Other Sellers on Amazon
+ $3.99 shipping
95% positive over last 12 months
+ $3.99 shipping
98% positive over last 12 months
+ $3.99 shipping
98% positive over last 12 months
Download the free Kindle app and start reading Kindle books instantly on your smartphone, tablet, or computer - no Kindle device required. Learn more
Read instantly on your browser with Kindle Cloud Reader.
Using your mobile phone camera - scan the code below and download the Kindle app.
Follow the Author
OK
Winners Take All: The Elite Charade of Changing the World Hardcover – Deckle Edge, August 28, 2018
| Anand Giridharadas (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 | |
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.
Enhance your purchase
Former New York Times columnist Anand Giridharadas takes us into the inner sanctums of a new gilded age, where the rich and powerful fight for equality and justice any way they can--except ways that threaten the social order and their position atop it. We see how they rebrand themselves as saviors of the poor; how they lavishly reward "thought leaders" who redefine "change" in winner-friendly ways; and how they constantly seek to do more good, but never less harm. We hear the limousine confessions of a celebrated foundation boss; witness an American president hem and haw about his plutocratic benefactors; and attend a cruise-ship conference where entrepreneurs celebrate their own self-interested magnanimity.
Giridharadas asks hard questions: Why, for example, should our gravest problems be solved by the unelected upper crust instead of the public institutions it erodes by lobbying and dodging taxes? He also points toward an answer: Rather than rely on scraps from the winners, we must take on the grueling democratic work of building more robust, egalitarian institutions and truly changing the world. A call to action for elites and everyday citizens alike.
- Print length304 pages
- LanguageEnglish
- PublisherKnopf
- Publication dateAugust 28, 2018
- Dimensions6.53 x 1.15 x 9.52 inches
- ISBN-109780451493248
- ISBN-13978-0451493248
Frequently bought together
Customers who viewed this item also viewed
Editorial Reviews
Review
“Entertaining and gripping . . . For those at the helm, the philanthropic plutocrats and aspiring 'change agents' who believe they are helping but are actually making things worse, it’s time for a reckoning with their role in this spiraling dilemma. I suggest they might want to read a copy of this book while in the Hamptons this summer.” —Joseph E. Stiglitz, The New York Times Book Review
"Truly, a fascinating book that exposes the world we live in today."—Trevor Noah
“Anand Giridharadas takes a swipe at the global elite in a trenchant, provocative and well-researched book about the people who are notionally generating social change . . . Read it and beware.” —Martha Lane Fox, Financial Times, “Books of the Year 2018”
“A splendid polemic . . . Giridharadas writes brilliantly on the parasitic philanthropy industry.” —The Economist
“Impassioned . . . That Giridharadas questions an idea that has become part of the air we breathe is alone worth the price of the book, and his delicious skewering of the many who exalt their own goodness while making money from dubious business practices makes for entertaining reading.” —Bethany McLean, The Washington Post
“One of the most insightful and provocative books about what’s going on in America that I’ve read in years.” —Senator Brian Schatz (Hawaii)
“The past years have seen some outstanding books on how philanthropists and their dollars have shaped public policy . . . [Anand Giridharadas] zeros in on what he sees as a glaring hypocrisy among affluent elites: that while many well-meaning (and well-off) Americans claim to want to improve society's inequalities, they don't challenge the structures that preserve that inequality, not wanting to jeopardize their own privileged positions.” —Jessica Smith, NPR, “Best Books of 2018”
“Important . . . [An] empathic tone gives the book its persuasive power to touch the hearts of even those readers, like myself, who are the targets of its criticism.” —Mark Kramer, Stanford Social Innovation Review
“An extraordinarily important book.” —Lydia Polgreen, editor-in-chief, Huffington Post
“Important . . . [Winners Take All] levels a devastating attack on philanthrocapitalism.” —Benjamin Soskis, The Chronicle of Philanthropy
“Indispensable . . . A lacerating critique.” —Chris Lehmann, In These Times
“Provocative and passionate . . . This damning portrait of contemporary American philanthropy is a must-read for anyone interested in ‘changing the world.’” —Publishers Weekly (boxed and starred review)
