The revolution did not run through the streets, Bell concluded, but through the faculty meeting and the seminar room.
When listening to the rhetori
The revolution did not run through the streets, Bell concluded, but through the faculty meeting and the seminar room.
When listening to the rhetoric from those on the American left today, does it ever feel like they think we are still living in the 1960s? In this book, Chris Rufo argues that there is a good reason for this. His central thesis is that after the "Revolution of 1968" and the subsequent domestic terror campaigns by groups like the Weathermen and the Black Liberation Army failed, its leaders retreated into academia. Despite their violent acts and numerous bombings, these radicals astonishingly almost always avoided imprisonment. They recognized, however, the violence had alienated them from society and was counterproductive.
Far from being a fatal setback, however, and mirroring Mao's resurgence after his 5,000-mile retreat, the radicals devised a new strategy of a "long march through the institutions." Rufo argues the strategy has been wildly successful, starting in academia but now expanding to capture most of present-day America's important institutions, including corporate America, the federal bureaucracy, and K-12.
Biographies of Key Figures
The book includes brief biographies of some of the key figures of America's radical left, with particular emphasis on
- Herbert Marcuse, a neo-Marxist, head of the Frankfurt School, and "the father of the New Left." - One of Marcuse's most famous students: Angela Davis - Eldridge Cleaver, who was the leader of the Black Liberation Army, - Paulo Freire, a Brazillian Marxist who is generally seen as the most influential figure in modern educational theory, and - Derrick Bell who is known as the father of critical race theory.
In the case of Marcuse, Davis, Friere, and Cleaver, Rufo emphasizes their rhetorical and charismatic gifts, their sharp intellects, and their sympathies toward violence. For example, in Marcuse's case, Rufo makes it clear that he directly supported and met with militant groups in the United States and Europe working toward violent revolution. His rhetoric was crafty enough to leave just enough ambiguity as to whether he was calling for violence: at least if you only took his statements in isolation. However, by looking at the overall picture, Rufo clarifies that Marcuse supported violence.
Derrick Bell, unlike his counterparts, was not a proponent of violence. Rufo underscores Bell's noteworthy accomplishments as a Civil Rights lawyer and founder of CRT, juxtaposing them with his eventual plunge into pessimism and nihilism. Bell's inclination towards dystopian fiction is highlighted, with him envisioning scenarios where white Americans would buy rights to discriminate openly against black people and, in perhaps the most extreme and well-known example, even sold them to extraterrestrials. Particularly striking is Sowell's critique that Bell, feeling outmatched at Harvard, chose to maintain his relevance through outlandish fiction.
The Capture of Academia
Although Rufo's biographies are fascinating, Rufo's recount of the radical capture of America's colleges is equally intriguing. In particular, Rufo emphasizes Marcuse's insights into the need to turn away from violence which, sadly, he realized only after it has already burnt itself out. At this point, Marcuse realized that the key was to capture academia as a base and then expand into the rest of society from there. Remarkably, this aligned perfectly with the fact that most of the 1960s and 1970s radicals, including nearly all members of the Weathermen, were able to avoid prosecution, and many of the most prominent took up academic careers as their next stage in life.
Among the book's most fascinating information, which is not currently well known, is that it was Marcuse's third wife who created the prototypes for the first DEI programs which were first instituted in academia. Rufo recounts how key components were modeled after the guilt-inducing struggle sessions denouncing whiteness and privilege that were rituals of the Weather Underground.
Davis's preeminence in academia is also detailed, with Rufo, for instance, crediting her for articulating the key notions of intersectionality long before Bell's student Kimberley Crenshaw.
Rufo additionally emphasizes that educational theory was the key focus of the radicals-become-academics. This included both post-secondary and K-12.
Expansion Beyond the University
Rufo details that critical theory, the main thread he sees uniting the radicals turned academics, was not content to remain confined to academia. Given the similarities between publicly funded education and government bureaucracies, Rufo details how the federal bureaucracy put up essentially no resistance to critical theory and DEI.
