Twilight of the Elites: America After Meritocracy
Twilight of the Elites: America After Meritocracy book cover

Twilight of the Elites: America After Meritocracy

Hardcover – June 12, 2012

Price
$10.00
Format
Hardcover
Pages
304
Publisher
Crown
Publication Date
ISBN-13
978-0307720450
Dimensions
6.46 x 1.02 x 9.5 inches
Weight
3.53 ounces

Description

A Foreign Policy Favorite Read of 2012A Mother Jones Staff Pick for Best Nonfiction of 2012An Inc.com Top Five Business Book of 2012A Kirkus Reviews Best Nonfiction Bookxa0of 2012 “Excellent” – Rolling Stone “Hayes, an editor-at-large of The Nation and host of the MSNBC talk show Up With Chris Hayes , has written a perceptive and searching analysis of the problems of meritocracy.” – Foreign Affairs “[A] stunning polemic….Hayes' book is the rare tome that originates from a political home (the left) and yet actually challenges assumptions that undergird the dominant logic in both political parties. This is not mealy-mouthed centrism. It is a substantive critique of the underlying logic of both Barack Obama and Mitt Romney – the logic of meritocracy.” – Ta-Nehisi Coates, Baltimore Sun “In a very good new book titled Twilight of the Elites: America After Meritocracy , Chris Hayes offers one of the most compelling assessments of how soaring inequality is changing American society.” – The Economist.com “Let's just say that if you like politics and big ideas, you want to buy this book.xa0 It's a lot more intellectually ambitious than your typical pundit book and offers a really great blend of writing chops and social theory synthesis.”– Matthew Yglesias, Slate.com “In his new book, The Twilight of the Elites: America After Meritocracy , Chris Hayes manages the impossible trifecta: the book is compellingly readable, impossibly erudite, and—most stunningly of all—correct.” – Aaron Swartz, Crookedtimber.org “Engrossing….thoughtful critiques of what's gone wrong with America's ruling class.” – The Atlantic.com “I was myself very impressed by the level of execution in this book.”– Tyler Cowen, Marginalrevolution.com “Hayes’s book makes for a great read…. Twilight uses a wide variety of academic and journalistic work, balancing a deep, systemic critique of society with detailed and empathetic reporting about those most affected by elite failure.”– Mike Konczal, Dissent “ Twilight of the Elites offers an elegant, original argument that will make both cynics and idealists reconsider their views of how, and whether, our society works. If Americans believe in anything, it’s our meritocracy. Hayes is brave to question it so forcefully.” – Commonweal “A potent articulation of a society’s free-floating angst, Twilight of the Elites stakes its claim as the jeremiad by which these days will be remembered.” – Washington Monthly.com “I read Chris Hayes' Twilight of the Elites last month and will suggest that you read it too – it's an engaging read that addresses the question of whether a meritocratic elite can really stay meritocratic over extended periods of time.” – Daniel W. Drezner, Foreign Policy.com “This was a book I found so stimulating and immersive that I cannot wait to be able to discuss it with a larger audience….Even if you think you are aware of the depth of the rot plaguing the highest levels of our society, you will likely earn a new level of outrage by reading this book.” – Alexis Goldstein, Livetotry.com “Make[s] you think in new ways about why we tolerate such vast and growing income inequality….an extended meditation on why the great hope and change revolution of 2008 has so far left the inequitable status quo a little bit too intact.” – Salon.com “ Twilight of the Elites by Chris Hayes may change the way you look at the world….[It] almost single-handily undermines virtually every precept we’ve come to accept about life in the modern age.xa0 It also may well turn out to be the seminal treatise for the so-called ‘FAIL’ generation, a term that loosely connotes everyone who graduated since the beginning of the 21st Century.” – Good Men Project.com “ Twilight of the Elites is a engaging, insightful book.xa0 I finished it in less than 24 hours, and I encourage you to pick up a copy.” – Forbes.com “You should really get yourself a copy of Twilight of the Elites” – Daily Kos “A powerful critique of the meritocratic elite that has overseen one of the most disastrous periods of recent history.” – The American Conservative “In his new book, Twilight of the Elites: America After Meritocracy , Hayes raises demanding questions about a nation that is both enamored with and troubled by its elites.” – Reason “[L]ively and well-informed….Offering feasible proposals for change, this cogent social commentary urges us to reconstruct our institutions so we can once again trust them.” – Publishers Weekly (starred) “[A] forcefully written debut....A provocative discussion of the deeper causes of our current discontent, written with verve and meriting wide interest.”– Kirkus Reviews (starred) “This is the Next Big Thing that we have been waiting for. Twilight of the Elites is the fully reported, detailed, true story of a 21st century America beyond the reach of authority.xa0 It’s new, and true, and beautifully told -- Hayes is the young left’s most erudite and urgent interpreter. xa0Brilliant book.” – Rachel Maddow,xa0host of The Rachel Maddow Show and author of Drift “Here is the story of the ‘fail decade’ and how it made cynicism the inescapable flavor of our times. Along the way Chris Hayes delivers countless penetrating insights as well as passages of brilliant observation. If you want to understand the world you're living in, sooner or later you will have to read this book.”– Thomas Frank, author of Pity the Billionaire “Chris Hayes is a brilliant chronicler of the central crisis of our time – the failure of America's elites.xa0 His humane, spirited reporting and analysis capture what millions of Americans already know in their gut – the emperor has no clothes. Yet this is not a book defined by despair or cynicism.xa0 Hayes seizes this moment of crisis to offer important and unconventional ideas as to how to reconstruct and reinvent our politics and society. Twilight of the Elites is a must read book for those, across the political spectrum, who believe there is still time to cure the structural ills of our body politic.” – Katrina vanden Heuvel, editor and publisher, The Nation “In Twilight of the Elites , Hayes shows us what links the bailout of investment bankers but not mortgage holders, the useless public conversation in the run-up to the Iraq war, and the Catholic Church's harboring of child rapists: our core institutions are no longer self-correcting, and have become committed to protection of insiders at all costs.xa0 Read this and prepare to be enraged.”– Clay Shirky, author of Here Comes Everybody and Cognitive Surplus "A provocation; a challenge; and a major contribution to the great debate over how the American dream can be restored." – David Frum, contributing editor, DailyBeast/Newsweek “Chris Hayes is a gift to this republic.xa0 The brilliance he shows us each week on MSNBC has now been complemented by this extraordinary book.xa0 Beautifully written, and powerfully argued, it will force you to rethink everything you take for granted about ‘merit.’xa0 And it will show us a way to a more perfect nation.”