I recently returned home from a business trip. West Africa, Istanbul, Bangkok, Paris and back to West Africa. It’s appropriate that my journey started in West Africa, from whence Robert Kaplan twenty-five years ago warned us of the ‘coming anarchy’, an anarchy which has now arrived. It is also appropriate that my reading for this trip was Patrick Deenan’s new book “Why Liberalism Failed”. Hagia Sophia, Notre Dame and the ancient Buddhist temples – the Bosphorus and the Seine and the Chao Phraya. Cradles of onetime powerful civilizations themselves which also fell away, overlaid now by liberalism’s vapid mono-anticulture.
Civilizations – ours has been called “liberalism”, a five-hundred-year-old idea that is now over.
Liberalism in its original intent was about freedom, freedom from outward constraint to be sure but also freedom from our own ungovernable human urges. Self-control, restraint, discipline. Deenan’s main contention is that our liberal project, at least how we have recently come to define it, has been taking us down a very dark, self-destructive path. We have focused the efforts of our civilizational struggles on the need to free us from each other, from any bonds that might be interpreted by anybody as restrictive – oppressive. An entirely external locus of attention – ignoring the important role of “liberty” in self-governance as we cast our nets ever-further afield, searching vigilantly for oppression in all its forms and fables.
Yes, oppression, that is the word of the day.
Libralism has become laser focused on ending oppression. But how was this to be achieved? Classical liberalism envisioned a world run by markets where our only limitations were of our own making. Progressive liberals saw a powerful benevolent state ready to cripple the enslavers and deliver everybody to themselves. Family, propriety, dignity, anatomy, environment, faith – all these were simply tools of oppression to be overcome by the means of market or state; at least that is Deenan’s contention.
This book could be called “In Defense of Culture”. That might even be better – a full throated clamoring for us all to remember that we are not place-less, sex-less, past-less, future-less entities. We did not arrive to planet earth, grown in a plastic bag by scientists for use of the elites, as is so often portrayed in the new post-apocalyptic sci-fi movies; our brains empty though our bodies are fully formed.
No, we arrived from our culture. Not “pop-culture” but instead that idea of culture that comes from the word cultivate – to carefully prepare the earth for the seed, to fertilize it, protect the plant as we watch it grow and mature; prune it and keep the predators away and nurture it, for we need it to produce a bountiful harvest of golden fruit not only once, eschewing a tomorrow as we satiate our immediate pangs of hunger but also again and again and yet again. For ourselves and our children and our children’s children.
Consumption – I think what I most appreciated about Deenan’s book was the discussion of consumption. As a free marketer I have been trained in the knee jerk reaction against those who decry consumption. How else do we get anything, if not purchasing it from the market to consume? Waking up, grabbing the toothpaste, the toothbrush, mouthwash, clothing and a shower and a coffee with cream and sugar. I haven’t even left the house yet and already I’ve depended on the market a dozen times. Besides, isn’t the opposite of the market system the centrally planned one? Isn’t the opposite of capitalism, communism? And anybody who reads me knows how I feel about that ideology.
Yes – we consume, but our division of labor, our anonymity allow us to think rarely about our depleted watersheds, our empty aquifers, our burned down forests and the accelerated destruction of our carbon-fueled world. We assume technology will fix it – of course, hasn’t it always in the past? Aren’t we at our most ingenious when we’re pushed against the wall, facing extinction?
We deny culture because we want an end to oppression – and culture exists to tell us of our land, our lives – our limits as they relate to God and nature. Yet we have a dark empty hole in our hearts that we prefer not to think about, and we instinctively fill that hole with the state – a positivist superstate that decides morality and opportunity and supervises our every interaction, assuring that each and every one is free from constraint, external or internal. Why do you think we fight so hard over who controls that state? Because our Platonic state now defines us. Or we want to finally, at long last, free the market, telling ourselves what we really need is to let the invisible hand guide us to perfect liberty – no not God’s hand but the invisible hand of our own self-interest. How could that go wrong? And in the never-ending hunt for oppressors we overlook the greatest oppressor of all – ourselves.
As I journeyed across the world reading Deenan in the courtyard of Topkapi Palace, sitting gazing at the Eiffel Tower or eating noodles at a local food stand beside a great river in Asia, I was amazed by the pervasiveness of the homogeneity that Deenan rightly identifies as the sign of our abiding anti-culture. Smart phones that ring no matter where I am; brands I recognize announced in technicolor from a garish sign over an ancient mosque; cars and planes and laptops that have all made our world safe, safe but fundamentally unstable.
Will humanity realize that our culture-less consumption is ephemeral? That we can’t keep it up and that this time maybe, just maybe, no technological “fix” will be forthcoming? At least not in time. At least not for the animals, for the water, for the forests and the trees and for ourselves.
Will we look up in time from our smartphones to realize that yes, we have freed ourselves from each other and from any limits of anything that we might self-identify as “oppressive”, but this has only made us miserable as it destroyed our world?
I doubt it – for I am not optimistic. Those who read my musings about “the arriving ordeal” know at least that. But what to do? Darned if I know – except the one answer I always return to. Read. Read backwards; start with Deenan and go back and back and back again until you arrive at Tolkien and then keep going till you get to Tocqueville and keep going still. Burke and Bacon and Locke and Augustine; Cicero and finally Aristotle. Look around at the valleys and the mountains that define your values, that set the limits to your expansion – yes there are limits – and make your peace with them, finding again your faith and your family and eventually your happiness. I will do the same. Maybe someday we will meet, and you will tell me about how you found your joy and I will smile while I tell you about mine. And they will be different, because by then our civilization of mono-anticulture will have come crashing down. And we will tell the story of how we survived.
