Books to understand conservatives
January 28, 2016 10:41 PM Subscribe
I’m curious to find one or two books that would help me understand conservatives better.
I was raised as a social justice liberal in a pretty lefty family. What I could read that would help me learn about the conservative mindset? What are the “classics” that give a sense of the thinking and values from the right?
For the record, I’ve read the Bible and some Ayn Rand. I’m not *that* interested in personalities like Ann Coulter or Rush Limbaugh, but if you really think they’re the epitome of conservative thinking, then go ahead and make a case. I'm also more interested in a book than I am in podcasts, magazines etc.
I was raised as a social justice liberal in a pretty lefty family. What I could read that would help me learn about the conservative mindset? What are the “classics” that give a sense of the thinking and values from the right?
For the record, I’ve read the Bible and some Ayn Rand. I’m not *that* interested in personalities like Ann Coulter or Rush Limbaugh, but if you really think they’re the epitome of conservative thinking, then go ahead and make a case. I'm also more interested in a book than I am in podcasts, magazines etc.
What's The Matter With Kansas?
By Thomas Frank, subtitled "How Conservatives Won The Heart Of America"
posted by jbenben at 11:03 PM on January 28, 2016 [6 favorites]
By Thomas Frank, subtitled "How Conservatives Won The Heart Of America"
posted by jbenben at 11:03 PM on January 28, 2016 [6 favorites]
Reading books by liberals (e.g. Frank and Friedman) to explain how they think conservatives think is not a good way to get the knowledge you seek.
You're better off reading something by a real conservative. Try something by Thomas Sowell.
posted by Chocolate Pickle at 11:10 PM on January 28, 2016 [7 favorites]
You're better off reading something by a real conservative. Try something by Thomas Sowell.
posted by Chocolate Pickle at 11:10 PM on January 28, 2016 [7 favorites]
Hm. My suggestions are not written by conservatives but are about them, which isn't exactly what you're asking for, but might be a useful on-ramp to pure conservative thinking. Anyway, I have found them helpful.
I'd try anything by George Lakoff, a UC Berkeley linguist who has written extensively about how conservatives and liberals see the world differently. Moral Politics: How Liberals and Conservatives Think is very good.
I'd also recommend Bob Altemeyer's Right-Wing Authoritarianism, which IIRC is a free download from his personal site. You can find it though Google.
Jonathan Haidt's The Righteous Mind: Why Good People are Divided by Politics and Religion is also worthwhile.
Good luck!
posted by Susan PG at 11:13 PM on January 28, 2016 [4 favorites]
I'd try anything by George Lakoff, a UC Berkeley linguist who has written extensively about how conservatives and liberals see the world differently. Moral Politics: How Liberals and Conservatives Think is very good.
I'd also recommend Bob Altemeyer's Right-Wing Authoritarianism, which IIRC is a free download from his personal site. You can find it though Google.
Jonathan Haidt's The Righteous Mind: Why Good People are Divided by Politics and Religion is also worthwhile.
Good luck!
posted by Susan PG at 11:13 PM on January 28, 2016 [4 favorites]
The smartest conservative friend I know was a classics major, so some of the ancient Roman texts might be worth looking into, but I can't give you much guidance beyond that.
She's also a heavy reader of the Economist, which leans a bit right-wise.
This list strikes me as fairly comprehensive: http://www.dineshdsouza.com/news/a-conservative-reading-list/
posted by grokfest at 11:38 PM on January 28, 2016
She's also a heavy reader of the Economist, which leans a bit right-wise.
This list strikes me as fairly comprehensive: http://www.dineshdsouza.com/news/a-conservative-reading-list/
posted by grokfest at 11:38 PM on January 28, 2016
P.S.: I'd say one of the biggest insights I had in college was that a huge frustration between dealing with people of different political (or religious, sometimes) persuasions is that the groups are often operating with different sets of facts. You can never see eye to eye because you don't believe in the same reality. On the other hand, it's important to recognize (as you may already have, by seeking out such a list) that underneath that, or in different subgroups of these 'camps' are people who can agree on the same reality and whose differences stem most strongly in differences in priorities, sometimes different values, and sometimes (bleeding into the reality issue) different ideas about how the world works. I bring this up because I think it will be helpful for you to keep this in mind and evaluate where a particular author is mainly operating.
posted by grokfest at 11:57 PM on January 28, 2016 [7 favorites]
posted by grokfest at 11:57 PM on January 28, 2016 [7 favorites]
Best answer: The classic conservative text is probably Burke, Reflections on the Revolution in France. A more recent book about the Burkean strain of conservatism is Michael Oakeshott, Rationalism in Politics. For the libertarian trend among modern conservatives, the foundational book is Hayek's Road to Serfdom.