– Lawrence Lessig, Roy L. Furman Professor of Law and Leadership, Harvard Law School and author of Republic, Lost “Chris Hayes has given us the kind of book people don't write any more: a sweeping work of social criticism like Rachel Carson's Silent Spring and Michael Harrington's The Other America that take the failings of an entire society as their subject.xa0 Those books brought grand movements of reform in their wake.xa0 Would that history repeats itself with Twilight of the Elites —America ignores this prophet at their gravest peril.” – Rick Perlstein, author of Nixonland and Before the Storm Christopher Hayes is Editor at Large of The Nation and host of Up w/ Chris Hayes onxa0MSNBC.xa0 From 2010 to 2011, he was a fellow at Harvard University’sxa0Edmond J Safra Foundation Center for Ethics. xa0His essays, articles, and reviews have appeared in The New York Times Magazine , Time , The American Prospect , The New Republic , The Washington Monthly , and The Guardian. Hexa0lives in Brooklyn with his wife Kate and daughter Ryan. Excerpt. © Reprinted by permission. All rights reserved. Chapter 1The Naked EmperorsNow see the sad fruits your faults produced, Feel the blows you have yourselves induced.-- RacineAmerica feels broken.Over the last decade, a nation accustomed to greatness and progress has had to reconcile itself to an economy that seems to be lurching backward. From 1999 to 2010, median household income in real dollars fell by 7 percent. More Americans are downwardly mobile than at any time in recent memory. In poll after poll, overwhelming majorities of Americans say the country is “on the wrong track.” And optimism that today’s young people will have a better life than their parents is at the lowest level since pollsters started asking that question in the early 1980s.It is possible that by the time this book is in your hands, these trends will have reversed themselves. But given the arc of the past decade and the institutional dysfunction that underlies our current extended crisis, even a welcome bout of economic growth won’t undo the deep unease that now grips the nation.The effects of our great disillusionment are typically measured within the cramped confines of the news cycle: how they impact the President’s approval rating, which political party they benefit and which they hurt. Most of us come to see the nation’s problems either as the result of the policies favored by those who occupy the opposite end of the ideological spectrum, or as an outgrowth of political dysfunction: of gridlock, “bickering,” and the increasing polarization among both the electorate and the representatives it elects.But the core experience of the last decade isn’t just political dysfunction. It’s something much deeper and more existentially disruptive: the near total failure of each pillar institution of our society. The financial crisis and the grinding, prolonged economic immiseration it has precipitated are just the most recent instances of elite failure, the latest in an uninterrupted cascade of corruption and incompetence.If that sounds excessively bleak, take a moment to consider America’s trajectory over the first decade of the twenty-first century.The Supreme Court--an institution that embodies an ideal of pure, dispassionate, elite cogitation--handed the presidency to the favored choice of a slim, five-person majority in a ruling whose legal logic was so tortured the court itself announced it could not be used as precedent. Then the American security apparatus, the largest in the world, failed to prevent nineteen men with knives and box cutters from pulling off the greatest mass murder in U.S. history. That single act inaugurated the longest period of war in the nation’s history.Just a few months later Enron and Arthur Andersen imploded, done in by a termitic infestation of deceit that gnawed through their very foundations. At the time, Enron was the largest corporate bankruptcy in the history of the nation, since eclipsed, of course, by the carnage of the financial crisis. What was once the hottest company in America was revealed to be an elaborate fraud, aided and abetted by one of the most trusted accounting firms in the entire world.And just as Enron was beginning to be sold off for scraps in bankruptcy court, and President Bush’s close personal connection to the company’s CEO, Ken Lay, was making headlines, the Iraq disaster began.Iraq would cost the lives of almost 4,500 Americans and 100,000-plus Iraqis, and $800 billion, burned like oil fires in the desert. The steady stream of grisly images out of the Middle East was only interrupted, in 2005, by the shocking spectacle of a major American city drowning while the nation watched, helpless.As the decade of war dragged on, the housing bubble began to pop, ultimately bringing about the worst financial panic in eighty years. In the wake of the bankruptcy of Lehman Brothers in September 2008, it seemed possible that the U.S. financial system as a whole would cease to operate: a financial blackout that would render paychecks, credit cards, and ATMs useless.In those frenzied days, I watched Federal Reserve chairman Ben Bernanke and Treasury secretary Hank Paulson defend their three-page proposal for a Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) in front of a packed and rowdy Senate hearing room. When pressed on the details by members of the Senate Banking Committee, Bernanke and Paulson were squirrelly. They couldn’t seem to explain how and why they’d arrived at the number they had (one Treasury staffer would tell a reporter it was plucked more or less at random because they needed “a really big number”).Watching them, I couldn’t shake a feeling in the pit of my stomach that either these men had no idea what they were talking about or they were intentionally obfuscating because they did not want their true purpose known. These were the guys in charge, the ones tasked with rescuing the entire global financial system, and nothing about their vague and contradictory answers to simple questions projected competence or good faith. I saw in an instant, with no small amount of fear, that the emperor truly had no clothes.Washington managed to pass the bailout for the financial sector, and while Wall Street would soon return to glory, wealth, and profitability, the rest of us would, come to learn in gruesome detail all the ways in which the source of its prosperity had, in fact, been the largest Ponzi scheme in the history of human civilization.The cumulative effect of these scandals and failures is an inescapable national mood of exhaustion, frustration, and betrayal. At the polls, we see it in the restless, serial discontent that defines the current political moment. The last three elections, beginning in 2006, have operated as sequential backlashes. In 2006 and 2008, Democrats were able to point to the horrifyingly inept response to Katrina, the bloody, costly quagmire in Iraq, and, finally, the teetering and collapsing economy. In 2010, Republicans could point to the worst unemployment rate in nearly thirty years--and long-term unemployment rates that rivaled those of the Great Depression--and present themselves as the solution.Surveying the results of the 2010 midterms on election night, Tom Brokaw alluded to the collapse of trust in institutions in the wake of a war based on lies and a financial bubble that went bust. “Almost nothing is going the way that most people have been told that it will. And every time they’re told in Washington that they have it figured out, it turns out not to be true.”At a press conference the day after Democrats faced a “shellacking” in the 2010 midterm elections, Barack Obama recounted the story of meeting a voter who asked him if there was hope of returning to a “healthy legislative process, so as I strap on the boots again tomorrow, I know that you guys got it under control? It’s hard to have faith in that right now.”And who could blame him? From the American intelligence apparatus to financial regulators, government failures make up one of the most dispiriting throughlines of the crisis decade.As citizens of the world’s richest country, we expend little energy worrying about the millions of vital yet mundane functions our government undertakes. Roads are built, sewer systems maintained, mail delivered. We aren’t preoccupied by the thought that skyscrapers will come crashing down because of unenforced building codes; we don’t fret that our nuclear arsenal will fall into the wrong hands, or dread that the tax collector will hit us up for a bribe.It is precisely because of our expectation of routine competence that government failure is so destabilizing.