Other Sellers on Amazon
$13.28
+ $3.99 shipping
+ $3.99 shipping
Sold by:
Ambis Enterprises
Sold by:
Ambis Enterprises
(17424 ratings)
83% positive over last 12 months
83% positive over last 12 months
Only 3 left in stock - order soon.
Shipping rates
and
Return policy
$18.75
& FREE Shipping
& FREE Shipping
Sold by:
Book Depository US
Sold by:
Book Depository US
(911773 ratings)
89% positive over last 12 months
89% positive over last 12 months
In stock.
Usually ships within 2 to 3 days.
Shipping rates
and
Return policy
Usually ships within 2 to 3 days.
$19.13
& FREE Shipping
& FREE Shipping
Sold by:
Publisher Direct
Sold by:
Publisher Direct
(84060 ratings)
94% positive over last 12 months
94% positive over last 12 months
Only 20 left in stock - order soon.
Shipping rates
and
Return policy
Add to book club
Loading your book clubs
There was a problem loading your book clubs. Please try again.
Not in a club?
Learn more
Join or create book clubs
Choose books together
Track your books
Bring your club to Amazon Book Clubs, start a new book club and invite your friends to join, or find a club that’s right for you for free.
Flip to back
Flip to front
Follow the Author
Something went wrong. Please try your request again later.
OK
Why Liberalism Failed (Politics and Culture) Paperback – February 26, 2019
by
Patrick J. Deneen
(Author)
|
Patrick J. Deneen
(Author)
Find all the books, read about the author, and more.
See search results for this author
|
|
Price
|
New from | Used from |
|
Audible Audiobook, Unabridged
"Please retry"
|
$0.00
|
Free with your Audible trial | |
|
MP3 CD, Audiobook, MP3 Audio, Unabridged
"Please retry"
|
$14.29 | — |
Great on Kindle
Great Experience. Great Value.
Putting our best book forward
Each Great on Kindle book offers a great reading experience, at a better value than print to keep your wallet happy.
Explore your book, then jump right back to where you left off with Page Flip.
View high quality images that let you zoom in to take a closer look.
Enjoy features only possible in digital – start reading right away, carry your library with you, adjust the font, create shareable notes and highlights, and more.
Discover additional details about the events, people, and places in your book, with Wikipedia integration.
Enjoy a great reading experience when you buy the Kindle edition of this book.
Learn more about Great on Kindle, available in select categories.
Enhance your purchase
-
Print length264 pages
-
LanguageEnglish
-
PublisherYale University Press
-
Publication dateFebruary 26, 2019
-
Dimensions8.2 x 5.5 x 0.9 inches
-
ISBN-100300240023
-
ISBN-13978-0300240023
Inspire a love of reading with Amazon Book Box for Kids
Discover delightful children's books with Amazon Book Box, a subscription that delivers new books every 1, 2, or 3 months — new Amazon Book Box Prime customers receive 15% off your first box. Learn more.
Enter your mobile number or email address below and we'll send you a link to download the free Kindle App. Then you can start reading Kindle books on your smartphone, tablet, or computer - no Kindle device required.
-
Apple
-
Android
-
Windows Phone
-
Android
|
Download to your computer
|
Kindle Cloud Reader
|
Frequently bought together
Customers who viewed this item also viewed
Page 1 of 1 Start overPage 1 of 1
An Intellectual History of LiberalismPaperback$38.95$38.95FREE Shipping on orders over $25 shipped by AmazonGet it as soon as Monday, Sep 20
Return of the Strong Gods: Nationalism, Populism, and the Future of the WestHardcover$20.30$20.30FREE Shipping on orders over $25 shipped by AmazonGet it as soon as Monday, Sep 20
Roots Of American OrderPaperback$18.00$18.00FREE Shipping on orders over $25 shipped by AmazonGet it as soon as Monday, Sep 20
The Virtue of NationalismHardcover$17.99$17.99FREE Shipping on orders over $25 shipped by AmazonGet it as soon as Monday, Sep 20
Coming Apart: The State of White America, 1960-2010Paperback$15.99$15.99FREE Shipping on orders over $25 shipped by AmazonGet it as soon as Monday, Sep 20
What other items do customers buy after viewing this item?
Page 1 of 1 Start overPage 1 of 1
The End of Liberalism: The Second Republic of the United StatesPaperback$48.24$48.24FREE Shipping on orders over $25 shipped by AmazonGet it as soon as Monday, Sep 20Only 1 left in stock (more on the way).
American Public Policy: An IntroductionClarke E. CochranPaperback$62.77$62.77+ $3.99 shippingOnly 3 left in stock - order soon.
