Donald T. Critchlow

In Defense of Populism: Protest and American Democracy by Donald T Critchlow is an interesting history and explication of populism in the United States.

As an informative work this book succeeds very well. As a work of persuasion, getting people to limit their knee jerk reaction to the idea of populism, I can't say for sure but I think it would also be considered a success. I happen to not be anti populism as an idea even while I may be opposed to certain strands of populism and faux populism.

I don't want to oversimplify or, even worse, misstate Critchlow's main points, so this is my takeaway from the book. Misunderstandings are mine but I hope that by seeing how it made one reader, me, think it will give you some idea of what you might get from the book. So...

Populism is, in some ways, what all grassroots movements (and some astroturf movements once they catch on) are, the usually broadly stated but often less structured (as far as solutions) popular responses to real or perceived wrongs in society. So unless you have always been content with the status quo and have never advocated for change when various movements have brought issues into the public forum, you have been at least a passive part of a populist movement. Additionally, anyone active in a movement is usually committed to sweeping change on whatever issue they care about, I speak from experience here. So when the effects of the movement finally have some affect on policy it is always less sweeping, which can be very disappointing. Yet without the populist movement the change, however disappointing it might be, would not have occurred. The part that scares and angers many people is when any movement which they feel is not a positive for society is most active, least organized, most extreme. As advocates for the change gain footholds in government or other influential organizations, then the movement is more often termed as a populist movement and then demonized. Yet without this process repeating itself far more often than we sometimes realize, there would have been little substantive change in our country.

I haven't read any of Crithlow's other work so my opinion of him is based on my reading of this book. I have the impression he is right leaning, maybe significantly, but not to the close-minded extreme of some (yes, there are some like that on the left, not my point here). I have this impression because of his discussion of some of the right wing "grassroots" movements. That said, he presents the information well and to whatever extent his personal politics influences his writing it does not even come close to a partisan presentation. This is, in sum, an honest and as fair a presentation as is likely humanly possible in these partisan times.

Highly recommended for readers who want to wrap their minds around the current debates and the terms thrown about as pejorative. This book is about coming to understand a term through its history and its importance to our history.

Reviewed from a copy made available by the publisher via NetGalley.… (más)

where mid-sized corporations fear to tread
Might be an accurate description of the themes in this informative book. Studebaker was a successful wagon maker at the turn of the last century, and got involved in car manufacture just as the market waxed. But they experimented with electrics and large, expensive cars before realizing that most of the profit was in the lower/lower middle sector.
They then tried to grow via merger (first with a maker of economy cars, then with with a heavy truck company), but Studebaker was too poor to buy out these firm's shares. Nonetheless, the merger attempts nearly bankrupted Studebaker, which was bailed out by powerful banks. However, to retain the confidence of these banks,most profits had to be returned to shareholders as dividends. By the 1950's, the US auto industry was a rather low margin business, and Studebaker could not manufacture cheaply and efficiently enough to compete.
In a rough sense, the events reminded me of of ALCO, which went from making steam locomotives to diesel ones, but like Studebaker, couldn't really afford to compete with GM.… (más)