“We’ve created this situation where we’ve created so much mistrust in government,” Ivor van Heerden told me one night in a seafood restaurant in the coastal town of Houma, Louisiana. For years van Heerden was deputy director of the LSU Hurricane Center, which issued a series of dire warnings about the insufficiencies of the levee system in the run-up to Katrina. After the storm, van Heerden was fired by LSU, because, he suspects, he was so outspoken in his criticism of the Army Corps of Engineers.“You have these politicians that are selling this mistrust,” he said in reference to the ceaseless rhetoric from conservatives about government’s inevitable incompetence. “And the federal government sure as hell hasn’t helped.”And yet the private sector has fared no better: from the popping of the tech bubble, to Enron, WorldCom, and Global Crossing, to the Big Three automakers, to Lehman Brothers, subprime, credit default swaps, and Bernie Madoff, the overwhelming story of the private sector in the last decade has been perverse incentives, blinkered groupthink, deception, fraud, opacity, and disaster. So comprehensive and destructive are these failures that even those ideologically disposed to view big business in the best light have had to confront them. “I’ve always defended corporations,” a Utah Tea Party organizer named Susan Southwick told me. “u200a‘Of course they wouldn’t do anything they knew was harming people; you guys are crazy.’ But maybe I’m the crazy one who didn’t see it.”The dysfunction revealed by the crisis decade extends even past the government and the Fortune 500. The Catholic Church was exposed for its systematic policy of protecting serial child rapists and enabling them to victimize children. Penn State University was forced to fire its beloved football coach--and the university president--after it was revealed that much of the school’s sports and administrative hierarchy had looked the other way while former assistant football coach Jerry Sandusky allegedly raped and abused young boys on its own property. Even baseball, the national pastime, came to be viewed as little more than a corrupt racket, as each week brought a new revelation of a star who was taking performance-enhancing drugs while owners, players, and union leadership colluded in a cover-up. “I’m 31, an Iraq war veteran, a Penn State graduate, a Catholic, a native of State College, acquaintance of Sandusky’s, and a product of his Second Mile foundation,” wrote Thomas Day, days after the Penn State scandal broke. “And I have fully lost faith in the leadership of my parents’ generation.”The foundation of our shared life as Americans--where we worship, where we deposit our paychecks, the teams we root for, the people who do our business in Washington--seems to be cracking before our very eyes. In our idle panicked moments, we count down the seconds until it gives out.In the course of writing this book, I spoke to hundreds of Americans from all over the country. From Detroit to New Orleans, Washington to Wall Street. I traveled to those places where institutional failure was most acute, and spoke with those lonely prophets who’d seen the failures coming, those affected most directly by their fallout, and those with their hands on the wheel when things went disastrously off course. No one I talked to has escaped the fail decade with their previous faith intact. Sandy Rosenthal, a New Orleans housewife radicalized by the failure of the levees during Katrina founded Levees.org in order to hold the Army Corps of Engineers to account, and she described her own disillusionment in a way that’s stuck with me: “We saw how quickly the whole thing can fall apart. We saw how quickly the whole thing can literally crumble.”The sense of living on a razor’s edge is, not surprisingly, most palpable in those areas of the country where economic loss is most acute. On a freezing cold January night in 2008, I accompanied the John Edwards campaign bus on a manic, thirty-six-hour tour of New Hampshire, and in the wee hours of the morning on primary day we stopped in the small former mill town of Berlin, New Hampshire. Murray Rogers, the president of the local steelworkers union and himself a laid-off millworker, was one of those who came out to greet the campaign bus as it rolled into the Berlin fire station at 2 a.m. When I asked him why he was there, he told me it was because he felt like no one in government cared about the fate of the millworkers of New Hampshire . . . with the exception of Edwards. When his mill had closed, he’d written to all the Democratic primary candidates. Edwards, he said, “offered to come and help us; he wrote a letter to the CEO because of the poor severance package they gave us. None of the others even offered to come.” When news of Edwards’s appalling personal behavior hit the papers, I immediately thought of Murray Rogers. Who would be Rogers’s champion now?In Detroit, the national capital of institutional collapse, the feeling of betrayal and alienation suffuses public life. “Just drive around,” a local activist named Abayomi Azikiwe told me in 2010. “It’s just block after block after block of abandoned homes, abandoned commercial structures.” Officially unemployment was about 28 percent, he said, but the real figure was closer to 50 percent. “This is ground zero in terms of the economic crisis in this country. They say the stimulus package saved or created about two million jobs. We really don’t see it.” As hard hit as Detroit is, it’s also probably the region of the country (with the exception of the tip of Lower Manhattan) that has most directly benefited from federal government intervention in wake of the crash. In many ways the bailout of the automakers was a stunning success, but like so many of the Obama administration’s successes, it is one only understood counterfactually: things could be much worse. But if this is what success looks like, what hope do the rest of us have?“I can’t remember when I last heard someone genuinely optimistic about the future of this country,” former poet laureate Charles Simic wrote in the spring of 2011. “I know that when I get together with friends, we make a conscious effort to change the subject” from the state of the country “and talk about grandchildren, reminisce about the past and the movies we’ve seen, though we can’t manage it for very long. We end up disheartening and demoralizing each other and saying goodnight, embarrassed and annoyed with ourselves, as if being upset about what is being done to us is not a subject fit for polite society.”That emotional disquiet plays in different registers on the right and the left, but across the ideological divide you find a deep sense of alienation, anger, and betrayal directed at the elites who run the country. “I’m an agent for angst,” one Tea Party organizer told me, “and the whole Tea Party movement is an agent for angst.” The progressive blogger Heather Parton, who goes by the screen name Digby, has dubbed the denizens of the Beltway who arrogate to themselves the role of telling Americans what to think the “Village,” and it was Village mentality, a toxic combination of petty obsessions with status combined with access to power, that in her view produced the disaster in Iraq, and the financial crisis that followed. In Parton’s telling, the Village is “a permanent D.C. ruling class who has managed to convince themselves that they are simple, puritanical, bourgeois burghers and farmers, even though they are actually celebrity millionaires influencing the most powerful government on earth.” Read more