The Unbroken Thread: Discovering the Wisdom of Tradition in an Age of ChaosHardcover$16.79$16.79FREE Shipping on orders over $25 shipped by AmazonGet it as soon as Monday, Sep 20
The Decadent Society: America Before and After the PandemicRoss DouthatPaperback$15.59$15.59FREE Shipping on orders over $25 shipped by AmazonGet it as soon as Monday, Sep 20
The Virtue of NationalismHardcover$17.99$17.99FREE Shipping on orders over $25 shipped by AmazonGet it as soon as Monday, Sep 20
The Great Debate: Edmund Burke, Thomas Paine, and the Birth of Right and LeftPaperback$18.99$18.99FREE Shipping on orders over $25 shipped by AmazonGet it as soon as Monday, Sep 20
Editorial Reviews
Review
"Why Liberalism Failed offers cogent insights into the loss of meaning and community that many in the West feel, issues that liberal democracies ignore at their own peril."—President Barack Obama
"Deneen's book is valuable because it focuses on today's central issue. The important debates now are not about policy. They are about the basic values and structures of our social order."—David Brooks, New York Times
"Bracing. . . . Deneen comes as a Jeremiah to announce that Tocqueville's fear that liberalism would eventually dissolve all [its] inheritances . . . may now be fully upon us."—Ross Douthat, New York Times
"Mr. Deneen has written a serious book offering a radical critique of modernity, and he has taken the trouble to do so both concisely and engagingly. His insights as well as his crotchets in pursuit of his argument are often arresting. He writes compellingly on the growth of government in tandem with the spread of liberal market principles, for example, noting that a supposed preference for 'limited government' has been no match for the demand for expanding government enforcement of individual rights."—Tod Lindberg, Wall Street Journal
“One of the most talked-about books of the moment.”—Scott Reyburn, The New York Times
"[Deneen's] exhortations to embrace the local over the global and the cultural over the political are sound and well expressed."—Barton Swaim, Wall Street Journal, Books on Politics: Best of 2018
"Few books challenge the core assumptions of modern liberalism as unapologetically as the suggestively titled Why Liberalism Failed by Patrick Deneen."—Shadi Hamid, TheAtlantic.com
“The most electrifying book of cultural criticism published in some time, and it’s hard to imagine its radicalism being surpassed anytime soon.”—Damon Linker, Week
“Vitally important for understanding the present crisis in Western politics.”—Gene Callahan, American Conservative
"Today is the publication date of Notre Dame political theorist Patrick Deneen’s much-anticipated book, Why Liberalism Failed. I read an advance copy of it late last fall, and knew at once that it would be one of the most important political books of 2018. Not just among conservative books, but among political books, period."—Rod Dreher, American Conservative
"This is an essential book as we contemplate the future. Few readers will agree with everything in it, but even fewer will . . . fail to be informed and edified by it. . . . [T]he questions Deneen raises . . . are perhaps the deepest questions about our liberal politics and culture: Can liberalism be saved? Should it?"—Nathanael Blake, Federalist
"Bold and provocative. . . . Why Liberalism Failed takes up the always necessary, increasingly urgent task of locating the deeper intellectual and cultural traditions that shape our everyday lives."—Fred Bauer, National Review
"A timely and radical book."—Samuel Goldman, University Bookman
“Why Liberalism Failed is a sobering look at an ideological turning point in history. It’s one of the few books deserving of being called revelatory. It’s a rare opportunity for a look at where we’re going. If liberalism is indeed on the way out, then it’s time to look ahead, past the end of history and beyond.”—Medium
“Reading Deneen, I found myself thoroughly engaged, and I wish more books like this would come from the editorial offices of university presses.”--Alan Wolfe, Commonweal
"Perhaps the most influential book to emerge so far from this anti-liberal ferment is Patrick J. Deneen’s Why Liberalism Failed, published in January by Yale University Press."—Park MacDougald, New York Magazine Daily Intelligencer Blog
"Deneen’s masterful study provides a compelling, clear, and scholarly analysis that helps people understand the failure of liberalism. He starts a much-needed conversation about America’s post-liberal future."—John Horvat, Imaginative Conservative
"In showing that radical individualism is in the water we drink and the air we breathe, Deneen may spur us to imagine a third way, an alternative that is neither 'liberal' nor 'conservative,' but more than either."—Anthony B. Robinson, Christian Century
“Why Liberalism Failed is an eminently worthy read. Today’s culture wars did not start in the 1960s or ’80s. They go back to the Founding, and Deneen offers us a useful doorway into that more difficult conversation.”—Jonathan Leeman, Christianity Today
“A persuasive contribution to the ongoing political debate in North America.”—David Koyzis and Bruce Ashford, The Gospel Coalition
"I commend Patrick Deneen’s Why Liberalism Failed to anyone seeking an honest account of our current political, economic, and cultural predicaments. This book will not confirm the standard conservative narrative of events. However, it will challenge and enlighten any serious reader."—Allan Carlson, Chronicles
"In our apparently transitional political moment, Deneen’s book should encourage both Left and Right to reevaluate long-held social, political, and economic assumptions whose time may have passed."—Alexander Stern, RealClearPolitics
“A must read for all scholars who seek to understand the roots of our current, dreary socio-political landscape.”—Paul Allen, Reading Religion
"The flame of the Anti-Federalists’ position has never been fully extinguished. But not for 160 years has it burned as brightly as it does in Patrick Deneen’s Why Liberalism Failed."—Jerome C. Foss, Catholic Social Science Review
Finalist for the Intercollegiate Studies Institute’s 2018 Conservative Book of the Year prize, the Paolucci Book Award.