“A challenging, provocative & bold book. I don’t agree with all of Anand’s critiques . . . but I encourage everyone to read the book & think hard about his take on the social sector.” —Mark Tercek, CEO, The Nature Conservancy
“Giridharadas makes a compelling case . . . [He] ultimately succeeds with Winners Take All by adopting a temperate approach that creates space for a conversation.” —David Talbot, Los Angeles Review of Books
“Anyone following the debate about the role of philanthrocapitalists, corporate foundations or tech billionaires in solving the world's problems will want to watch for this new book.” —Jena McGregor, The Washington Post
“[A] landmark new book.” —Darren Walker, president, The Ford Foundation
“[Giridharadas] has delivered a clarion call that will be a fixture on my syllabus and bookshelf.” —Megan Tompkins-Stange, assistant professor, Gerald R. Ford School of Public Policy at the University of Michigan
“This is a very difficult subject to tackle, but Giridharadas executes it brilliantly . . . This must-have title will be of great interest to readers, from students to professionals and everyone in-between, interested in solutions to today’s complex problems . . . Winners Take All will be the starting point of conversations private and in groups on alternatives to the status quo and calls to action. An excellent book for troubled times.” —Booklist
“In Anand’s thought-provoking book his fresh perspective on solving complex societal problems is admirable. I appreciate his commitment and dedication to spreading social justice.” —Bill Gates
“An insightful and refreshing perspective on some of the most vexing issues this nation confronts. This is an important book from a gifted writer whose honest exploration of complex problems provides urgently needed clarity in an increasingly confusing era.” —Bryan Stevenson, author of Just Mercy
“A trenchant, humane, and often revelatory investigation by one of the wisest nonfiction writers going.” —Katherine Boo, author of Behind the Beautiful Forevers
“Winners Take All is the book I have been waiting for—the most important intervention yet regarding elite-driven solutions, a vitally important problem to expose. The book courageously answers so many of the critical questions about how, despite much good will and many good people, we struggle to achieve progress in twenty-first-century America. If you want to be part of the solution, you should read this book.” —Ai-jen Poo, director, National Domestic Workers Alliance
“A brilliant, rising voice of our era takes us on a journey among the global elite in his search for understanding of our tragic disconnect. Thought-provoking, expansive, and timely.” —Isabel Wilkerson, author, The Warmth of Other Suns
“Winners Take All boldly exposes one of the great if little-reported scandals of the age of globalization: the domestication of the life of the mind by political and financial power and the substitution of ‘thought leaders’ for critical thinkers. It not only reorients us as we lurch out of a long ideological intoxication; it also embodies the values—intellectual autonomy and dissent—that we need to build a just society.” —Pankaj Mishra, author of Age of Anger
“In this trenchant and timely book, Anand Giridharadas shows how the winners of global capitalism seek to help the losers, but without disturbing the market-friendly arrangements that keep the winners on top. He gives us an incisive critique of corporate-sponsored charities that promote frictionless ‘win-win’ solutions to the world’s problems but disdain the hard, contentious work of democratic politics. An indispensable guide for those perplexed by the rising public anger toward ‘change-making’ elites.” —Michael J. Sandel, author of What Money Can’t Buy: The Moral Limits of Markets
About the Author
Excerpt. © Reprinted by permission. All rights reserved.
A successful society is a progress machine. It takes in the raw material of innovations and produces broad human advancement. America’s machine is broken. When the fruits of change have fallen on the United States in recent decades, the very fortunate have basketed almost all of them. For instance, the average pretax income of the top tenth of Americans has doubled since 1980, that of the top 1 percent has more than tripled, and that of the top 0.001 percent has risen more than sevenfold—even as the average pretax income of the bottom half of Americans has stayed almost precisely the same. These familiar figures amount to three and a half decades’ worth of wondrous, head-spinning change with zero impact on the average pay of 117 million Americans.
