of life seems to occasion them, and in order to taste them, nothing is required but to live."

"I think that democratic communities have a natural taste for freedom; left to themselves, they will seek it, cherish it, and view any privation of it with regret. But for equality their passion is ardent, insatiable, incessant, invincible; they call for equality in freedom; and if they cannot obtain that, they still call for equality in slavery. They will endure poverty, servitude, barbarism, but they will not endure aristocracy."

"This is true at all times, and especially in our own day. All men and all powers seeking to cope with this irresistible passion will be overthrown and destroyed by it. In our age freedom cannot be established without it, and despotism itself cannot reign without its support.”

In Defense of Elitism is a thoughtful and engaging reflection on what may be the inevitable development of democratic egalitarianism.

16 people found this helpful

Helpful

Rose

DARING CRITIQUE of Modern U.S. Education System, but has some other flaws

Reviewed in the United States on August 27, 2020

Verified Purchase

A daring, controversial book with some flaws. The most hard-hitting and well-researched parts involve his critique of the U.S.'s rapidly deteriorating educational system, which is probably even WORSE now than when the author wrote it.

On page 37, he writes "schools find it easier to lower the standards than raise the performance". This leads to a War on Excellence, which has become pervasive, as the lowest common denominator of slow groupthink is catered to the most. I went to NYC's Hunter College and all of his critique of Hunter is accurate, though, for some reason, Hunter still rides on the fumes of a "good school" bygone reputation. At Hunter, it is this diluted, dumbed-down lowest common denominator, pre-selected strain of perception that is the true legacy of NON-EXCELLENCE bequeathed upon class after class.

College degrees are now disseminated like dumbed-down Skittles, and they are "no longer a mark of distinction or proof of achievement [but] a...mere rite of passage" (p.151). True academic competition has been replaced by the Politics of Victimhood. This is NOT to say that there are no true victims, but success should NOT be measured in terms of who is the biggest winner of Victimhood in some kind of warped Victimhood Olympics. Degrees, first and foremost, demonstrate that the student was inundated with the Politics of Victimhood. The most coveted title is *not* CEO or something similar, but Victim. The most prevalent "competition" nowadays typically is over the one who possesses the biggest Victimhood Status.

On page 154, the author states that "the American Style of mass higher education probably ought to be judged a mistake---and one based on a GIANT LIE". It is the repudiation of "responsible individualism, which should be considered a component of intelligence" (p.143) that has made the U.S.'s educational system such a hotbed of mediocrity. School has become the equivalent of a prison holding cell because "for many adolescents who finish high school without a clear sense of direction, college is simply a holding pattern until they get on with their lives" (p.165).

The author died in his 40's of heart failure, shortly after completing this book, and he did not see its reception. One of his flaws was that he was too dismissive of what is often called "alternative medicine", lumping it with all mediocrities. His book does not show any research towards that, as it does with the educational system. For example, on p.189, he derides, without research, "the tendency...to give a respectful place at the table to...herbalists and homeopaths, and other practitioners of magic and mumbo-jumbo". Then he condescendingly says that would find it amusing that such "mumbo-jumbo" practitioners would be insulted to be similarly categorized. It deserves mentioning, since he didn't, that some conventional medicines are derived from plants. I don't know why he is so quick to dismiss alternative medicines, but maybe had he not been, he would still be around. Perhaps if he had tried some Hawthorne (an herb!) for his heart he would have lived to be able to write more books about how some people are better than others and more truisms like one on p.182: "Some people are more talented, some more beautiful, some more interesting as personalities".

3 people found this helpful

Helpful

Top reviews from other countries

Allen Baird

A rare defence of meritocracy over mediocrity from an unexpected source

Reviewed in the United Kingdom on July 3, 2013

Verified Purchase

I've been on the hunt for a book like this for some time. A book that defends cultural elitism, consistently meritocratic principles, and individual achievement is not going to be easy to acquire, one would think, outside the confines of the esoteric (Julius Evola), the economic (F. A. Hayek) or the entertaining (Ayn Rand). But this author, William A Henry III, was a Pulitzer Prize winning journalist, a social liberal, a Democrat Party member. Not a 'usual suspect' then.

His thesis here is radical: some things (cultures, ideas, works of art, achievements, contributions, people) are better (more enduring, more sophisticated, more universally beneficial, less dispensable) than others. This is an objective judgement, reflecting a state of values in the world. The subsequent production of rank and hierarchy among these things is unavoidable and in fact to be embraced. Let's have a taste of what this means from the opening chapter.

For Henry, real-world result and attainments are everything. "Talent, achievement, practice and learning" (12) are what makes winners, and a society that encourages "its winners to achieve more" will "benefit everyone." For one person to be better than another means "smarter, harder working, more learned, more productive, harder to replace" (14). Elitists cheer "victory and conquest" (16), and superior cultures expand by "trade or cultural imperialism or conquest or all of the above" (30).

