Next book

INHERENTLY UNEQUAL

THE BETRAYAL OF EQUAL RIGHTS BY THE SUPREME COURT, 1865-1903

A creditable condensation of a library of material into a dense 200-page narrative, which an annotated timeline would have...

A furious indictment of the Supreme Court as an accessory to the anti-democratic machinations of Gilded Age elites.

Anti-federalist author “Brutus” may have been right when he warned New Yorkers in 1788 that the Supreme Court, as laid out in the Constitution, would become a tool to neuter individual and minority rights, writes Goldstone (The Activist: John Marshall, Marbury v. Madison, and the Myth of Judicial Review, 2008, etc.). The author agrees that it is a defect of Article III that antidemocratic caprice in the high court is immune to democratic check. The author’s view of the Court shares much with Peter Irons’s A People’s History of the Supreme Court (1999), and he also focuses on the decisions of the Chase, Waite and Fuller courts, which undid federal guarantees of equal rights in the aftermath of the Civil War. Bracketed by Slaughter-House (1873) and Giles (1903), this series of decisions emasculated the 13th, 14th and 15th amendments, dismantled Congress’s Reconstruction program, condoned the disenfranchisement and quasi-enslavement of the South’s African-American population and ushered in the era of oppressive Jim Crow laws. The text is marred by intrusive moralizing and epithetic vehemence, but the biographical sketches and case backgrounds are mostly well-drawn. However, readers’ confidence in Goldstone’s ability to balance economy and accuracy may be shaken by his misrepresentations of Justice Holmes as a Spencerian, Justice Miller as a hypocrite and Hamilton, Franklin and Darwin as racists.

A creditable condensation of a library of material into a dense 200-page narrative, which an annotated timeline would have helped untangle.

Pub Date: Feb. 1, 2011

ISBN: 978-0-8027-1792-4

Page Count: 256

Publisher: Walker

Review Posted Online: Sept. 29, 2010

Kirkus Reviews Issue: Oct. 15, 2010

Next book

A PEOPLE'S HISTORY OF THE UNITED STATES

For Howard Zinn, long-time civil rights and anti-war activist, history and ideology have a lot in common. Since he thinks that everything is in someone's interest, the historian—Zinn posits—has to figure out whose interests he or she is defining/defending/reconstructing (hence one of his previous books, The Politics of History). Zinn has no doubts about where he stands in this "people's history": "it is a history disrespectful of governments and respectful of people's movements of resistance." So what we get here, instead of the usual survey of wars, presidents, and institutions, is a survey of the usual rebellions, strikes, and protest movements. Zinn starts out by depicting the arrival of Columbus in North America from the standpoint of the Indians (which amounts to their standpoint as constructed from the observations of the Europeans); and, after easily establishing the cultural disharmony that ensued, he goes on to the importation of slaves into the colonies. Add the laborers and indentured servants that followed, plus women and later immigrants, and you have Zinn's amorphous constituency. To hear Zinn tell it, all anyone did in America at any time was to oppress or be oppressed; and so he obscures as much as his hated mainstream historical foes do—only in Zinn's case there is that absurd presumption that virtually everything that came to pass was the work of ruling-class planning: this amounts to one great indictment for conspiracy. Despite surface similarities, this is not a social history, since we get no sense of the fabric of life. Instead of negating the one-sided histories he detests, Zinn has merely reversed the image; the distortion remains.

Pub Date: Jan. 1, 1979

ISBN: 0061965588

Page Count: 772

Publisher: Harper & Row

Review Posted Online: May 26, 2012

Kirkus Reviews Issue: Jan. 1, 1979

Next book

GOOD ECONOMICS FOR HARD TIMES

Occasionally wonky but overall a good case for how the dismal science can make the world less—well, dismal.

“Quality of life means more than just consumption”: Two MIT economists urge that a smarter, more politically aware economics be brought to bear on social issues.

It’s no secret, write Banerjee and Duflo (co-authors: Poor Economics: A Radical Rethinking of the Way To Fight Global Poverty, 2011), that “we seem to have fallen on hard times.” Immigration, trade, inequality, and taxation problems present themselves daily, and they seem to be intractable. Economics can be put to use in figuring out these big-issue questions. Data can be adduced, for example, to answer the question of whether immigration tends to suppress wages. The answer: “There is no evidence low-skilled migration to rich countries drives wage and employment down for the natives.” In fact, it opens up opportunities for those natives by freeing them to look for better work. The problem becomes thornier when it comes to the matter of free trade; as the authors observe, “left-behind people live in left-behind places,” which explains why regional poverty descended on Appalachia when so many manufacturing jobs left for China in the age of globalism, leaving behind not just left-behind people but also people ripe for exploitation by nationalist politicians. The authors add, interestingly, that the same thing occurred in parts of Germany, Spain, and Norway that fell victim to the “China shock.” In what they call a “slightly technical aside,” they build a case for addressing trade issues not with trade wars but with consumption taxes: “It makes no sense to ask agricultural workers to lose their jobs just so steelworkers can keep theirs, which is what tariffs accomplish.” Policymakers might want to consider such counsel, especially when it is coupled with the observation that free trade benefits workers in poor countries but punishes workers in rich ones.

Occasionally wonky but overall a good case for how the dismal science can make the world less—well, dismal.

Pub Date: Nov. 12, 2019

ISBN: 978-1-61039-950-0

Page Count: 432

Publisher: PublicAffairs

Review Posted Online: Aug. 28, 2019

Kirkus Reviews Issue: Sept. 15, 2019

Close Quickview