I got my best sense of what intellectually respectable modern American conservatism is like from Rod Dreher's book, Crunchy Cons. I know you said books rather than magazines, but reading First Things for a few months also significantly improved my understanding of American conservatism - it's a bit specifically Catholic in its leanings, but it also has a lot of articles about political issues in the US (gender, gay marriage, welfare) that put the extreme conservative view in intellectually comprehensible terms.
posted by Aravis76 at 12:04 AM on January 29, 2016 [5 favorites]
I got my best sense of what intellectually respectable modern American conservatism is like from Rod Dreher's book, Crunchy Cons. I know you said books rather than magazines, but reading First Things for a few months also significantly improved my understanding of American conservatism - it's a bit specifically Catholic in its leanings, but it also has a lot of articles about political issues in the US (gender, gay marriage, welfare) that put the extreme conservative view in intellectually comprehensible terms.
posted by Aravis76 at 12:04 AM on January 29, 2016 [5 favorites]
Best answer: It's better for understanding the conservative mindset generally, rather than the current Republican Party, but Russell Kirk's The Conservative Mind:From Burke to Elliot presents a good overview of intellectual conservativism. It's definitely a classic on the Right.
As recommended above, Road to Serfdom gives you the libertarian streak in probably its best articulated and most coherent version.
posted by Bulgaroktonos at 12:07 AM on January 29, 2016 [1 favorite]
As recommended above, Road to Serfdom gives you the libertarian streak in probably its best articulated and most coherent version.
posted by Bulgaroktonos at 12:07 AM on January 29, 2016 [1 favorite]
You should read Rick Perlstein's Barry Goldwater bio, Before The Storm. That guy writes a lot of "understanding movement conservatives for liberal readers" books.
posted by johngoren at 12:24 AM on January 29, 2016 [1 favorite]
posted by johngoren at 12:24 AM on January 29, 2016 [1 favorite]
I'd also recommend Bob Altemeyer's Right-Wing Authoritarianism, which IIRC is a free download from his personal site.
The Authoritarians can indeed be downloaded for free here:
home.cc.umanitoba.ca/~altemey/
posted by qbject at 1:05 AM on January 29, 2016 [2 favorites]
The Authoritarians can indeed be downloaded for free here:
home.cc.umanitoba.ca/~altemey/
posted by qbject at 1:05 AM on January 29, 2016 [2 favorites]
2nding George Lakoff's Moral Politics : How Liberals and Conservatives Think. He uses cognitive metaphor theory to elucidate how different the basic political intuitions of American conservatives and liberals are. For both the nation is like a family where government plays the role of parents, and the rest of us are the children. Conservatives, however, see the world as a dangerous place where a tough-love parenting style is appropriate, while liberals see the world as a basically pleasant opportunity for personal exploration where the appropriate parenting style is nurturing.
Of course a nation is not really like a family. But Lakoff shows how a lot of party policy differences can be derived from the assumption that such a metaphor is guiding people's values and moral intuitions.
At some point he argues that for liberals the Communist dictum of 'To each according to his needs, from each according to his means' represents a lofty political ideal whose realization is unfortunately for practical purposes impossible. While for conservatives, the same dictum is deeply immoral, because it implies many would have their needs fulfilled without suffering for it, which contradicts the tough-love in a dangerous world model.
posted by bertran at 2:20 AM on January 29, 2016 [3 favorites]
Of course a nation is not really like a family. But Lakoff shows how a lot of party policy differences can be derived from the assumption that such a metaphor is guiding people's values and moral intuitions.
At some point he argues that for liberals the Communist dictum of 'To each according to his needs, from each according to his means' represents a lofty political ideal whose realization is unfortunately for practical purposes impossible. While for conservatives, the same dictum is deeply immoral, because it implies many would have their needs fulfilled without suffering for it, which contradicts the tough-love in a dangerous world model.
posted by bertran at 2:20 AM on January 29, 2016 [3 favorites]
Best answer: If Not Us, Who? by David Frisk is a good primer on the Conservative Movement which is related to understanding ideals but isn't quite the same thing. Very relevant as most of what people encounter is really the force of the movement.
In Defense of Freedom and other related essays by Frank S. Meyer covers fusionism - an attempt to reconcile conservative and libertarian thought into a more coherent ideology. He was an influential figure in the movement.