“Liberalism is clearly in everybody’s sights, and Why Liberalism Failed will be an important contributor to the conversation, suggesting that we cannot work within the existing paradigm anymore. The philosophers will not solve our problems; working with our neighbors will.”—Joshua Mitchell, Professor of Political Theory, Georgetown University
"Deneen writes with clarity, candor and superior scholarship to create one of the most absorbing political philosophy books of the past decade. No one who reads it, no one who considers its substance, will be able to think about the dynamics and the consequences of the American democratic experiment in quite the same way."—Archbishop Charles J. Chaput, author of Author of Strangers in a Strange Land
"This courageous and timely book is a major contribution to understanding the rude awakening in the Trump moment. It shows that we must transcend the death grip of the two oscillating poles of classical liberalism (of Republican and Democratic parties) and examine the deep assumptions that hold us captive. It also reveals that if we remain tied to liberalism's failure, more inequality, repression, and spiritual emptiness await us."—Cornel West, Professor of the Practice of Public Philosophy, Harvard
"Patrick Deneen is a probing and gifted cultural critic, afire with controlled moral passion. Why Liberalism Failed provides a bracing antidote to the pieties of left and right by showing how an impoverished, bipartisan conception of liberty has imprisoned the public life it claims to have set free. One could not ask for a timelier or more necessary enrichment of our depleted political discourse."—Jackson Lears, Board of Governors Distinguished Professor of History, Rutgers University
“A path-breaking book, boldly argued and expressed in terms that might justifiably be called prophetic in character.”—Wilfred M. McClay, G.T. and Libby Blankenship Chair in the History of Liberty, University of Oklahoma
"Deneen's book is valuable because it focuses on today's central issue. The important debates now are not about policy. They are about the basic values and structures of our social order."—David Brooks, New York Times
"Bracing. . . . Deneen comes as a Jeremiah to announce that Tocqueville's fear that liberalism would eventually dissolve all [its] inheritances . . . may now be fully upon us."—Ross Douthat, New York Times
"Mr. Deneen has written a serious book offering a radical critique of modernity, and he has taken the trouble to do so both concisely and engagingly. His insights as well as his crotchets in pursuit of his argument are often arresting. He writes compellingly on the growth of government in tandem with the spread of liberal market principles, for example, noting that a supposed preference for 'limited government' has been no match for the demand for expanding government enforcement of individual rights."—Tod Lindberg, Wall Street Journal
“One of the most talked-about books of the moment.”—Scott Reyburn, The New York Times
"[Deneen's] exhortations to embrace the local over the global and the cultural over the political are sound and well expressed."—Barton Swaim, Wall Street Journal, Books on Politics: Best of 2018
"Few books challenge the core assumptions of modern liberalism as unapologetically as the suggestively titled Why Liberalism Failed by Patrick Deneen."—Shadi Hamid, TheAtlantic.com
“The most electrifying book of cultural criticism published in some time, and it’s hard to imagine its radicalism being surpassed anytime soon.”—Damon Linker, Week
“Vitally important for understanding the present crisis in Western politics.”—Gene Callahan, American Conservative
"Today is the publication date of Notre Dame political theorist Patrick Deneen’s much-anticipated book, Why Liberalism Failed. I read an advance copy of it late last fall, and knew at once that it would be one of the most important political books of 2018. Not just among conservative books, but among political books, period."—Rod Dreher, American Conservative
"This is an essential book as we contemplate the future. Few readers will agree with everything in it, but even fewer will . . . fail to be informed and edified by it. . . . [T]he questions Deneen raises . . . are perhaps the deepest questions about our liberal politics and culture: Can liberalism be saved? Should it?"—Nathanael Blake, Federalist
"Bold and provocative. . . . Why Liberalism Failed takes up the always necessary, increasingly urgent task of locating the deeper intellectual and cultural traditions that shape our everyday lives."—Fred Bauer, National Review
"A timely and radical book."—Samuel Goldman, University Bookman
“Why Liberalism Failed is a sobering look at an ideological turning point in history. It’s one of the few books deserving of being called revelatory. It’s a rare opportunity for a look at where we’re going. If liberalism is indeed on the way out, then it’s time to look ahead, past the end of history and beyond.”—Medium
“Reading Deneen, I found myself thoroughly engaged, and I wish more books like this would come from the editorial offices of university presses.”--Alan Wolfe, Commonweal
"Perhaps the most influential book to emerge so far from this anti-liberal ferment is Patrick J. Deneen’s Why Liberalism Failed, published in January by Yale University Press."—Park MacDougald, New York Magazine Daily Intelligencer Blog
"Deneen’s masterful study provides a compelling, clear, and scholarly analysis that helps people understand the failure of liberalism. He starts a much-needed conversation about America’s post-liberal future."—John Horvat, Imaginative Conservative
"In showing that radical individualism is in the water we drink and the air we breathe, Deneen may spur us to imagine a third way, an alternative that is neither 'liberal' nor 'conservative,' but more than either."—Anthony B. Robinson, Christian Century
“Why Liberalism Failed is an eminently worthy read. Today’s culture wars did not start in the 1960s or ’80s. They go back to the Founding, and Deneen offers us a useful doorway into that more difficult conversation.”—Jonathan Leeman, Christianity Today
“A persuasive contribution to the ongoing political debate in North America.”—David Koyzis and Bruce Ashford, The Gospel Coalition
"I commend Patrick Deneen’s Why Liberalism Failed to anyone seeking an honest account of our current political, economic, and cultural predicaments. This book will not confirm the standard conservative narrative of events. However, it will challenge and enlighten any serious reader."—Allan Carlson, Chronicles
"In our apparently transitional political moment, Deneen’s book should encourage both Left and Right to reevaluate long-held social, political, and economic assumptions whose time may have passed."—Alexander Stern, RealClearPolitics
“A must read for all scholars who seek to understand the roots of our current, dreary socio-political landscape.”—Paul Allen, Reading Religion
"The flame of the Anti-Federalists’ position has never been fully extinguished. But not for 160 years has it burned as brightly as it does in Patrick Deneen’s Why Liberalism Failed."—Jerome C. Foss, Catholic Social Science Review
Finalist for the Intercollegiate Studies Institute’s 2018 Conservative Book of the Year prize, the Paolucci Book Award.