The capture of Corporate America is only slightly more complex and occurred in large part through DEI programs. Rufo presents statistics regarding the explosion in critical theory jargon in NYT articles after the Great Financial Crisis. This he attributes to layoffs followed by hiring new graduates thoroughly indoctrinated into the critical theories now generally accepted by universities. Beyond ideological sympathies, Rufo explains how corporations have come to see alignment with critical theory as necessary to the bottom line. For instance, Rufo argues that it is treated as "protection money," or the cost of doing business and avoiding coming in the crosshairs of social justice activism.
The Book's Strengths
Even with some background in this field and prior knowledge of Rufo's work, I found this book enlightening. It offered fresh insights like Marcuse's shift toward non-violence and institutional infiltration and the early nexus between Critical Race Theorists and Gramsci. Because of the wealth of new information, Rufo's ability to recount fast-paced, engaging stories, and editing the book to the lower end of medium length, I never got bored.
Another great strength of the book is its meticulous endnotes. Since they often lead back to primary sources, this makes it hard to deny things many on the left would like to.
Specifically, Rufo's notes show that Critical Race Theorists are against free speech; they seek a suspension of property rights, first through a temporary suspension and redistribution, followed by ongoing interventions in the name of affirmative action. Rufo connects this opposition to free speech to Marcuse's writings, where he explicitly discusses a dictatorship of intellectuals who would determine what could be discussed and what could not. For example, free speech would be allowed for Marxists on the left but denied to fascists or even those whose words intellectuals worry could inadvertently promote fascism.
The final strength to mention is Rufo's emphasis on how the modern left operates through psychological manipulation, primarily by inducing unwarranted guilt. Rufo provocatively sees this as a consequence of what he describes as a shift from failed masculine notions of capturing society through violence to more effective but covert and sinister feminine strategies.
The Book Weaknesses
Compared to its strengths, the book's weaknesses are relatively minor. The book does make some minor errors. For instance, it claims that a statue of Lincoln was torn down during the riots of 2020. Although there was a rally that made this seem imminent at one point, it never transpired. There are a few other minor inaccuracies throughout the book, with, unfortunately, probably enough for a pedantic critic predetermined to give the book a bad review a chance to cherry-pick out and make their focus.
More seriously, Rufo's book omits a crucial CRT assertion: that formal equality alone cannot secure actual equality for minorities. He avoids elaborating on the details, although it presents a plausible claim: a person's success generally correlates with parental wealth. Hence, CRT could be correct in suggesting that generational wealth disparity, which resulted from horrific past injustices, might permanently impede black people's advancement. Rufo neither adequately presents nor counters this proposition.
A final weakness from the conclusion is that although the book decries critical theory's inability to produce evidence that it leads to positive results, Rufo fails to address why black people should have hope that they can succeed without critical theory-based policy. Here, Rufo could have done better. He is clearly a fan of Thomas Sowell, who has argued that, through educational reforms, quite the opposite of those envisioned by critical theory, black people can overcome obstacles such as being born into poorer families. Indeed, Sowell gives examples of black people doing this starting immediately after the Civil War.
Summary
Out of all the books I have read since the 2020 riots, Rufo's "America's Cultural Revolution" provides the most concise and well-sourced account of the radical left's influence on present-day America. It is a fast-paced book providing short biographies of the key figures of America's radical left since the 1960s. It discusses how, after violence failed, they captured academia, expanded Marcuse's critical theory, and merged it with other acidic leftist schools of thought. The book then details how leftist radicalism expanded into the federal bureaucracy, corporate America, and K-12. Due to the wealth of new material, the book will fascinate those new to Rufo's thesis, along with those who already consider themselves well-versed.
The book's weaknesses are minor: only enough to make it 4.75 stars instead of 5.0. There are a few relatively minor inaccuracies, although none on crucial points. This is even when Rufo presents what, initially, seem to be claims that those on the left would surely fight hard to deny but will not be able due to his meticulous endnotes.
The final minor weakness is that the conclusion could contain more specifics. Rufo could have pointed to others, like Sowell, who have solutions to improve black people's lives and avoid the intellectual and moral bankruptcy of critical theory and its underlying nihilism....more
In this book, Lila Rose, perhaps the best-known pro-life advocate in the country, presents her memoirs and offers some general principles learned for In this book, Lila Rose, perhaps the best-known pro-life advocate in the country, presents her memoirs and offers some general principles learned for those interested in political and cultural activism. Despite its brevity, her book packs some powerful insights.