Thus many millions of Americans, on the left and right, feel one thing in common: that the game is rigged against people like them. It is no wonder that the American voting public— like other publics around the world—has turned more resentful and suspicious in recent years, embracing populist movements on the left and right, bringing socialism and nationalism into the center of political life in a way that once seemed unthinkable, and succumbing to all manner of conspiracy theory and fake news. There is a spreading recognition, on both sides of the ideological divide, that the system is broken and has to change.
Some elites faced with this kind of gathering anger have hidden behind walls and gates and on landed estates, emerging only to try to seize even greater political power to protect themselves against the mob. But in recent years a great many fortunate people have also tried something else, something both laudable and self-serving: They have tried to help by taking ownership of the problem.
All around us, the winners in our highly inequitable status quo declare themselves partisans of change. They know the problem, and they want to be part of the solution. Actually, they want to lead the search for solutions. They believe that their solutions deserve to be at the forefront of social change. They may join or support movements initiated by ordinary people looking to fix aspects of their society. More often, though, these elites start initiatives of their own, taking on social change as though it were just another stock in their portfolio or corporation to restructure. Because they are in charge of these attempts at social change, the attempts naturally reflect their biases.
The initiatives mostly aren’t democratic, nor do they reflect collective problem-solving or universal solutions. Rather, they favor the use of the private sector and its charitable spoils, the market way of looking at things, and the bypassing of government. They reflect a highly influential view that the winners of an unjust status quo— and the tools and mentalities and values that helped them win—are the secret to redressing the injustices. Those at greatest risk of being resented in an age of inequality are thereby recast as our saviors from an age of inequality.
Socially minded financiers at Goldman Sachs seek to change the world through “win-win” initiatives like “green bonds” and “impact investing.” Tech companies like Uber and Airbnb cast themselves as empowering the poor by allowing them to chauffeur people around or rent out spare rooms. Management consultants and Wall Street brains seek to convince the social sector that they should guide its pursuit of greater equality by assuming board seats and leadership positions. Conferences and idea festivals sponsored by plutocrats and big business host panels on injustice and promote “thought leaders” who are willing to confine their thinking to improving lives within the faulty system rather than tackling the faults. Profitable companies built in questionable ways and employing reckless means engage in corporate social responsibility, and some rich people make a splash by “giving back”—regardless of the fact that they may have caused serious societal problems as they built their fortunes. Elite networking forums like the Aspen Institute and the Clinton Global Initiative groom the rich to be self-appointed leaders of social change, taking on the problems people like them have been instrumental in creating or sustaining. A new breed of community-minded so-called B Corporations has been born, reflecting a faith that more enlightened corporate self-interest—rather than, say, public regulation—is the surest guarantor of the public welfare. A pair of Silicon Valley billionaires fund an initiative to rethink the Democratic Party, and one of them can claim, without a hint of irony, that their goals are to amplify the voices of the powerless and reduce the political influence of rich people like them.
The elites behind efforts like these often speak in a language of “changing the world” and “making the world a better place” more typically associated with barricades than ski resorts. Yet we are left with the inescapable fact that in the very era in which these elites have done so much to help, they have continued to hoard the overwhelming share of progress, the average American’s life has scarcely improved, and virtually all of the nation’s institutions, with the exception of the military, have lost the public’s trust.
Are we ready to hand over our future to the elite, one supposedly world-changing initiative at a time? Are we ready to call participatory democracy a failure, and to declare these other, private forms of change-making the new way forward? Is the decrepit state of American self-government an excuse to work around it and let it further atrophy? Or is meaningful democracy, in which we all potentially have a voice, worth fighting for?
There is no denying that today’s elite may be among the more socially concerned elites in history. But it is also, by the cold logic of numbers, among the more predatory in history. By refusing to risk its way of life, by rejecting the idea that the powerful might have to sacrifice for the common good, it clings to a set of social arrangements that allow it to monopolize progress and then give symbolic scraps to the forsaken—many of whom wouldn’t need the scraps if the society were working right. This book is an attempt to understand the connection between these elites’ social concern and predation, between the extraordinary helping and the extraordinary hoarding, between the milking—and perhaps abetting—of an unjust status quo and the attempts by the milkers to repair a small part of it.