I did a capstone project on the influence of former communists on the formation of the American conservative movement - if you're interested in that angle start with Whittaker Chambers.
No matter the state of today's Republican party, conservatism has a really rich intellectual tradition that you could explore if that is what you are interested in doing. There are also a lot of books written from the perspective of outsiders trying to explain conservative thought - there are some worthwhile texts in that vein but it might be helpful for you to think about what approach you want to take from the start as the two are really very different undertakings.
posted by cessair at 2:47 AM on January 29, 2016
In Defense of Freedom and other related essays by Frank S. Meyer covers fusionism - an attempt to reconcile conservative and libertarian thought into a more coherent ideology. He was an influential figure in the movement.
I did a capstone project on the influence of former communists on the formation of the American conservative movement - if you're interested in that angle start with Whittaker Chambers.
No matter the state of today's Republican party, conservatism has a really rich intellectual tradition that you could explore if that is what you are interested in doing. There are also a lot of books written from the perspective of outsiders trying to explain conservative thought - there are some worthwhile texts in that vein but it might be helpful for you to think about what approach you want to take from the start as the two are really very different undertakings.
posted by cessair at 2:47 AM on January 29, 2016
Best answer: Gene Wolfe's essay on Tolkien, "The Best Introduction to the Mountains" contains some insight into what I'd call a "traditional" conservatism that it's possible to respect even while disagreeing. Here's a key quote: "We might have a society in which the laws were few and just, simple, permanent, and familiar to everyone — a society in which everyone stood shoulder-to-shoulder because everyone lived by the same changeless rules, and everyone knew what those rules were. When we had it, we would also have a society in which the lack of wealth was not reason for resentment but a spur to ambition, and in which wealth was not a cause for self-indulgence but a call to service."
You can find more of this in writers like Chesterton or Burke. I'm not qualified to talk about modern US politics, but extreme versions of some of these ideas are still a key part of what I hear from right wing politicians.
posted by crocomancer at 3:14 AM on January 29, 2016 [1 favorite]
You can find more of this in writers like Chesterton or Burke. I'm not qualified to talk about modern US politics, but extreme versions of some of these ideas are still a key part of what I hear from right wing politicians.
posted by crocomancer at 3:14 AM on January 29, 2016 [1 favorite]
Best answer: Barry Goldwater's The Conscience of a Conservative is a foundational text for the modern conservative movement in the US, even if current conservatives have drifted from it somewhat, and some of what he says would be more identified with libertarianism than with conservatism today.
posted by DevilsAdvocate at 4:37 AM on January 29, 2016 [1 favorite]
posted by DevilsAdvocate at 4:37 AM on January 29, 2016 [1 favorite]
Best answer: I'm a conservative, albeit a very moderate, eccentric one. Ayn Rand should never be mentioned in the same sentence as conservatism.
The problem is, there are a lot of only tangentially-related ideologies that are grouped together under the name of conservatism, so the question is, what do you really want to understand? Religious conservatives? Free marketers? Republican politicians? Republican voters? I'll try to give an overview, although it'll be skewed toward my own brand of conservatism.
Edmund Burke is, as many have said, the intellectual foundation of modern conservatism. Realistically, though, it's mostly lip service. Most people on the right have never actually read Burke, and if they have, they don't really pay attention. If you read his Wikipedia page, that'll give you a good enough introduction to his thought.
The reason Burke is so prominent is largely due to Russell Kirk's "The Conservative Mind". Again, probably not the most useful thing for understanding day-to-day electoral politics, but if you want one book to help you with the philosophical underpinnings of traditional conservatism, this is it.
The person who did more than anyone else to turn Burke's and Kirk's philosophy into an actual electoral force was William F. Buckley (who also added a much stronger emphasis on free-market economics than either Burke or Kirk had). As it turns out, he's also a quite delightful writer. You could do much worse than reading old WFB columns.
"The Death of Conservatism" by Sam Tanenhaus was a pretty good recap of much of the second half of the twentieth century. As a conservative, I found the tone in some parts a little irritating, but you probably won't have the same problem. Tanenhaus, although a liberal, evinces a lot of respect for WFB, and he regrets the decline from WFB's principled philosophy to the opportunism of today's GOP. If you only read one book that I've recommended, this would probably be the one. To get an idea, you can check out this Q&A from the Times.