Lila: The Young Activist
Although Lila is well known for founding Live Action when she was only 15, her book describes how her activism began much earlier. For example, she describes fundraising more than everyone in her church put together when only nine years old. This was just the beginning of what can only be described as a prodigious career.
In addition to the successes, Lila is very open about her mental health challenges and heartbreaks she felt along the way. For instance, she describes how after praying for years for a sister and being moved by the ultrasound pictures, she was devastated when seeing graphic images of an abortion shortly after Caterina's birth. One can't help but empathize with the pain and confusion she must have felt at such a young age, leading her to the path she's on today.
Lila describes how she used her heartbreak as a sign that she needed to do something after learning about the horrors of abortion. Indeed, from this, I gathered that although she has suffered because of depression, it also means that she was prone to think about darker things that most would shy away from. Without it, maybe she would have been less likely to pursue the work she has.
In the early chapters of the book Lila recounts her undercover work exposing knowing violations of the law at Planned Parenthood (PP) clinics, along with how they withheld or provided false information about fetal development and alternatives to abortion. For those not already aware, some of the revelations, for instance, the details about PP knowingly aiding human traffickers, are so shocking that even many pro-choice advocates will be forced to admit that PP was involved in some of the worst crimes imaginable.
General Advice to Activists
Far from being a book focused solely on being a guide to pro-life advocates, however, the book contains good general philosophy for anyone interested in activism. For instance, Lila believes high-pressure sales tactics are not the most effective as the people who want to donate and have the money to are out there. It is a matter of finding them and making a credible presentation that your ideas are worth the cost. In addition, Lila discusses receiving valuable knowledge from her supporters, such as regarding management philosophy. Lila was very open to learning, which was undoubtedly crucial to Live Action growing as rapidly as it did.
A Student of History
Lila also shares the lessons she learned as a student of history and how she applies these to the pro-life cause. Lila was particularly inspired by the rise of abolitionism in America and the Black Civil Rights movement. From these, she learned the importance of people seeing the abuses to remove them from the abstract and, most importantly, to rehumanize the victims. Few will deny just how effective Live Action's media presentation is. Although she does not say it herself, it seems also safe to conclude that being President of Live Action and "walking her talk" while she was at the age when women are most likely to have abortions was a great strength for Live Action. Along similar lines, she discusses how her sister Caterina unexpectedly got pregnant and went ahead with her pregnancy.
The Book's Weaknesses
Overall, the book is fast-paced, although some of the abuses of PP are so appalling and saddening that I had to pause before continuing. The book, however, does have a few downsides:
The main downside is that the book could have been longer. I would have liked to see Lila describe some things in more detail. Related to this is that the book was released before the Dobbs decision overturning Roe v. Wade. Being at the center of the pro-life struggle, I would like to hear what Lila thinks about strategy going forward. Are we now faced with a stalemate with different laws from state to state guaranteed to make nobody happy?
Indeed, so much happened in the aftermath of Dobbs that Lila could make some strong cases even stronger now. For instance, Lila is exasperated with what has now become the line that "pro-life" is merely "pro-birth" with no concern for assisting the mother during pregnancy or after birth. Lila correctly points out that pro-life provides more resources to women who choose not to abort than pro-choice organizations do. Indeed, in Dobbs's aftermath, we, incredibly, saw a wave of attacks on dozens of these pregnancy resource centers across the country. Shockingly, these widespread attacks were largely ignored by mainstream left-leaning media outlets. The logic is mind-boggling: If there were no such centers, that fact would be decried, but if there are, they get attacked by extremists who want them to shut down!
Not a Book of Apologetics, but...