There are many ways to make sense of all this elite concern and predation. One is that the elites are doing the best they can. The world is what it is; the system is what it is; the forces of the age are bigger than anyone can resist; the most fortunate are helping. This view may allow that this helpfulness is just a drop in the bucket, but it is something. The slightly more critical view is that this elite-led change is well-meaning but inadequate. It treats symptoms, not root causes; it does not change the fundamentals of what ails us. According to this view, elites are shirking the duty of more meaningful reform.
But there is still another, darker way of judging what goes on when elites put themselves in the vanguard of social change: that it not only fails to make things better, but also serves to keep things as they are. After all, it takes the edge off of some of the public’s anger at being excluded from progress. It improves the image of the winners. With its private and voluntary half-measures, it crowds out public solutions that would solve problems for everyone. For when elites assume leadership of social change, they are able to reshape what social change is—above all, to present it as something that should never threaten winners. In an age defined by a chasm between those who have power and those who don’t, elites have spread the idea that people must be helped, but only in market-friendly ways that do not upset fundamental power equations. The society should be changed in ways that do not change the underlying economic system that has allowed the winners to win and fostered many of the problems they seek to solve.
What is at stake is whether the reform of our common life is led by governments elected by and accountable to the people, or rather by wealthy elites claiming to know our best interests. We must decide whether, in the name of ascendant values such as efficiency and scale, we are willing to allow democratic purpose to be usurped by private actors who often genuinely aspire to improve things but, first things first, seek to protect themselves. Yes, government is dysfunctional at present. But that is all the more reason to treat its repair as our foremost national priority. Pursuing workarounds of our troubled democracy makes democracy even more troubled. We must ask ourselves why we have so easily lost faith in the engines of progress that got us where we are today—in the democratic efforts to outlaw slavery, end child labor, limit the workday, keep drugs safe, protect collective bargaining, create public schools, battle the Great Depression, electrify rural America, weave a nation together by road, pursue a Great Society free of poverty, extend civil and political rights to women and African Americans and other minorities, and give our fellow citizens health, security, and dignity in old age.
This book offers a series of portraits of this elite-led, market- friendly, winner-safe social change. In these pages, you will meet people who ardently believe in this form of change and people who are beginning to question it.
What these various figures have in common is that they are grappling with certain powerful myths—the myths that have fostered an age of extraordinary power concentration; that have allowed the elite’s private, partial, and self-preservational deeds to pass for real change; that have let many decent winners convince themselves, and much of the world, that their plan to “do well by doing good” is an adequate answer to an age of exclusion; that put a gloss of selflessness on the protection of one’s privileges; and that cast more meaningful change as wide-eyed, radical, and vague.
It is my hope in writing what follows to reveal these myths to be exactly that. Much of what appears to be reform in our time is in fact the defense of stasis. When we see through the myths that foster this misperception, the path to genuine change will come into view.
Don't have a Kindle? Get your Kindle here, or download a FREE Kindle Reading App.
Product details
- ASIN : 0451493249
- Publisher : Knopf; First Edition, First Printing (August 28, 2018)
- Language : English
- Hardcover : 304 pages
- ISBN-10 : 9780451493248
- ISBN-13 : 978-0451493248
- Item Weight : 1.42 pounds
- Dimensions : 6.53 x 1.15 x 9.52 inches
- Best Sellers Rank: #99,487 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)
- #44 in Philanthropy & Charity (Books)
- #200 in Sociology of Class
- #202 in Democracy (Books)
- Customer Reviews:
About the author

Anand Giridharadas is a writer.
He is the author of "Winners Take All: The Elite Charade of Changing the World", "The True American: Murder and Mercy in Texas," and "India Calling: An Intimate Portrait of a Nation’s Remaking." A former foreign correspondent and columnist for The New York Times for more than a decade, he has also written for The New Yorker, The Atlantic, and Time, and he is the publisher of the popular newsletter The Ink.