Someone upthread mentioned Rod Dreher's "Crunchy Cons". While I love Rod Dreher, and the original article that the book was based on was kind of a watershed moment for me, I don't know if I'd recommend it to someone looking to understand the modern GOP. Dreher, like me, is a fairly marginal figure in the modern conservative world. You won't learn much from him about why self-proclaimed "conservatives" are rushing to Donald Trump rallies or occupying federal land in Oregon or believing Barack Obama is the antichrist. But he's readable (he does a lot of pearl-clutching about sexual politics on his blog, which might turn you off, but that's most absent in the book) and principled. If you're interested in seeing if it's possible for conservatism to have a principled foundation in the 21st century, Dreher would be my first recommendation.
And once you've read Dreher, you're primed for G.K. Chesterton, who is my hero. His works are in the public domain. I recommend starting with "Tremendous Trifles", which is both hilarious and thought-provoking.
I have obviously left out a bunch - the Irving Kristol neoconservatives, Reagan, Friedman/Hayek economists, etc. If you'd like more of that, let me know and I can go on. Please feel free to MeMail me as well. I'd be happy to discuss this stuff with you. Hope this helps.
posted by kevinbelt at 4:41 AM on January 29, 2016 [12 favorites]
The problem is, there are a lot of only tangentially-related ideologies that are grouped together under the name of conservatism, so the question is, what do you really want to understand? Religious conservatives? Free marketers? Republican politicians? Republican voters? I'll try to give an overview, although it'll be skewed toward my own brand of conservatism.
Edmund Burke is, as many have said, the intellectual foundation of modern conservatism. Realistically, though, it's mostly lip service. Most people on the right have never actually read Burke, and if they have, they don't really pay attention. If you read his Wikipedia page, that'll give you a good enough introduction to his thought.
The reason Burke is so prominent is largely due to Russell Kirk's "The Conservative Mind". Again, probably not the most useful thing for understanding day-to-day electoral politics, but if you want one book to help you with the philosophical underpinnings of traditional conservatism, this is it.
The person who did more than anyone else to turn Burke's and Kirk's philosophy into an actual electoral force was William F. Buckley (who also added a much stronger emphasis on free-market economics than either Burke or Kirk had). As it turns out, he's also a quite delightful writer. You could do much worse than reading old WFB columns.
"The Death of Conservatism" by Sam Tanenhaus was a pretty good recap of much of the second half of the twentieth century. As a conservative, I found the tone in some parts a little irritating, but you probably won't have the same problem. Tanenhaus, although a liberal, evinces a lot of respect for WFB, and he regrets the decline from WFB's principled philosophy to the opportunism of today's GOP. If you only read one book that I've recommended, this would probably be the one. To get an idea, you can check out this Q&A from the Times.
Someone upthread mentioned Rod Dreher's "Crunchy Cons". While I love Rod Dreher, and the original article that the book was based on was kind of a watershed moment for me, I don't know if I'd recommend it to someone looking to understand the modern GOP. Dreher, like me, is a fairly marginal figure in the modern conservative world. You won't learn much from him about why self-proclaimed "conservatives" are rushing to Donald Trump rallies or occupying federal land in Oregon or believing Barack Obama is the antichrist. But he's readable (he does a lot of pearl-clutching about sexual politics on his blog, which might turn you off, but that's most absent in the book) and principled. If you're interested in seeing if it's possible for conservatism to have a principled foundation in the 21st century, Dreher would be my first recommendation.
And once you've read Dreher, you're primed for G.K. Chesterton, who is my hero. His works are in the public domain. I recommend starting with "Tremendous Trifles", which is both hilarious and thought-provoking.
I have obviously left out a bunch - the Irving Kristol neoconservatives, Reagan, Friedman/Hayek economists, etc. If you'd like more of that, let me know and I can go on. Please feel free to MeMail me as well. I'd be happy to discuss this stuff with you. Hope this helps.
posted by kevinbelt at 4:41 AM on January 29, 2016 [12 favorites]
You're Not as Crazy as I Thought (But You're Still Wrong) breaks down both conservative and liberal takes on several political issues.
Also, it's not a book but some of the Intelligence Squared debates might be of interest to you. Available in podcast form from iTunes.
posted by bunderful at 5:09 AM on January 29, 2016 [1 favorite]
Also, it's not a book but some of the Intelligence Squared debates might be of interest to you. Available in podcast form from iTunes.
posted by bunderful at 5:09 AM on January 29, 2016 [1 favorite]
The best sources to understand Conservatives are written by them. Conservatism changed in the late '80s, early '90s. Tens of millions found a voice that explained their vague unease with their politics. They voted Democrat but didn't feel like they fit in either party. Rush Limbaugh explained why on the radio beginning in 1988 and in print beginning in 1992 with The Way Things Outta Be.
