作者:
Thomas Frank 出版社: Metropolitan Books 副标题: Or, What Ever Happened to the Party of the People? 出版年: 2016-3-15 页数: 320 定价: USD 27.00 装帧: Hardcover ISBN: 9781627795395
I doubt it. That Google hired several of President Obama’s former advisers probably had something to do with it. But a more basic reason is that many of our leading Democrats know you don’t treat blue-state innovators in this way. They lead clean industries, virtuous industries—knowledge industries. They represent the learning class, the creative class. They are the future, and what you do with the future is you win it.
In reality, there is little new about this stuff except the software, the convenience, and the spying. Each of the innovations I have mentioned merely updates or digitizes some business strategy that Americans learned long ago to be wary of. Amazon updates the practices of Wal-Mart, for example, while Google has dusted off corporate behavior from the days of the Robber Baro... (查看原文)
The attitude of this book toward professional and tech innovation is near hostile. The problem is not a liberal party which has forsaken the industrial labor, it's the legal constraints which kills an...The attitude of this book toward professional and tech innovation is near hostile. The problem is not a liberal party which has forsaken the industrial labor, it's the legal constraints which kills any possibilities for a third political party when the interest of labor and professionals have parted their ways. (展开)
The attitude of this book toward professional and tech innovation is near hostile. The problem is not a liberal party which has forsaken the industrial labor, it's the legal constraints which kills an...The attitude of this book toward professional and tech innovation is near hostile. The problem is not a liberal party which has forsaken the industrial labor, it's the legal constraints which kills any possibilities for a third political party when the interest of labor and professionals have parted their ways. (展开)
1 有用 Rilkelee 2016-12-22 10:44:38
4.5.集中黑60年代后的民主党。总体还是局限于一个比较journalist的视角，最后一段喷新兴共享经济等相比其它部分论述有点弱，但总体上对美国政治的insight以及对民主党抛弃union workers与经济不平等议题而拥抱elitist professionalism 之转向的论述可谓鞭辟入里，对比今年的大选看则尤其有预言性质。
2 有用 ROTCEV 2020-04-09 06:35:10
16年川普的一大部分选票来自中西部的制造业工人。左派选民为何“变节”？作者分析说，90年代起，民主党开始走中间派路线，无视工人阶级的诉求，转而为专业人士(professionals)代言。这些人是应试教育的佼佼者，信奉meritocracy，看不上传统的平等主义，对蓝领工人的困境没有共情。NAFTA使美国制造业岗位大量流失？全球化的浪潮无可阻挡，工人需要训练新技能，适应“信息时代”。银行去管制化？... 16年川普的一大部分选票来自中西部的制造业工人。左派选民为何“变节”？作者分析说，90年代起，民主党开始走中间派路线，无视工人阶级的诉求，转而为专业人士(professionals)代言。这些人是应试教育的佼佼者，信奉meritocracy，看不上传统的平等主义，对蓝领工人的困境没有共情。NAFTA使美国制造业岗位大量流失？全球化的浪潮无可阻挡，工人需要训练新技能，适应“信息时代”。银行去管制化？我们要鼓励金融人才的“创造性”，才能增加美国金融业的全球竞争力。裁减社会福利？穷人应当努力工作挣钱而不是懒在家里等着国家养。精英们鼓吹的“创新”与其说是创新，不如说是返祖，返祖到了前工会时代。虽然有了两党选举，但是哪个政党都不代表working poor的利益。 (展开)
0 有用 TimberNord 2017-03-31 10:03:26
The attitude of this book toward professional and tech innovation is near hostile. The problem is not a liberal party which has forsaken the industrial labor, it's the legal constraints which kills an... The attitude of this book toward professional and tech innovation is near hostile. The problem is not a liberal party which has forsaken the industrial labor, it's the legal constraints which kills any possibilities for a third political party when the interest of labor and professionals have parted their ways. (展开)
0 有用 乌米诺乜鲁玛吉 2024-01-14 10:59:54 加拿大
其实读得不太起劲，因为观点和论证在我都已了解，也基本认同。 这里批评的liberals特指今日美国民主党人dems，他们日益精英化，优待技术大亨technocrats与高学历专业人士highly educated professionals，但日益忽视并脱离左派最应该代表的群体：劳工阶级；他们自认为“进步”，过于注重“多样性”和身份ZZ，过于投入某些形式大于实质的东西，却忽略左派的根本立足点：为... 其实读得不太起劲，因为观点和论证在我都已了解，也基本认同。 这里批评的liberals特指今日美国民主党人dems，他们日益精英化，优待技术大亨technocrats与高学历专业人士highly educated professionals，但日益忽视并脱离左派最应该代表的群体：劳工阶级；他们自认为“进步”，过于注重“多样性”和身份ZZ，过于投入某些形式大于实质的东西，却忽略左派的根本立足点：为劳工阶级争取权益。 比较有收获的是看作者批评那个为人称道的克林顿时代如何开始加剧社会贫富分化inequality，包括Neoliberal Economic Policies、Financial Deregulation、强化身份ZZ、鼓吹Meritocracy等。 (展开)
1 有用 Jas.Z 2017-03-12 08:28:55
因为一场election,开始认真读一些分析democrats问题的书。这本书系统分析了meritocracy, welfare system, and economic inequality，都是导致大选失败的原因。真正的原因众说纷纭，但是这个社会一些根深蒂固的问题却是无法回避的. identity politics不是solution.