He has spoken on stages around the world and taught narrative journalism at New York University. He is a regular on-air political analyst for MSNBC.
Born in Cleveland, Ohio, he was raised there, in Paris, France, and in Maryland, and educated at the University of Michigan, Oxford, and Harvard.
His writing has been honored by the Poynter Fellowship in Journalism at Yale, the Porchlight Business Book of the Year award, the Outstanding Lifetime Achievement Award for Humanism in Culture from Harvard, and the New York Public Library’s Helen Bernstein Award. He lives in Brooklyn, New York, with his wife, Priya Parker, and their two children.
Customer reviews
Top reviews from the United States
There was a problem filtering reviews right now. Please try again later.
"Elite-led, market-friendly, winner-safe social change"
In Winners Take All, author Anand Giridharadas zeroes in on growing economic inequality in America. As he notes at the outset, "When the fruits of change have fallen on the United States in recent decades, the very fortunate have basketed almost all of them." His culprit? "Elite-led, market-friendly, winner-safe social change." This is the set of beliefs held by the people who attend the World Economic Forum at Davos and gather at such other places as Aspen and the Clinton Global Initiative. In reviewing this book for the New York Times, Nobel Prize-winner Joseph Stieglitz described them as "an elite that, rather than pushing for systemic change, only reinforces our lopsided economic reality—all while hobnobbing on the conference circuit and trafficking in platitudes." Giridharadas calls their mindset MarketWorld.
"An ascendant power elite" that seeks to do good by doing well
"MarketWorld," he explains, "is an ascendant power elite that is defined by the concurrent drives to do well and do good, to change the world while also profiting from the status quo. It consists of enlightened businesspeople and their collaborators in the worlds of charity, academia, media government, and think tanks."
Giridharadas takes on the elite consulting firms as well, citing McKinsey and its peers in the industry as among the culprits. The values they all promote are those of the marketplace; its proponents always talk about opportunities to solve problems, never about those who are responsible for creating the problems in the first place. The author distinguishes between public intellectuals (good) and thought leaders (bad). In his view, the former are primarily academics free of commercial influences. The latter have fallen for MarketWorld values, hook, line, and sinker. And that strikes me as simplistic. It would be naive to imply that major corporations haven't made inroads into academia.
The eight billionaires who own half the world's wealth are an easy target
Author Anand Giridharadas aims his most powerful broadsides at easy targets such as the multimillionaire and billionaire leaders of the tech and financial industries. Can anyone seriously argue that Amazon, Google, Facebook, and Goldman Sachs are addressing the economic inequality that Giridharadas identifies as the central issue? No matter what their leaders say, they're clearly part of the problem, not the solution.
As I write today, Jeff Bezos of Amazon can claim a net worth of $162.9 billion. Facebook's Mark Zuckerberg is "worth" $60.4 billion. The Google guys, Larry Page and Sergei Brin, weigh in at $54.1 billion and $52.7 billion, respectively. These four men are among the eight billionaires whose collective net worth is equal to all the wealth of half of the world's population. Yes, just eight billionaires. And Goldman Sachs possesses assets of nearly $1 trillion. How could anyone suggest that these people would even consider lobbying the federal government to adopt policies that would lessen economic inequality in America? Yet Giridharadas complains that they don't.
Winners Take All is based on the premise that these would-be do-gooders call the shots in the American economy and dominate the political debate. The author implies that economic inequality would quickly shrink if these folks were to work for genuine social change. However, this is far from the truth. Most wealthy people in the United States are conservative Republicans who do not pretend to be change agents. And they exert far greater power and influence in American society than the Davos and Aspen set. In today's political discourse, the Heritage Foundation and its peers among Right-Wing think tanks and the institutions of the Christian Right wield far more power in setting government policy at both the federal and state levels than the "enlightened elite" Giridharadas writes about.