In 1994, because of Limbaugh, Republicans took a majority in the House of Representatives for the first time in 40 years, controlled a majority of state legislatures for the first time in 50 years and a majority of governorships for the first time in 20 years. Read him to understand the core issues and beliefs of today's Conservatives.
posted by Homer42 at 6:27 AM on January 29, 2016 [2 favorites]
In 1994, because of Limbaugh, Republicans took a majority in the House of Representatives for the first time in 40 years, controlled a majority of state legislatures for the first time in 50 years and a majority of governorships for the first time in 20 years. Read him to understand the core issues and beliefs of today's Conservatives.
posted by Homer42 at 6:27 AM on January 29, 2016 [2 favorites]
I have a similar background -- except Canadian, so votes go even further to the left than "liberal" -- and I have long adored The Economist; it is supposedly not willing to be pinned down -- "The concepts of right- and left-wing predate The Economist's foundation by half a century," etc. So, far from a hard-right rag. But when it takes a position that offends me, I still enjoy reading about it and they do an eloquent job of explaining why they are wrongbacking that position. My conclusion is "Their priorities differ from my own," and not "These people are fools." It is highly palatable stuff for the lefty. (Also a magazine and not a book, apologies.)
I assume Coulters and Limbaughs are not meant to be taken seriously by intelligent people -- you know the term sports entertainment? That sort of noisemaking is surely political entertainment.
posted by kmennie at 6:59 AM on January 29, 2016
I assume Coulters and Limbaughs are not meant to be taken seriously by intelligent people -- you know the term sports entertainment? That sort of noisemaking is surely political entertainment.
posted by kmennie at 6:59 AM on January 29, 2016
Best answer: Friedman's Capitalism and Freedom is eminently readable a as a sort of very-pro-market text, although there's some extent to which he's arguing against either a strawman of socialist intellectuals or a class of socialist intellectual that doesn't really exist anymore but did when he was writing. He was one of the important intellectual figures in the Chicago school of economics, for instance. I would say that it is trying to make a case for a hands-off-the-market libertarianism that American conservatives often pay at least lip service to. Contra Chocolate Pickle, I don't think you could stick Friedman anywhere near Thomas Frank in terms of political ideology. But he's a very clear writer and I found it enjoyable enough to read more than once, even though I don't agree with large chunks of it.
The Economist (which I read, and like a lot) makes a case for a similar sort of pro-market agenda, albeit not one quite as forceful as Friedman. I honestly don't think it's particularly influential for US conservatives except maybe college libertarian types (those were the people besides me that I knew who read it).
I guess from your question it's not clear to me whether you want sort of "classic" conservative texts or if you want to try to get a handle on what the Republican party is thinking these days. While those guys probably pay lip service to Hayek I'm not sure most of them have read it or if it's terribly influential outside of the young libertarian set, which is only a (smallish, I think) subset of people who might be called conservative in the US. If the latter, honestly, my Republican-supporting relatives seem to be into Limbaugh/Beck/etc and choking down one of their books might be a good way to understand what exactly US conservatives think even if it might not be as clear what their premise is.
posted by dismas at 7:14 AM on January 29, 2016
The Economist (which I read, and like a lot) makes a case for a similar sort of pro-market agenda, albeit not one quite as forceful as Friedman. I honestly don't think it's particularly influential for US conservatives except maybe college libertarian types (those were the people besides me that I knew who read it).
I guess from your question it's not clear to me whether you want sort of "classic" conservative texts or if you want to try to get a handle on what the Republican party is thinking these days. While those guys probably pay lip service to Hayek I'm not sure most of them have read it or if it's terribly influential outside of the young libertarian set, which is only a (smallish, I think) subset of people who might be called conservative in the US. If the latter, honestly, my Republican-supporting relatives seem to be into Limbaugh/Beck/etc and choking down one of their books might be a good way to understand what exactly US conservatives think even if it might not be as clear what their premise is.
posted by dismas at 7:14 AM on January 29, 2016
Read The Economist. The leftists think it leans to the right, while the conservatives find it too liberal (as in US understanding of liberal). It's pretty libertarian, it's exceptionally well written and it is argumentative on a lot of issues
I was raised as a social justice liberal in a pretty lefty family
Hmmm... Ever challenged your family's set of values?