“Liberalism is clearly in everybody’s sights, and Why Liberalism Failed will be an important contributor to the conversation, suggesting that we cannot work within the existing paradigm anymore. The philosophers will not solve our problems; working with our neighbors will.”—Joshua Mitchell, Professor of Political Theory, Georgetown University
"Deneen writes with clarity, candor and superior scholarship to create one of the most absorbing political philosophy books of the past decade. No one who reads it, no one who considers its substance, will be able to think about the dynamics and the consequences of the American democratic experiment in quite the same way."—Archbishop Charles J. Chaput, author of Author of Strangers in a Strange Land
"This courageous and timely book is a major contribution to understanding the rude awakening in the Trump moment. It shows that we must transcend the death grip of the two oscillating poles of classical liberalism (of Republican and Democratic parties) and examine the deep assumptions that hold us captive. It also reveals that if we remain tied to liberalism's failure, more inequality, repression, and spiritual emptiness await us."—Cornel West, Professor of the Practice of Public Philosophy, Harvard
"Patrick Deneen is a probing and gifted cultural critic, afire with controlled moral passion. Why Liberalism Failed provides a bracing antidote to the pieties of left and right by showing how an impoverished, bipartisan conception of liberty has imprisoned the public life it claims to have set free. One could not ask for a timelier or more necessary enrichment of our depleted political discourse."—Jackson Lears, Board of Governors Distinguished Professor of History, Rutgers University
“A path-breaking book, boldly argued and expressed in terms that might justifiably be called prophetic in character.”—Wilfred M. McClay, G.T. and Libby Blankenship Chair in the History of Liberty, University of Oklahoma
About the Author
Patrick J. Deneen is Professor of Political Science and holds the David A. Potenziani Memorial College Chair of Constitutional Studies at the University of Notre Dame. His previous books include The Odyssey of Political Theory, Democratic Faith, and a number of edited volumes. He lives in South Bend, IN.
Start reading Why Liberalism Failed (Politics and Culture) on your Kindle in under a minute.
Don't have a Kindle? Get your Kindle here, or download a FREE Kindle Reading App.
Don't have a Kindle? Get your Kindle here, or download a FREE Kindle Reading App.
Product details
- Publisher : Yale University Press; Reprint edition (February 26, 2019)
- Language : English
- Paperback : 264 pages
- ISBN-10 : 0300240023
- ISBN-13 : 978-0300240023
- Item Weight : 9.5 ounces
- Dimensions : 8.2 x 5.5 x 0.9 inches
-
Best Sellers Rank:
#59,562 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)
- #53 in Income Inequality
- #169 in Political Philosophy (Books)
- #251 in Political Conservatism & Liberalism
- Customer Reviews:
Customer reviews
4.5 out of 5 stars
4.5 out of 5
402 global ratings
How are ratings calculated?
To calculate the overall star rating and percentage breakdown by star, we don’t use a simple average. Instead, our system considers things like how recent a review is and if the reviewer bought the item on Amazon. It also analyzes reviews to verify trustworthiness.
Top reviews
Top reviews from the United States
There was a problem filtering reviews right now. Please try again later.
Reviewed in the United States on May 1, 2018
Verified Purchase
213 people found this helpful
Report abuse
Reviewed in the United States on September 10, 2018
Verified Purchase
Many of the points in this book are very good and illustrate a lot of the issues currently in our country. Deneen has a lot of valid insights into the issues in this country, but he fails when it comes to relating it all back to liberalism. There are definitely aspects of America's failings that can be portrayed as logical conclusions of liberalism, but this portrayal doesn't give any room for iterative improvement on the tenets of liberalism. Deneen instead makes the claim that liberalism has wholly failed.
Of course, he does also talk about the benefits that liberalism has provided in the past centuries, especially in comparison to the other competing ideologies, but I think he focuses on it because it makes it harder to be educated enough to refute his arguments. It may just be that I am more of an optimist than Deneen, but I do think that there are solutions to our problems that are compatible with liberalism. There is a way that this book could have been written to make it far more accessible to most individuals, particularly people like me who are interested in the current failings of our grand system and eager to solve the problems, but lack the political background that Deneen has. The book misses the opportunity to actually make some prescriptions, which I think he has the capacity to do, instead opting to be inflammatory. Perhaps the authors other books have done so, but I have not read them, so I can't say.
You can see the rest of the reviews for specific critiques on some of the arguments in the book, but I think my review covers some of the bases not covered by others. Although my review is primarily negative, I don't think it was a particularly bad book, just that it could have been much better.
I specifically want to point out one anecdote that I really enjoyed. He talked about Amish people having the opportunity to ditch the Amish lifestyle for the modern lifestyle. 90% of them don't because they believe that good old-fashioned work, which must be done with others, is what builds community, something that is sorely lacking in the modern world.
I especially encourage those who think they disagree to read the book because it will be a good mental exercise and learning experience figuring out exactly which ways you differ from the author.
Of course, he does also talk about the benefits that liberalism has provided in the past centuries, especially in comparison to the other competing ideologies, but I think he focuses on it because it makes it harder to be educated enough to refute his arguments. It may just be that I am more of an optimist than Deneen, but I do think that there are solutions to our problems that are compatible with liberalism. There is a way that this book could have been written to make it far more accessible to most individuals, particularly people like me who are interested in the current failings of our grand system and eager to solve the problems, but lack the political background that Deneen has. The book misses the opportunity to actually make some prescriptions, which I think he has the capacity to do, instead opting to be inflammatory. Perhaps the authors other books have done so, but I have not read them, so I can't say.
You can see the rest of the reviews for specific critiques on some of the arguments in the book, but I think my review covers some of the bases not covered by others. Although my review is primarily negative, I don't think it was a particularly bad book, just that it could have been much better.