Features & Highlights

  • A powerful and original argument that traces the roots of our present crisis of authority to an unlikely source: the meritocracy.
  • Over the past decade, Americans watched in bafflement and rage as one institution after another –  from Wall Street to Congress, the Catholic Church to corporate America, even Major League Baseball – imploded under the weight of corruption and incompetence. In the wake of the Fail Decade, Americans have historically low levels of trust in their institutions; the social contract between ordinary citizens and elites lies in tatters.    How did we get here? With
  • Twilight of the Elites
  • , Christopher Hayes offers a radically novel answer. Since the 1960s, as the meritocracy elevated a more diverse group of men and women into power, they learned to embrace the accelerating inequality that had placed them near the very top. Their ascension heightened social distance and spawned a new American elite--one more prone to failure and corruption than any that came before it.    Mixing deft political analysis, timely social commentary, and deep historical understanding,
  • Twilight of the Elites
  • describes how the society we have come to inhabit – utterly forgiving at the top and relentlessly punitive at the bottom – produces leaders who are out of touch with the people they have been trusted to govern. Hayes argues that the public's failure to trust the federal government, corporate America, and the media has led to a crisis of authority that threatens to engulf not just our politics but our day-to-day lives.    Upending well-worn ideological and partisan categories, Hayes entirely reorients our perspective on our times.
  • Twilight of the Elites
  • is the defining work of social criticism for the post-bailout age.

Customer Reviews

Rating Breakdown

★★★★★
60%
(469)
★★★★
25%
(195)
★★★
15%
(117)
★★
7%
(55)
-7%
(-55)

Most Helpful Reviews

✓ Verified Purchase

Chris Hayes Debut Exceeds Expectations

Full disclosure: I was already a big fan of Chris Hayes and his work before reading this book, so I had a pretty good idea that I would enjoy "Twilight of the Elites: America After Meritocracy." If you are also a fan, then you really have no excuse for not having/reading this book.