posted by Kwadeng at 8:27 AM on January 29, 2016
I was raised as a social justice liberal in a pretty lefty family
Hmmm... Ever challenged your family's set of values?
posted by Kwadeng at 8:27 AM on January 29, 2016
Best answer: not sure these are " the classics", but here's a bit more variety, looking at "conservative" in a variety of ways:
when i lived in the usa for a time (5 or 6 years ago now), i read a bunch of books to try understand the place better. titles like "red state, blue state". the one i brought back in my limited luggage was deer hunting with jesus. i honesty don't remember much about it now, but i think it was the most sympathetic of the bunch, and most clearly explained what "other" people were like (for some value of other).
someone above is recommending hayek. i haven't actually read anything of his, but this biography is one of the best books i have read. it shows a very complex, intelligent man, always interested in new ideas (and very well written - i wish the author would write more).
finally, rites of spring can be read, i think, as a eulogy for the conservatism of a passing era (pre-wwi) (see the negative review on amazon to see what i mean). that may not be the kind of conservatism you mean, but it's another excellent book.
posted by andrewcooke at 8:31 AM on January 29, 2016
when i lived in the usa for a time (5 or 6 years ago now), i read a bunch of books to try understand the place better. titles like "red state, blue state". the one i brought back in my limited luggage was deer hunting with jesus. i honesty don't remember much about it now, but i think it was the most sympathetic of the bunch, and most clearly explained what "other" people were like (for some value of other).
someone above is recommending hayek. i haven't actually read anything of his, but this biography is one of the best books i have read. it shows a very complex, intelligent man, always interested in new ideas (and very well written - i wish the author would write more).
finally, rites of spring can be read, i think, as a eulogy for the conservatism of a passing era (pre-wwi) (see the negative review on amazon to see what i mean). that may not be the kind of conservatism you mean, but it's another excellent book.
posted by andrewcooke at 8:31 AM on January 29, 2016
Response by poster: Thanks all, I'm grateful for the responses. I do realize that the question is broad, that I haven't been specific about what kind of conservatives I'm trying to understand and that there's no one book that will give me the whole picture. Didn't mean to be confusing, I am looking for books written by conservatives to explain/discuss their values rather than liberals trying to explain conservatives (are there books for conservatives who try to explain liberals?).
It just occurred to me that it was worth reading from a different perspective than has been easily handed to me. I like expanding my horizons.
posted by mulkey at 9:06 AM on January 29, 2016
It just occurred to me that it was worth reading from a different perspective than has been easily handed to me. I like expanding my horizons.
posted by mulkey at 9:06 AM on January 29, 2016
"are there books for conservatives who try to explain liberals?"
Yes. Avoid them.
posted by kevinbelt at 10:16 AM on January 29, 2016 [2 favorites]
Yes. Avoid them.
posted by kevinbelt at 10:16 AM on January 29, 2016 [2 favorites]
are there books for conservatives who try to explain liberals?
Liberal Fascism, by Jonah Goldberg.
posted by Chocolate Pickle at 12:37 PM on January 29, 2016 [1 favorite]
Liberal Fascism, by Jonah Goldberg.
posted by Chocolate Pickle at 12:37 PM on January 29, 2016 [1 favorite]
One thing to keep in mind is that capital-C Conservatives, Republicans, and people who vote Republican (least common to most common, respectively) are an overlapping Venn diagram, and there are books by people representing all three camps.
posted by Rykey at 1:08 PM on January 29, 2016
posted by Rykey at 1:08 PM on January 29, 2016
Strongly seconding Rick Perlstein. He's written a trio of books. In addition to the one about Goldwater, there's Nixonland (about the rise of Nixon) and The Invisible Bridge (about the rise of Reagan). I love Nixonland so, so much and recommend it to people constantly. Invisible Bridge is super-teriffic, too.
Perlstein is most certainly a liberal, but his work is extremely respected, and he's much more careful and far better researched than Thomas Frank.
posted by Conrad Cornelius o'Donald o'Dell at 4:16 PM on January 29, 2016
Perlstein is most certainly a liberal, but his work is extremely respected, and he's much more careful and far better researched than Thomas Frank.
posted by Conrad Cornelius o'Donald o'Dell at 4:16 PM on January 29, 2016
Hetherington and Weiler, for some definitions/aspects of "conservative".
posted by busted_crayons at 11:30 AM on March 29, 2016
posted by busted_crayons at 11:30 AM on March 29, 2016
This thread is closed to new comments.
posted by z11s at 10:52 PM on January 28, 2016