I specifically want to point out one anecdote that I really enjoyed. He talked about Amish people having the opportunity to ditch the Amish lifestyle for the modern lifestyle. 90% of them don't because they believe that good old-fashioned work, which must be done with others, is what builds community, something that is sorely lacking in the modern world.
I especially encourage those who think they disagree to read the book because it will be a good mental exercise and learning experience figuring out exactly which ways you differ from the author.
55 people found this helpful
Report abuse
Top reviews from other countries
Mooncarrot the Hare
4.0 out of 5 stars
Liberalism delivers on ALL its promises.
Reviewed in the United Kingdom on April 28, 2018Verified Purchase
Liberalism delivers on all its promises. This is the author’s contention. Neither does he intend to take sides.
He contends that both conservatives and progressives have combined to create all the features of liberal society in which we live, move and have our being. These two positions are not opposites, as is often thought. What was originally conceived as a theory of what human beings are by such as Plato and Francis Bacon,; has, through the mediation of John Stuart Mil, Hobbes and many lesser beings, been made into a reality.
Deneen concisely describes what this reality comprises of. He notes both the continuance of the development of liberalism through the ages as well as the distinctive redefining of its terms in recent times which has produced its current iteration. Liberalism, as expressed in reality, he argues, is the exact representation of its philosophical blueprint. There are many surprises here for the reader. And as an introduction to the subject, the book is a help. There are also some challenging views here as well.
A particular criticism that has been made in the American reviews is that Deneen is complaining about modernity. This assumes he is taking his stand from within one of liberalisms strands, the conservative. Yet his argument could equally be made from the other side, from the progressive strand of liberalism. As Deneen points out, the objection that has arisen to the results of the last presidential election in the USA and the EU referendum in Britain is one that was made from within liberalism by certain of its exponents in the past. (And indeed, all ages are modern to the people who live in them).
At the same time, the author, if he wants to be consistent with the thrust of his argument, cannot describe as ‘deformations’ certain features of the establishment of liberalism as a currently-lived reality. He seems to fall into this as a way of drawing the reader’s attention to what he asserts to be the failure of liberalism. Just as the oak tree is in the acorn, so these features of liberalism as lived, were always present in its philosophical DNA. The animal that looked cute as a puppy has grown to be the species Rottweiler that is always was. Though muzzled and neutered, it is still the same. And it may share this fierce nature with its two rivals that are now defunct. The author reminds the reader of Mill’s utilitarian imperialist proposal for making productive those native peoples who were deemed by him to be inefficient.
It’s possible to feel when reading that Deneen doesn’t always quite fully articulate the observations or conclusions that his text begs. For example, liberal liberty of the self-actualised individual can only be guaranteed by the state, and to which end the state must and has become ever larger and ubiquitous. In the Bible, it is God who liberates and who confers material benefits on people. Now the Almighty God-State does this, and it does it far more thoroughly. (In Britain an MP has described the National Health Service (NHS) as the nearest thing the English have to a religion).
Although liberal liberty claims to enable people to make a free choice, there are examples, certainly from Britain, that a writer could have quoted to indicate that you can only choose what the liberal state allows: this necessarily ubiquitous entity will defend your right to agree with it. He suggests that if there is a post-liberal age it could be totalitarian. While he hints at its growing authoritarianism, he could equally have posited that totalitarianism is liberalisms self-perpetuating end state, rather than its decline. Deneen highlights many contradictions of liberalism in practice, but it sometimes feels as if he doesn’t always fire a full broadside.
Though the author alludes to the reasons for it, he doesn't express any surprise that millions of ordinary people who are neither philosophers nor radicals have so easily and so quickly abandoned their previous habits and affections. It was easy to change their sexual habits. Why?
Deneen concludes his book with a brief selection of thoughts and one important suggestion, considering how liberalism first began, as to what might be possible if there were to be an age that is post-liberal. One suggestion will surprise both liberals and conservatives if they assume the author is writing respectively either against or for their position.
Overall, the book could be enjoyed for the author’s concise formulations of what liberalism is in practice. These are almost Shakespearian in their economy of words. They also take on the character of indictments read out in a courtroom. Or they feel like the sword thrusts of a master swordsman, driving his blade into the deepest sinews of Leviathan.
But will the beast die? Can it die? To quote Sir Roger Scruton writing about one of liberalism’s rival ideologies, and referencing Deneen on page 5, has the software ‘ossified into hardware’? If it can die, what is it to take some of its scrimshaw in our knapsack as we set out, as the author suggests, to look for another place, another belonging, outside the city of destruction?
As the Israelites, liberated from the fleshpots of Egypt, wandered in the wilderness in search of the Promised Land, some hankered after the good things they had been left behind in the land of their former slavery.
Liberalism offers to crown your will with imperial rule. It offers to place the orb of the world in the left hand of your aspirations, and the sceptre of the power of unfettered freedom in the right hand of your appetites. Above all, it offers to lay on your shoulders the mantle of righteousness, that which is woven from the gold and silver threads of equality and diversity.
And the devil, taking him up into an high mountain, shewed unto him all the kingdoms of the world in a moment of time. And the devil said unto him, All this power will I give thee, and the glory of them: for that is delivered unto me; and to whomsoever I will I give it. If thou therefore wilt worship me, all shall be thine.
He contends that both conservatives and progressives have combined to create all the features of liberal society in which we live, move and have our being. These two positions are not opposites, as is often thought. What was originally conceived as a theory of what human beings are by such as Plato and Francis Bacon,; has, through the mediation of John Stuart Mil, Hobbes and many lesser beings, been made into a reality.