Bill Clinton's central role in making the problem immeasurably worse
In the author's view, it's not just clueless businessmen or Republicans who are at fault. Bill Clinton also comes in for justifiable criticism. His "Third Way" between left and right effectively reversed the Democratic Party's commitment to helping the less fortunate in our society. Remember mass incarceration? Financial deregulation? So-called welfare "reform?" Bill Clinton institutionalized the neoliberal consensus that Ronald Reagan had brought to the White House a decade previously—and the consequences were devastating, years before Donald Trump entered the political scene. On this point, Giridharadas is right on the money. (Pun intended.)
Just for example, deregulation, including the repeal of Glass-Steagall, was among the root causes of the Great Recession that struck in 2008. Don't forget that millions lost their homes, and millions more lost their jobs, in that calamitous economic downturn. Democrat or Republican—it doesn't seem to matter. Not a single US President over the past half century has taken any significant step to address America’s growing inequality in wealth and income. Barack Obama was by far the best of them, but he also:
** named as his top economic advisers many of the same people whose policies in the 90s brought down the economy in the 2000s;
** prevented the prosecution of the bankers who caused the crash; and
**failed to question the prevailing bipartisan love affair with Corporate America.
Who will lead society toward viable solutions?
Here's the crux of the matter, as Giridharadas sees it: "What is at stake is whether the reform of our common life is led by governments elected by and accountable to the people, or rather by wealthy elites claiming to know our best interests." It doesn't matter how well-intentioned they might make themselves out to be. If they don't actively work to raise estate and income taxes, drive private money out of politics, provide universal free healthcare, and work to elect people committed to serving the majority of America's people, they're part of the problem. Nothing else they do can be a solution. And to that I say amen.
What other reviewers say about the book
** In his review of the book, Joseph Stieglitz notes that "Giridharadas is careful not to offend. He writes on two levels—seemingly tactful and subtle—but ultimately he presents a devastating portrait of a whole class, one easier to satirize than to reform."
** Kirkus Reviews leads its commentary with this: "Give a hungry man a fish, and you get to pat yourself on the back—and take a tax deduction." The review concludes that Winners Take All is "A provocative critique of the kind of modern, feel-good giving that addresses symptoms and not causes."
** Writing in Forbes, B Lab co-founder and managing partner Jay Coen Gilbert terms Winners Take All a "new and important book." Before launching into a defense of Certified B Corporations, Gilbert notes that "In provocative style and with compelling substance, Giridharadas speaks truth to power, calling elites to account for giving so much lip service to 'changing the world,' while mostly upholding an unacceptable status quo."
This is, by far, one of the most important books published in the 21st century. Giridharadas articulates, with great storytelling, the illusion that has gripped us—particularly Americans,—allowing, if not engineering, injustice and inequality into our way of life: There are several ways to define it, including market mindset or really materialism where money elevates the monied by virtue of their market acumen to rule. He calls them MarketWorlders—people who apply a market perspective to solving social issues. Winners Take All offers all of us who have ever dreamt of changing the world to interrogate our motives, to think about who we are inviting to the table, and to understand that who we are, the experiences we’ve had, and the questions we ask or don’t ask determine the who, what, when, where and how of change. And if the only change we can imagine insists on us not losing comfort, reputation, influence, power, and so on, then we’ve already limited the change that is possible.
Top reviews from other countries
I epitomize the class of people the author of this book has placed at its crosshairs: my kids hold three G7 passports apiece, with an additional OECD passport waiting for them if they ask. I’m comfortable in five modern languages. My business is in automation. It is registered in Delaware, headquartered in Boston and, for now, I run it out of London. Our clients are hedge funds, banks and pension funds. I once started the world’s first live-online restaurant reservation service and was fully prepared to take money from the wonderful people at Carlyle to do so. Oh, and to cap it all (and fit the author’s stereotype to a T) not too long ago we were diverting fully one third of my family’s income to a French-based international charity that sends doctors to dangerous places…
If that would give him any comfort, I’m happy to supply Anand Giridharadadas with a long-nosed, balding, middle-aged voodoo doll to poke. Get in there, brother!