For those who are unfamiliar with Chris Hayes: His POV is liberal, thoughtful, and incredibly well-informed. The first things I noticed about him were his wonderful way with words and how precise he is with language. He's got the best vocabulary in all of cable news-dom. I believe he has a background in philosophy, and so his writing style is academic in nature, but super readable.

"Twilight of the Elites" examines America's relationship with our traditional institutions of authority, and how the events of the past decade (Chris reviews these significant events for most of the first chapter, which results in most of the first chapter being kind of a bummer, but necessary for the premise of the book and you just have to slog through it) have affected the social contract between ordinary people and 'the meritocracy.'

TOTE isn't an anti-authoritarian polemic; Hayes is exploring the historic role of elites in America (no demonization of job creators, don't worry), how that role has changed/is changing, and what that might portend for our society. It isn't an ideological text, it's a critical one. And it is a refreshingly non-partisan and insightful look at structural society in America.
74 people found this helpful
✓ Verified Purchase

Important Book in the Trump (or any) Era

Twilight of the Elites

Christopher Hayes' book, Twilight of the Elites, documents the end of elites in America, from religious to sporting to political to news organizations as well as others. They are often considered the pillars upon which society has rested. But in many cases, they have squandered the mandates by which they lead, the credibility they assumed they could not loose. In several cases, such as that of the Catholic Church, they have been sexual transgressions compounded by an emphasis on maintenance of their own power. In the case of sports, a win-at-any-cost mentality exemplified by the use of and tolerance of drugs. Winning above all else has lead to a collapse of the credibility of institutions, therefore, the lose of their leadership. Politics is certainly not exempt.

Regulators and legislators are guilty of the same sins. On page 173, Hays writes:

And yet during our era of fractal inequality, the noncommercial sphere has shrunk, leaving noncommercial institutions increasingly dependent on commercial interests. What we're left with is a blurring of the boundaries between what Jane Jacobs described as the Guardian Syndrome on the one hand and Commercial Syndrome on the other. According to Jacobs, the Guardian Syndrome ('shun trading," "be loyal," "treasure honor") regulates the behavior of the soldier, the politician, and the policeman among others, while the Commercial Syndrome ("compete," "respect contracts," "promote comfort and convenience") guides the behavior of the banker, the baker, and the businessman. This basic division captures something essential about our expectations of many "authority" figures, particularly elite authority figures in positions of great social and financial esteem. We want them to be Guardians first; we don't thin they should be for sale.
Yet our current system of fractal inequality creates the conditions in which everything is inexorably drawn into the realm of commerce.

The enormous differential in reward and power of the Commercial verses the Guardian role means that the former inevitably corrupts the latter. And it destroys the civil society we have created as a revolving door rewards today's regulators and government officials who move to the commercial side. "We can never be sure just which other business cards are in the pocket of pundit, politician, or professor."

The book is important to document and verify what many of us may believe about Trump: he is corrupt and corrupting. And dangerous to our republic. We need to heed a writer who observed that influence on outcomes, and fight for right rather than power alone.

Plutarch: An imbalance between rich and poor is the oldest and most fatal ailment of all republics.
55 people found this helpful
✓ Verified Purchase

Yeah, but now what?

Chris Hayes's writing is beautiful. His prose is lyrically achingly accurate. His concepts are compelling, complete and superbly organized. I truly enjoyed reading this book .. .. But mostly for the appreciation of the art form. Perhaps others will find this to be enlightening new information. I found it a very well researched, detailed, articulate Description of the Problem that I am, unfortunately, already too well informed of.
I am almost embarrassed to even hint at any fault of anything that Chris does. I am an enthusiastic fan of his weekend roundtable, Up with Chris Hayes. His show is consistently the most interesting on TV. However, the lively discussions of future social developments and strategies for progressive forward movement that so interest me in the show were generally lacking in the book.
The exhaustive expose of the cult of kleptocracy that forms the bulk of the book gives way to a vague wistful glance forward in the book's final chapter. Chris, exactly how do we get from here to this better place we want to be? We want tactics, strategy, specific plans and suggestions. Where should we apply leverage? We're screwed, .. OK, we all see this .... Now What?
51 people found this helpful
✓ Verified Purchase

An Excellent Argument with One Fatal Flaw

In Twilight of the Elites, Christopher Hayes tells the story of how America became a meritocracy and why that might not be such a good thing. The biggest problem, he argues, is that unlike other forms of privilege, because meritocracy is based on merit - or at least some measure that tries to determine merit - the elite that it creates not only consider themselves to be better than the common man but also to have objective proof of it. However the system for determining merit can be gamed: Wealthy people can hire tutors for their kids; poor people can't. Connected people can find out how to navigate into the right circumstances for the next opportunity. Ordinary folks find themselves unaware that there was even an informal process they should have been involved in. As a result, we have seen the emergence of an elite that spans across the worlds of business and government but is out of touch with how the average person lives, even as the same elite seeks to solve problems for us without understanding what our problems actually are or that one of the biggest ones is that things are continually rearranged in a way that makes sense to them.

Hayes is at his strongest when he explains how the meritocracy emerged and how such a system is not only subject to being gamed but also creates incentives to do things that advance individuals within the system while ignoring that the system is out of whack (so athletes take steroids because they have to in order to compete with other athletes taking steroids, Congresspeople get involved in campaign finance situations they shouldn't because they have to raise as much money as the other guy, Enron excecs cut corners because their department has to be as profitable as another department that is cutting corners).