Although this book is not meant to be a book of Christian or pro-life apologetics, there are points where I would have liked to see Lila dive deeper into the logic behind the pro-life movement. For instance, Lila seems to make a particular point of calling out how, when pregnant herself, she was repulsed when her pro-life doctor said she almost never performed abortions but would in the case of a rare disorder that left babies with only part of their brain and a very short life expectancy. Since Lila decided to focus intensely on this incident, I would like to see her get deeper into the incident and related hypotheticals: if a baby is almost certain to have a very short life of suffering after birth, why is it not better to prevent this suffering even before consciousness, or, perhaps, brain activity begins? Are these cases that Lila thinks are difficult? A deeper examination seems warranted.
Cross-Organizational Work?
Another omission is that I would have liked to see more discussion of Live Action's work with other pro-life organizations. Lila, despite being innovative regarding strategy, approaches abortion from what is the most common angle: Christian conservativism. Although not as numerous, others are involved in the struggle, and Live Action seems to be increasingly working with, for instance, pro-life atheists and Democrats.
One group that appears to have a particularly unique perspective and energy is PAAU. They are a group of young progressives who, like Lila, were often moved by seeing increasingly detailed ultrasound images of the pre-born. They were featured in the New York Times last year and reject abortion as killing the most vulnerable in society. Going forward, I suspect that pro-life will need to and will find greater success in appealing to people beyond its Christian conservative base. It would be good to hear Lila's thoughts on the matter.
Summary
Fighting for Life is a profoundly open and powerful recount of how Lila Rose was drawn to the pro-life cause from a very early age and quickly built Live Action into, perhaps, the best-known pro-life organization in the country. It discusses her personal struggles and provides principles of general use to activists. Some of Planned Parenthood's actions Lila describes are so vicious that even pro-choice advocates who read the book will surely be shocked.
The only real weakness is that I would have liked to hear even more of what Lila has to say, particularly what she expects in the post-Dobbs world. Hopefully, Lila will publish an updated edition at some point. However, even as it stands, this book should be of great interest to anyone interested in the abortion debate or activism in general....more
A good book to get up to speed on Putin and the recent history of Russia.
The book is written quite objectively carefully documenting what is clearly A good book to get up to speed on Putin and the recent history of Russia.
The book is written quite objectively carefully documenting what is clearly established versus what is speculation. For example
- In the case of Putin's alleged amassing of a fortune as a corrupt bureaucrat in St Petersburg, something which is essentially presented as fact by no less a journalistic luminary than Frontline, the book provides convincing evidence that the speculation is false.
- In the case of the apartment bombings, in which Putin's engineering of it all is taken as fact by Frontline, the book presents the cases both for and against.
- In cases where the evidence is clearer, for example, election rigging in 2012 the author is willing to put his foot down that it clearly did happen.
Although Putin definitely emerges as a bad guy overall for building a kleptocracy and smashing all but token opposition the book also documents positive changes he enacted: For example something of a move toward a market economy and the building of a rainy day fund which the author believes allowed Russia to survive the global financial crisis.
Putin's life before becoming Prime Minister and then President is not glorified. The author points out his recklessness such as street brawling while a KGB agent and his indifference to family life. On the other hand, he is not demonized. The author points out that Putin had gained a reputation as being loyal, even when coming at the cost of personal risk and being seen as above corruption prior to becoming Prime Minister. Indeed the author points out that Yeltsin appointed him precisely for these characteristics. It is remarkable that the book is engaging enough to get you through Putin's rather boring life pre-1998 without giving up on it all!
Although the book presents a decent amount of detail on Putin's personal life and habits, he ultimately remains a rather mysterious figure. I felt this was one weakness of the book. It does discuss Putin's hostility toward the west somewhat: for example his feeling that the west is imperialistic, ultimately intent on crushing Russia, arrogant and corrupting of family and religious value. It seemed that the author had just touched on the tip of the iceberg, however, and, perhaps, with more exposition Putin would seem less mysterious.
Another weakness of the book is its rather brief coverage of the events of 2014 in Ukraine. The events are sketched out but there is not enough detailed investigation to have a good sense as to whose version of events is more likely to be true. For example, to what extent was it far right Ukrainian nationalists behind it all versus a truly populist uprising? Who was responsible for things turning violent?
Like most Russian history, things are rather dreary and after reading the book my main sense was being lucky to live in the west and how important it is to keep corruption out of government....more
Loading...