Henry opposes this 'elitism' with post-modern versions of egalitarianism, which holds that it is unethical to talk in terms of superiority and inferiority at all. For these egalitarians, every value judgment is relative, subjective, and based on power plays rather than reason. Henry does not use the phrase 'post-modern' as I have here, but I think it is apt. The worldview Henry espouses is a classic American Enlightenment one that the founding fathers would recognise, but that their twenty-first century heirs from left and right would not.

Where all this becomes incendiary is Henry's application of it to some contemporary issues, such as (certain interpretations of) multiculturalism, feminism, educational (chapter 2) and workplace quotas, positive discrimination/affirmative action, and other forms of 'political correctness'. Henry argues that a little way below the egalitarian veneer of these policies smoulders the groupthink of minority resentment/envy and sense of perpetual victimhood, and a manufactured majority guilt at the 'crime' of cultural success and competitive achievement.

But the analysis does not stop here. Henry goes down deeper, and in doing so makes two pleas that could serve as solutions. The first is for an ethical quality - truthfulness. Be honest that a culture with advanced medicine and hygiene, never mind democracy and science, is superior to one without these. Be honest that affirmative action increases resentment in majority communities and minority individuals of talent. Be honest that educational standards are slipping when schools are treated as places of therapy rather than learning. The "big lie" of all such egalitarianism is that everyone can be above average; its "vital lie" is that we discriminate every moment of every day without admitting to it.

The second is for a politico-philosophical principle - individualism. Societal advancement occurs when people stop hiding behind the comfort blanket of group identity - whether of gender, race, or orientation - and take personal responsibility for their own advancement. This is not just an American problem. I think of class warfare in England, and the religious tribalism of my own country, Northern Ireland, where the two communities refuse of name their country or even pronounce the alphabet in the same way!

"Perhaps it is time to stop thinking of blacks - and having them think of themselves - as a category. Let them rise or fall as individuals...The measure of a just society is not whether a demographically proportionate share of any group succeeds, but whether any individual of talent can succeed regardless of what group he belongs to...The error is in looking for a group basis, a categorical basis, for pride. One's worth and self-regard ought to come from individual competitive performance, not from group identity. [Tribal pride] appeals to people who fear they cannot succeed as individuals, and by diverting their energies it all but ensures that they will not success as individuals." (82, 91)

Amen, brother, preach it! The end of discrimination will only come when we have tuned our discrimination to such an degree that judging someone as either/or, for or against, on the basis of one criterion only - catholic or protestant, black or white, man or women - will seem not only unethical but ridiculous. There are so many perspectives from which to 'discriminate' or categorise any individual's politics. For example, in Northern Ireland terms, there's not only the British/Irish axis of discrimination. What about socialist/capitalist, statist/libertarian, social liberal/economic liberal, egalitarian/meritocracy etc? Most of us don't even know the meaning of such categories; we prefer our well-worn bigotries instead of having to THINK i.e. to reason and rank.

Let me reiterate yet again that book this is NOT some right-wing, reactionary rant. It's not a dry, scholarly tome either. Henry was a journalist; his writing is therefore jaunty, penetrating and well sourced. Only remember when the book was written (1994) and where (USA). But I think these limitations are overcome by the radical insights with which Henry challenges us, the congenial nature of his writing style, often jokey and personal, and the lack of similar reads that have the guts to cover this type of ground with such gusto.

4 people found this helpful

Ignatius Reilly

An insightful, original look at 'Elitism'

Reviewed in the United Kingdom on September 3, 2017

Verified Purchase

This book is a polemic, so it is one-sided as all hell. By the end, I found the arguments to be well trodden and yet not properly discussed; it felt as though the author were throwing buckets at evidence at me in support of their position, without having stopped to examine the reasons why. I am used to reading philosophical works, so the lack of decent argumentation may not be something that most readers would notice, though it would be a lazy reader who did not notice the repetition. On the whole, however, I would say that this is an insightful, original look at 'Elitism', especially given the time of writing.

If one allows for bias, reportage, and the time of writing, this is a cracking book. Given that this was written in the early 90s, one can say that this work is prescient, highlighting as it does symptoms of societal trends towards reverse-intellectual snobbery, or 'anti-Elitism', or whatever you want to call it... the 'Dumbing Down' effect. If it was written now, one might not be so impressed. Also, the bias of the book is forgivable, I think, in that when bucking trends, violent moves are sometimes required to re-balance things (cf. Dawkins, 'God Delusion'). Finally, the journalistic-style makes for an informative, stylised experience but be aware that there are no references given for the facts reported. So, you have to do your own homework.

On the whole, despite the flaws mentioned, if one takes the book for what it is (polemical reportage, written in the early 90s), one must admit it to be an insightful, original look at 'Elitism'.

One person found this helpful

See more reviews