There is, however, one critical weakness in Hayes' book: While Hayes can plainly see what has gone wrong with the meritocratic elite, he wants such an elite to exist. Specifically, he wants such an elite to exist because without a powerful elite, he doesn't think we'll be able to build and hold the social consensus necessary to make the sacrifices necessary to stop global warming. Now, the problem is not global warming, per se: It would be just as bad if he wanted a business elite to step up to the plate so that we'd all appreciate free markets again. The problem, rather, is that as clear-eyed about the dangers of elite overreach in almost every area of our lives, he has his one spot where he thinks we don't trust them enough and need to give them even more power. Unfortunately, while a lot of people distrust a lot of elite institutions, almost all of us have a weak spot for one elite institution or another. With his own reticence to question climate science and his own conviction that one institution ought be given a pass because it's too critical for us to turn our backs on, he gives the script for likewise backing the Fed, the welfare system, the stock market or whatever else it is that the one group of elites you trust in controls. And even as he shows where the meritocratic elite has gone wrong and why, he also shows how the elites, by careful cultivation of people who still believe in one thing, can be drawn along to prop up the elite system a little longer.

Christopher Hayes has written an excellent expose of how a lot of things have gone wrong in America and how some of the meritocratic elite involved didn't even mean to do any harm, they were just living in a system whose incentives have gone topsy-turvy. But he also demonstrates how we are willing to giving elites a pass and sustain their power provided it's in an area we think it is too important to question. For that reason, this is worth reading first for the superb argumentation when Hayes it at his best, but also as a cautionary tale that we, too, may have blind spots that need addressing if we truly want to make things better, not just complain about things as they are.
51 people found this helpful
✓ Verified Purchase

It's Capitalism, Stupid!

Time and again the well-meaning, comfortable liberals tell the rest of us how bad things are. For that they get a gold star and a pat on the back. However, when push comes to shove they take the easy road and talk reform. Reform of what? After pointing out how corrupt things are, they nevertheless think a system run by the rich and powerful can be reformed. What opportunists! Why should a reader expect more from people still benefitting from the system? The media allows these liberal critics a seat at the table in order to demonstrate the validity of the myth that we are living in a democracy. Their position would change immediately if they stopped talking reform and advocated for something more akin to revolution. Capitalism is the problem and revolution is the answer. This country was founded on revolution. The colonists fought a king's army for grievances less than those we are experiencing today. We are in a depression and it will only get worse. Recovery is not around the corner. Our whole social safety net is being dismantled. What is happening was unthinkable five years ago and we haven't seen anything yet.
The solution is revolution.
47 people found this helpful
✓ Verified Purchase

Hayes starts out strong but limps along by the end

Hayes book has provoked a great deal of discussion about elites and meritocracy in the US and that seems to be its most important function. It's the kind of book that shakes up people who confuse listening to NPR with being well informed and it's given some context to people who want to believe in the system but know that something is very wrong. I suspect that, though, that a lot of people who've pondered questions about economic advancement and elites will find that it falls far short as was the case for me. The work of people like Barbara Ehrenreich or Joe Bageant is much more on target, which reflects their willingness to be outside of Hayes' bubble. Hayes starts out strong with a commencement speech that sharply challenged the test-based elitism of his alma mater, Hunter College High School in New York. Unfortunately, it goes down from there. Hayes covers valuable ground, but never really connects the dots. he points out the obvious shared anger of tea partiers and occupiers, but doesn't connect either back to the kind of astroturf campaign that exploited rank and file tea partiers and that dates back to slavery time in terms of how populist anger has been manipulated by a certain kind of entrenched elite (in contrast to the genuine grassroots anger of the occupy crowd). Hayes harkens back to a "golden age" of meritocracy (roughly the first 20-25 years after WWII) and a second era that engaged people who'd been excluded by the golden age (ethnic/racial minorities, women, & gays), without really questioning the limits of the golden age or recognizing how affirmative action for women and minorities affected the second era. Affirmative action happened without any recognition that the "golden age" had its own affirmative action and that some preferences, e.g., for entrenched elites like the Bushes had never gone away. The inclusion of gays just seems gratuitous given that most advances for them have come later.

The book gets more scattershot as it goes along and important points like the funding of tea partiers by Dick Armey and other establishment figures get lost. It seems as though he attempted to use his Harvard sabbatical to write the book, as well as related articles without really integrating the short form material into the book. The book also seems compromised by Hayes inability to really get outside the privileged world he's inhabited since he passed the test for Hunter. There is no mention of the people from his childhood who didn't pass the test and he clearly never bothered to use his Harvard time to visit the shrinking blue collar precincts of Cambridge that gave Tip O'Neil his start. Having grown up in a pretty ordinary place and having had the opportunity to see or observe different cohorts of people through my education, teaching, and mentoring, it's obvious that many talented people lose the opportunity to join the "elite" while others rise or fall at different points in their lives, sometimes able to do better in a later step than they did in school. The people I know who have justly succeeded in my field often were not the people with the best grades or test scores. Some of the "most likely.." folks have made incredible job killing mistakes in their personal lives and some of the "successes" have achieved much though lucky breaks early in their careers. Some people voluntarily leave the elite, too--the older brother of a high school classmate earned an PhD at MIT, played a significant role in the "Star Wars" defense program (enough to be turned into a Tom Clancy character), and yet chucked a lucrative defense contracting career to become an evangelical pastor and an amateur Old Testament scholar. The elite is far more fluid, and fragile than Hayes opines. It's always had some degree of corruption, but he doesn't seem fully able to accept that.