Deneen concisely describes what this reality comprises of. He notes both the continuance of the development of liberalism through the ages as well as the distinctive redefining of its terms in recent times which has produced its current iteration. Liberalism, as expressed in reality, he argues, is the exact representation of its philosophical blueprint. There are many surprises here for the reader. And as an introduction to the subject, the book is a help. There are also some challenging views here as well.
A particular criticism that has been made in the American reviews is that Deneen is complaining about modernity. This assumes he is taking his stand from within one of liberalisms strands, the conservative. Yet his argument could equally be made from the other side, from the progressive strand of liberalism. As Deneen points out, the objection that has arisen to the results of the last presidential election in the USA and the EU referendum in Britain is one that was made from within liberalism by certain of its exponents in the past. (And indeed, all ages are modern to the people who live in them).
At the same time, the author, if he wants to be consistent with the thrust of his argument, cannot describe as ‘deformations’ certain features of the establishment of liberalism as a currently-lived reality. He seems to fall into this as a way of drawing the reader’s attention to what he asserts to be the failure of liberalism. Just as the oak tree is in the acorn, so these features of liberalism as lived, were always present in its philosophical DNA. The animal that looked cute as a puppy has grown to be the species Rottweiler that is always was. Though muzzled and neutered, it is still the same. And it may share this fierce nature with its two rivals that are now defunct. The author reminds the reader of Mill’s utilitarian imperialist proposal for making productive those native peoples who were deemed by him to be inefficient.
It’s possible to feel when reading that Deneen doesn’t always quite fully articulate the observations or conclusions that his text begs. For example, liberal liberty of the self-actualised individual can only be guaranteed by the state, and to which end the state must and has become ever larger and ubiquitous. In the Bible, it is God who liberates and who confers material benefits on people. Now the Almighty God-State does this, and it does it far more thoroughly. (In Britain an MP has described the National Health Service (NHS) as the nearest thing the English have to a religion).
Although liberal liberty claims to enable people to make a free choice, there are examples, certainly from Britain, that a writer could have quoted to indicate that you can only choose what the liberal state allows: this necessarily ubiquitous entity will defend your right to agree with it. He suggests that if there is a post-liberal age it could be totalitarian. While he hints at its growing authoritarianism, he could equally have posited that totalitarianism is liberalisms self-perpetuating end state, rather than its decline. Deneen highlights many contradictions of liberalism in practice, but it sometimes feels as if he doesn’t always fire a full broadside.
Though the author alludes to the reasons for it, he doesn't express any surprise that millions of ordinary people who are neither philosophers nor radicals have so easily and so quickly abandoned their previous habits and affections. It was easy to change their sexual habits. Why?
Deneen concludes his book with a brief selection of thoughts and one important suggestion, considering how liberalism first began, as to what might be possible if there were to be an age that is post-liberal. One suggestion will surprise both liberals and conservatives if they assume the author is writing respectively either against or for their position.
Overall, the book could be enjoyed for the author’s concise formulations of what liberalism is in practice. These are almost Shakespearian in their economy of words. They also take on the character of indictments read out in a courtroom. Or they feel like the sword thrusts of a master swordsman, driving his blade into the deepest sinews of Leviathan.
But will the beast die? Can it die? To quote Sir Roger Scruton writing about one of liberalism’s rival ideologies, and referencing Deneen on page 5, has the software ‘ossified into hardware’? If it can die, what is it to take some of its scrimshaw in our knapsack as we set out, as the author suggests, to look for another place, another belonging, outside the city of destruction?
As the Israelites, liberated from the fleshpots of Egypt, wandered in the wilderness in search of the Promised Land, some hankered after the good things they had been left behind in the land of their former slavery.
Liberalism offers to crown your will with imperial rule. It offers to place the orb of the world in the left hand of your aspirations, and the sceptre of the power of unfettered freedom in the right hand of your appetites. Above all, it offers to lay on your shoulders the mantle of righteousness, that which is woven from the gold and silver threads of equality and diversity.
And the devil, taking him up into an high mountain, shewed unto him all the kingdoms of the world in a moment of time. And the devil said unto him, All this power will I give thee, and the glory of them: for that is delivered unto me; and to whomsoever I will I give it. If thou therefore wilt worship me, all shall be thine.
30 people found this helpful
Report abuse
John Fletcher
4.0 out of 5 stars
Needed to be written.
Reviewed in the United Kingdom on May 28, 2018Verified Purchase
After a generation or so in which Liberalism seemed untouchable, and even just a synonym for "good," its grimmer consequences are starting to be felt in the breakdown of social and economic systems around the world, and the passing of the discourse of tradition and collective action from the mainstream into the hands of so-called "extremists" and "populists." Yet for anyone vaguely familiar with the history of Liberalism, there is an obvious paradox: this is exactly what the doctrine was supposed to produce; the end of tradition and local and natural cultures and their replacement by interchangeable, androgynous economic and social actors trying to maximise their individual advantage. What do you mean you don't like it? It's a bit late to say that now.
So here is Patrick Deneen to give Liberalism a brutal and much deserved kicking. As he points out at the beginning, what we are actually seeing is not the failure of liberalism, but rather its success in fulfilling its objectives. And indeed by the time he has finished there is very little that is left standing. Such criticisms often have a strong ideological flavour but Deneen largely avoids imposing his personal opinions, and he shows, with great clarity, how social and economic liberalism are not opposites, but all part of the same grand scheme.