With that out of the way, let’s get down to the serious business of actually reviewing “Winners Take All:”
Surprise! For all the wrong reasons, I liked it a lot.
It’s beautifully written. The man can write. He gets his message across very crisply, but without shouting. Not only that, the book is very accessible: you don’t need to have studied any Economics to read “Winners Take All.” Neither do you need to be familiar with the public discourse on the issues he addresses. With the exception of a single, annoying, neologism I’ll get to later, it uses no jargon. You won’t find any mumbo jumbo in here about concepts like “the Washington Consensus” or “the End of History” or “Neoconservatism” or anything else like that. If he can avoid namedropping, moreover, you can trust the author to do so. Names are in here only if mentioning them helps the argument. Tremendous stuff! If I could write half as well as Anand Giridharadadas, I’d be a happy man.
Significantly, the criticism leveled at the hypocrisy of (the upper echelons of) my class is 100% justified. These days, when I hear “philanthropist,” I run the mile. This book has explained to me where my visceral distaste comes from and traces it back to the seminal writing behind the hypocrisy, the “manifesto” Andrew Carnegie wrote for his deeds before that was really a word you could use in polite conversation, along the lines of “I make my money how money’s made and I get to give back how I know is best.” There are also entire chapters that demolish the idea of the “win-win” (also known as “doing well while doing good”), poke fun at the idea of a “thought leader” (a guy who dances around the topic of redistribution when addressing ways to improve society) and summarize well how bad we’ve been swindled by the Sacklers and their ilk.
And yet, the book fails! Here’s how:
The alleged straw man in this book is “MarketWorld,” the concept that we can deal with all problems on the planet using the framework of the market. Throughout the book it’s MarketWorld this, MarketWorld that, until you, the reader, are ready to hit somebody. Advice to my new friend Anand: ask Matt Taibbi to grant you an audience and get his advice on a better name for your concept.
But here’s the funny thing about “Winners Take All:“ Around p. 143 it finally dawned on me that the author’s muse is not his distaste for Marketworld. What actually informs this book is anticolonialism. He’s (justifiably) sick of western experts and do-gooders flying into far-away places like India or Rwanda and proposing ready-made solutions to local problems without having done an iota of homework on how the locals deal with these issues even more than he’s annoyed that the helicoptered-in experts all hail from Marketworld. This much he actually tells us in a well-penned chapter.
He goes on to identify this as the biggest issue with private interventions of the pluto-philanthropists WITHIN the border: not only is it presumptuous of us to think we’ve got the answers, he says, not only does our hypocrisy irk the recipients of our munificence so much that they voted for Trump, but by failing to engage with the authorities, the local governments and the local beneficiaries of any philanthropic efforts, we are no different than a privileged kid on his gap year that’s flying into Bangladesh to teach housewives how to program in Python.
Well!
In this case, it’s Anand Giridharadas who’s guilty of not having done his local reconnaissance! It’s fine to argue that we, the one percenters are flouting “our political institutions -our laws, our police, our constitutions, our regulations, our taxes, our shared infrastructure,” but it is also to 100% ignore that the approach of adding our own, private, improvements one at a time is PRECISELY, 101%, HOW THE GOVERNMENT ITSELF WORKS IN AMERICA.
I’m quoting from Edward Luce’s “Time to Start Thinking” here, so numbers may have in the meantime changed (upwards, I’m willing to bet, Trump notwithstanding), but all government interventions in America are incremental. As Obama was starting his second term, the US government had 51 entirely duplicative schemes for worker assistance, 82 different programs to improve teaching and 56 different programs to promote financial literacy. Obama himself had 37 “policy czars.” Both sides doing it, btw: George W Bush had 64 “chiefs of staff.” There were at least 12 protocols for de-activating IEDs in Afghanistan. (See, I can also say “protocol” and I’m using it literally, how about that?)