The book ends on an optimistic but wholly unrealistic note. Hayes clearly has no idea what people sacrificed to accomplish previous cycles of reform and change in the US, or how long it has taken to establish labor unions, child labor laws, etc. He fails to realize that elites often lose in the process, if only to a new elite. One can talk about social justice in the abstract, but it can come with a personal price. By the end, I found myself humming the Phil Ochs anthem to well intentioned cluelessness, "Love Me I'm a Liberal". It pretty much sums up why Hayes in his earnestness comes up short.
36 people found this helpful
✓ Verified Purchase

Greetings From the 1 Percent

Reading this book gave me the answer why Chris Hayes is bouncing in his chair all the time. It's his brain. I thought it was caffeine. Hayes is smart, informed, intellectually curious and an analytical buzzsaw. And he's a hell of a writer, too. Having just finished Maddow's Drift about how American political power put us on a permanent warpath, reading this book finished the analysis for me with the rest of what's going on in the American economy, media, corporations, banking and our own households. We've been outclassed. Literally, and with no apologies from the .01 percent that figured how to pick our pockets and keep the money, along with the get out of jail free card. Hayes' most biting observation is that while the people with the financial fist on the neck of the rest of us talk, talk - and may in fact believe, that there is a level playing field of opportunity; the power elite also enjoy complete awareness that there is no equality of outcome. It's rigged thataway. While I finished reading this book, Mitt Romney is bussing around Republican strongholds in Michigan, telling voters that he pulled himself up by his bootstraps, that he's just a regular guy, that he started with nothing, and he made himself the success he appears today. Anybody buying that story needs to read this book. And a whole bunch of other books, too. Hayes called this book "The Twilight of the Elites." We'll see if the twilight bit turns out to be so any time soon.
19 people found this helpful
✓ Verified Purchase

overly hyped

This book is perfectly fine, but it does not merit the adulation it has received. It's a smart but lightweight piece of cultural and political criticism. The title invites comparison with Christopher Lasch's "Revolt of the Elites," but nothing in this book rivals Lasch's work. The reviewer who described Hayes as "impossibly erudite" should read Lasch or Hofstadter.

Hayes's basic point is we are currently suffering a Crisis of Authority (his caps). This Crisis is explained by an inequality exacerbated by the system of meritocracy that was supposed to combat inequality. This system produces a class of elites that is racially and ethnically diverse, but increasingly homogenous in terms of its wealth, power, and isolation from the rest of us. The result is that the 99% no longer trust the elites who run our institutions. The only solution to this problem is to reduce real inequality--to shrink the gap between the elites and everyone else. We can't do this by continuing to focus so exclusively on equality of opportunity. The reason why is there's no such thing. Elites will always rig the competition; their sons and daughters will always be better positioned to take advantage of opportunity. They take their position at the starting block better prepared to win the race.

If this is news to you, then Hayes's book is worth reading. He's clever and the book is a nice, brisk read--like a smart piece written for "Slate" or "Harpers." But one shouldn't mistake this sort of thing for a piece of deep cultural and political analysis. He tells us throughout that he traveled around the country "talking with hundreds of people," but this by itself doesn't constitute real journalism. Nor does his potted history of the 60s, 70s, and 80s count as real historical analysis. We're not told why this Crisis of Authority is really any different from earlier crises, and Hayes never makes a convincing case for the claim that this group of elites is MORE out of touch and irresponsible than the elites of yesterday. What he does manage to convey is that our current elites are uniquely smug in their unshakable confidence that they deserve their power and wealth because they are a product of the meritocracy rather than older systems of privilege. This is an important point, and I'm glad someone is making it. But don't be mislead by the glowing reviews and effusive praise from Hayes's friends in the media.
17 people found this helpful
✓ Verified Purchase

The title's premise is contradicted in the 1st paragraph, but not only

The 1st sentence, namely "America feels broken", sums up the book's content as a matter of whim/taste/gust and thus not of fact or substance. If its "Twilight of the Elites; America After Meritocracy" title had been true, the income of the title's classes, their defining trait, should have declined, but it increased. Also, the constant increase in freely paid college cost and thus in the perceived value of premium education, i.e. in the price to enter meritocracy, can result only from rising profitability of being a part of it that contradicts its decline or twilight and thus of the elites in general.

A simple Internet search for "It's the Inequality, Stupid; Meet the Elite (Mother Jones)" reveals that the elite (the richest 1%) comprises mostly of the meritocracy, and that their income was increasing since 1999. However, the book's 1st paragraph states the deterioration in the average (of the elite + non-elite) influence and a 7% median household income fall in real dollars. That signifies a greater than average decline of the non-elite and not only the absence of the elite's deterioration or stagnation, but to the contrary - their accelerated rise and booming, which contradicts the alleged twilight.

As America is shaped by its Constitution, the 1st sentence "America feels broken" means not only that "the Constitution feels not working", but also that the constitutional ways are not available, which signifies that "a revolt feels justified". This book deceptively disseminates that idea and as such is propaganda. Already the Romans said that disputing taste/gust is pointless (one person likes blue, another - red): "de gustibus non est disputandum". There is no intelligent discussion about "I like this or feel that", so you might consider 'Who Stole the American Dream?' by Hedrick Smith (ISBN 1400069661) instead.