0 有用 乌米诺乜鲁玛吉 2024-01-14 10:59:54 加拿大
其实读得不太起劲，因为观点和论证在我都已了解，也基本认同。 这里批评的liberals特指今日美国民主党人dems，他们日益精英化，优待技术大亨technocrats与高学历专业人士highly educated professionals，但日益忽视并脱离左派最应该代表的群体：劳工阶级；他们自认为“进步”，过于注重“多样性”和身份ZZ，过于投入某些形式大于实质的东西，却忽略左派的根本立足点：为... 其实读得不太起劲，因为观点和论证在我都已了解，也基本认同。 这里批评的liberals特指今日美国民主党人dems，他们日益精英化，优待技术大亨technocrats与高学历专业人士highly educated professionals，但日益忽视并脱离左派最应该代表的群体：劳工阶级；他们自认为“进步”，过于注重“多样性”和身份ZZ，过于投入某些形式大于实质的东西，却忽略左派的根本立足点：为劳工阶级争取权益。 比较有收获的是看作者批评那个为人称道的克林顿时代如何开始加剧社会贫富分化inequality，包括Neoliberal Economic Policies、Financial Deregulation、强化身份ZZ、鼓吹Meritocracy等。 (展开)
2 有用 ROTCEV 2020-04-09 06:35:10
16年川普的一大部分选票来自中西部的制造业工人。左派选民为何“变节”？作者分析说，90年代起，民主党开始走中间派路线，无视工人阶级的诉求，转而为专业人士(professionals)代言。这些人是应试教育的佼佼者，信奉meritocracy，看不上传统的平等主义，对蓝领工人的困境没有共情。NAFTA使美国制造业岗位大量流失？全球化的浪潮无可阻挡，工人需要训练新技能，适应“信息时代”。银行去管制化？... 16年川普的一大部分选票来自中西部的制造业工人。左派选民为何“变节”？作者分析说，90年代起，民主党开始走中间派路线，无视工人阶级的诉求，转而为专业人士(professionals)代言。这些人是应试教育的佼佼者，信奉meritocracy，看不上传统的平等主义，对蓝领工人的困境没有共情。NAFTA使美国制造业岗位大量流失？全球化的浪潮无可阻挡，工人需要训练新技能，适应“信息时代”。银行去管制化？我们要鼓励金融人才的“创造性”，才能增加美国金融业的全球竞争力。裁减社会福利？穷人应当努力工作挣钱而不是懒在家里等着国家养。精英们鼓吹的“创新”与其说是创新，不如说是返祖，返祖到了前工会时代。虽然有了两党选举，但是哪个政党都不代表working poor的利益。 (展开)
0 有用 TimberNord 2017-03-31 10:03:26
The attitude of this book toward professional and tech innovation is near hostile. The problem is not a liberal party which has forsaken the industrial labor, it's the legal constraints which kills an... The attitude of this book toward professional and tech innovation is near hostile. The problem is not a liberal party which has forsaken the industrial labor, it's the legal constraints which kills any possibilities for a third political party when the interest of labor and professionals have parted their ways. (展开)
1 有用 Jas.Z 2017-03-12 08:28:55
因为一场election,开始认真读一些分析democrats问题的书。这本书系统分析了meritocracy, welfare system, and economic inequality，都是导致大选失败的原因。真正的原因众说纷纭，但是这个社会一些根深蒂固的问题却是无法回避的. identity politics不是solution.
1 有用 undercover 2017-01-19 22:41:43
一个美国老左派写的，非常有意思，值得一读。