The American way is not to scrap existing programs. It’s to tack on new ones. Remember how Obama was crucified for saying “if you’ve got a plan you can keep your plan?” It’s because, for once, he did the right thing. Good deeds like that don’t go unpunished.
So the main message in “Winners Take All” is right in theory, but wrong in practice. The failure is a failure to study one’s domain. When in Rome, do as Romans do. The kids that could be earning millions working for Goldman Sachs but only earn thousands working on some more charitable project of very narrow scope are doing the best they can, actually. The billionaire’s kid that takes a year off to teach high school somewhere that has metal detectors is doing the right thing.
That is not to say that the pendulum has not swung too far away from the commons and too close to the interests of capital. It has.
That is not to deny that some things we have privatized lie in the domain where the government is the more natural protagonist.
Most to the point, that is not to say that the Sacklers are true philanthropists or that Clinton does the right thing by charging corporates 250k to tell them what they want to hear (even if he declares taxes on it, unlike his new billionaire friends).
But, contrary to the central message of this book, it’s healthy to fight the good fight wherever it is that the border lies today. Let’s concentrate our efforts on gaining ground and on moving that border in the right direction.
Giridharadas calls such efforts a charade because they don’t address the causes of inequality. He writes, “when elites assume leadership of social change, they are able to reshape what social change is—above all, to present it as something that should never threaten winners.” (p. 8) Quoting OECD leader Angel Gurria, Giridharadas writes, “Elites have found myriad ways to change things on the surface so that in practice nothing changes at all.” (p. 9)
To explain and illustrate why the elites’ efforts fail to address structural causes of poverty and inequality, Giridharadas examines the methods that foundations and corporations use. He describes a meeting of the Open Society Foundations’ Economic Advancement Program’s advisers in which, “the issues . . . would be presented in the business way, in the form of slides with graphs and charts. The question of building more inclusive economies would be atomized into endless subcategories, until the human reality all but vanished. The fundamental problems would grow almost unrecognizable. Justice and inequality would be converted into problems the private equity executive was preeminently qualified to solve.”(p. 132)
Giridharadas explains that the protocols by which McKinsey consultants help corporations to become more competitive are now commonly viewed by foundations and NGOs as essential for analysing and addressing social problems. He writes, “Our age of market supremacy has blessed the protocols with a remarkable change of fortune: They have evolved from being a specialized way of solving particular business problems to being, in the view of many, the essential toolkit for solving anything.” (p. 139)
The problem, according to Giridharadas, with using the protocols for analysing and addressing social problems is that, “problems reformatted according to the protocols were recast in the light of the winner’s gaze. After all, the definition of the problem is done by the problem-solver and crowds out other ways of seeing it.” (p. 142) “The protocols’ spread to social questions also gave elites a chance to limit the range of possible answers.” (p. 152)
Giridharadas’s cites the final Clinton Global Initiative’s one-sided panel discussions to demonstrate that private social reform efforts fail to understand and address the causes of poverty and inequality because they exclude divergent perspectives and voices: “The organizers of this final CGI, held in the throes of the antiglobalist revolt, decided that a panel on the topic was a must. And the organizers evidently concluded that the panel should consist entirely of globalists, with no one representing the other side.” (p. 214)
Giridharadas devotes Chapter 4 to examining the sycophancy of thought leaders, to show how the elites reward the generation and promotion of winner-safe prescriptions for social change.
Frank Giustra of the Giustra Foundation wrongly accuses Giridharadas of not offering solutions to the problems presented in Winners Take All. Giridharadas does propose solutions. To more equitably distribute the gains from the increasing productivity of the workforce, Giridharadas calls for “tighter regulations on trading, higher taxes on financiers, stronger labor protections to protect workers from layoffs and pension raiding by private equity owners, and incentives favouring job-creating investment over mere speculation.” (pp. 40-41)
I strongly recommend Winners Take All to anyone working in philanthropy or CSR.
The financial system as been rigged since Romans
brought taxation on the workers
And democracy as always been a clever facade no such thing as equality