Some niggles. The book is very American, and effectively ignores the European Socialist tradition, which provides (an always did), an alternative and coherent ideology to Liberalism, which is why Liberals were always so bitterly opposed to Socialism. And it ends on a rather artificially upbeat note, suggesting that somehow Liberalism is capable off reform. But overall it's the kind of book that needed to be written, and I'm glad someone has.
So here is Patrick Deneen to give Liberalism a brutal and much deserved kicking. As he points out at the beginning, what we are actually seeing is not the failure of liberalism, but rather its success in fulfilling its objectives. And indeed by the time he has finished there is very little that is left standing. Such criticisms often have a strong ideological flavour but Deneen largely avoids imposing his personal opinions, and he shows, with great clarity, how social and economic liberalism are not opposites, but all part of the same grand scheme.
Some niggles. The book is very American, and effectively ignores the European Socialist tradition, which provides (an always did), an alternative and coherent ideology to Liberalism, which is why Liberals were always so bitterly opposed to Socialism. And it ends on a rather artificially upbeat note, suggesting that somehow Liberalism is capable off reform. But overall it's the kind of book that needed to be written, and I'm glad someone has.
15 people found this helpful
Report abuse
David J Warden
3.0 out of 5 stars
Prophetic but a bit of a slog
Reviewed in the United Kingdom on December 22, 2020Verified Purchase
This is quite a difficult read for a Brit. Heavy on American content (Madison, Tocqueville, the Amish and so on). I had to skim through a lot of it. But the basic message is prophetic and hard-hitting. Liberalism is an ideology in its death throes because it has failed to live up to its promises. It has created an overclass of entitled college-educated elites and a left-behind servant class condemned as racists and xenophobes. Populism (in its bad sense) is one of the pathological outcomes of liberalism. Liberalism has 'deracinated' and disembedded us (rootlessness, placelessness) and enslaved us to an 'orgy' of cultureless consumerism and disconnected loneliness. Deneen argues that fascism, Marxism, and liberalism are the three ideologies of modernity and that liberalism is the last one standing. I'm surprised that he doesn't explicitly mention conservativism as an alternative, given that he is of course conversant with Edmund Burke. In the UK, Roger Scruton wrote about this older conservative tradition and we have been talking about one-nation conservatism and 'blue Labour' as hybrid political responses which reject the pathologies of hyper-individualised liberalism (blue being the colour of conservatism in the UK). Nick Timothy and Paul Embery are two particularly good writers, along with David Goodhart and Matthew Goodwin. John Gray also wrote a good book about liberalism in 2000 which described its two faces: universalist liberalism (the bad type) and pluralist liberalism (the good type). Isaiah Berlin and Michael Oakeshott are also in this conservative philosophical tradition. So there's a rich tradition to draw on. We don't have to start from scratch.
4 people found this helpful
Report abuse
Catherine Welch
2.0 out of 5 stars
Have a dictionary handy, but don’t expect any ground-breaking revaluations or evidenced conclusions
Reviewed in the United Kingdom on February 1, 2021Verified Purchase
I wrote a list of questions that came to mind from reading the Introduction and Chapter 1 that I hoped would be addressed later on, including ‘What is your definition of Liberalism?’ None of those questions come even close to being answered, but instead Deneb further diversifies his argument to include disparate philosophies, beliefs and consequences under an ever-widening banner of ‘liberalism’, with no clear effort to define what he means by the term. He claims that all the ills of conservatism and progressivism are due to a common undercurrent of ‘liberalism’ (which he fails to adequately define at any point), but his arguments are weak. He conflates features of human psychology and behaviour in general with political ideologies, and lazily lumps them under an umbrella banner of ‘liberalism’. He then cherry-picks historical, philosophical and idiological evidence to support his arguments.
There is a confusingly superfluous circumlocution to camouflage doublespeak (tongue-in-cheek to describe what I mean). In reality, he could have completed this work using half the words, within a more typical range of vocabulary. However, that would perhaps just uncover his biases and weak foundations to a wider audience, and lose the ‘Academic Mystique’ effect which conceals his failure to really justify the purpose of the book.
I really wouldn’t waste my time on this, unless it is to increase your vocabulary by looking up all the over-complicated words he uses, and perhaps explore the works of some better-known political philosophers.
There is a confusingly superfluous circumlocution to camouflage doublespeak (tongue-in-cheek to describe what I mean). In reality, he could have completed this work using half the words, within a more typical range of vocabulary. However, that would perhaps just uncover his biases and weak foundations to a wider audience, and lose the ‘Academic Mystique’ effect which conceals his failure to really justify the purpose of the book.
I really wouldn’t waste my time on this, unless it is to increase your vocabulary by looking up all the over-complicated words he uses, and perhaps explore the works of some better-known political philosophers.
One person found this helpful
Report abuse
Daniel LO
5.0 out of 5 stars
Groundbreaking. A bit complicated lenguaje though.
Reviewed in the United Kingdom on April 8, 2020Verified Purchase
I would say this is rather a ‘crucial’ reading to understand what is going on in the world today, specially in the political sphere.
I was debating whether give it 4 starts instead of 5 due to the slightly -and in my opinion unnecessary- complicated language. The author is a professor, nevertheless it would have made my reading more enjoyable if ‘simpler ’ words where used, and probably increase reach.
Regardless I loved the book and the thesis.
Recommended.
I was debating whether give it 4 starts instead of 5 due to the slightly -and in my opinion unnecessary- complicated language. The author is a professor, nevertheless it would have made my reading more enjoyable if ‘simpler ’ words where used, and probably increase reach.
Regardless I loved the book and the thesis.
Recommended.
Deals related to this item
Page 1 of 1 Start overPage 1 of 1