Also, the author does not propose a democratic remedy and thus he indicates not seeing any or the absence of a democratic remedy, which suggests the opposite - an undemocratic remedy or a revolt. In other words, when "America feels broken" and no democratic remedy is considered, an undemocratic remedy is implied. Hence, such a "broken America" mantra is not just innocently liberal, but sneakily subversive, as it signifies the only alternative to the democratic constitutional evolution - a revolution.

Nearby followers of the mantra claim not being communists, but German/Swedish style socialists. However, most Americans likes the Constitution and so also the American structure thus not considered broken, but evolving democratically, and they do not subscribe to this unpopular mantra. A deceptive dissemination of it in an attempt to push it through is a call for America to be changed by a small minority against the will of the vast majority. This book hides that undemocratic (dictatorial, communist, fascist, un-American) intention and thus it is not democratic, nor social, nor social-democratic.

The book 1st sentence's "broken America" mantra pertains to the county's centuries old constitutional system and not its economical difficulties that come and go every several years. Hence, the economical considerations and platitudes, even though the bulk of the book, are just a smoke screen to hide the detached from them mantra. They are not only arbitrary and self-serving to slyly pretend to be the main subject under the unfortunate title, but some also shallow or flat wrong, and, so, not worth to be dignified by their analysis.

The brief decline of the role of meritocracy in the management of the 2 big and almost bankrupt automakers vanished once the blue collar compensation was lowered by restraining the union demands. Similarly, big banks ("Wall Street") were successfully bailed out for free, as TARP would have yielded a net gain, if not for the losses stemmed from the aid to AIG and GM, and the failed grants to avoid the foreclosures. Also, the meritocracy's health and immunity to economical difficulties is supported by the 4% rate of unemployment among the college graduates while the national average is 8% and the high school graduates suffer 12%.

The American meritocracy (the intellectual elite leading the USA and constituting the most of the richest 1%) is selective in admitting college graduates (see the "Upper middle class" on Wikipedia). A relatively few exceptions, like Bill Gates, Mark Zuckerberg, Steve Jobs, David Geffen, etc., who did not graduate, do prove the rule. Still, the best graduates get the best jobs, and the graduates from better universities get better jobs.

The rising tuition/fees signify an increasing demand for premium 'higher education' (see Wikipedia) or a rising price of entering meritocracy/the richest 1% (see above)/acquiring the best jobs. Gary Becker showed that education is an investment, and got the 1992 Nobel Prize in economics. So, when investment is less profitable it drops in value and price, as the stock market shows. Hence, when jobs pay less than the tuition/fees for the education (or the price) to get them must decrease, as a decreasing value cannot command a higher price.

Then, the increase in the tuition/fees signifies a higher value of premium education, as an investment (shown by Becker) and as entry to meritocracy, which higher price of entry means a higher profitability of membership that contradicts its twilight. In other words, if meritocracy were fading, as alleged, then nobody would pay higher tuition/fees for premium higher education to enter it, as premium higher education is an investment, and it can demand higher price only when is more valuable that happens only when its destination - meritocracy - is more profitable and rises instead of declining as alleged.

Shortly speaking, rising tuition/fees mean higher value of premium higher education that results from higher paying best jobs meaning a higher profitability of membership of meritocracy that contradicts its twilight as based on the 1992 Nobel Prize in economics. Sorry Chris Hayes, but formal logic seems not your cup of tea, as the rising gap between rich and poor (and the average) clearly and unequivocally signifies the rise of the elites and booming meritocracy in America like never before.
11 people found this helpful
✓ Verified Purchase

Great diagnosis; Weak on Solutions

Christopher Hayes Book, like many before it, tries to define who our rulers are and what makes them so bad. Like those before him, he cites the harmful impact of IQ testing on shaping the nature of our leadership. Like many dangerous ideas, it was at Harvard, almost 100 years ago, where its president James Conant, and a few advisors developed the well intentioned plan to supplement their enrollment of aristocratic boys of inherited wealth and Brahmin connections with a more diverse and select group of truly "bright" kids--kids that seemingly deserved access to a superior education.

Hayes outlines how ever since IQ and SAT testing became the prime measure of a person's ability, the emphasis on this quality has grown and produced a "heirarchy of merit" that predicts a person's capability as being in direct proportion to their intelligence. "We have come to believe that "smartness is rankable and that the heirarchy of intelligence, like the heirarchy of wealth, never plateaus." Hayes objects to this view, arguing that it has resulted in a corrupt, arrogant, and out of touch leadership in most important institutions. He correctly suggests that intelligence is not a single quality but must be tempered by "wisdom, judgment, empathy, and ethical rigor."

Thus, Hayes' thesis mirrors that of Michael Young's "The Rise of the Meritocracy," published in the 1950's, that outlined how, when a society institutes mass educational sorting based on IQ tests, and superior school grades, a ruling class will emerge that has distinctly high IQ's. And if they absorb the left-wing views that prevail in the universities, then, once in power, they will resemble the arrogant "ruling class" that dominated Soviet Russia, as described in Milovan Djilas's "The New Class," also published in the 1950's.

The problem common to all these books is that "Intelligence" is not well defined. A useful definition can be found in Nicholas Lemann's "The Big Test," where he describes three categories of successful individuals-- the "Mandarins," whose high test scores get them into the best schools and the best jobs--mostly in finance, think-tanks, and NGO's, and that therefore have the most influence in shaping modern institutions and cultural beliefs; the "Lifers," who lack the high IQ but through persistence and discipline work their way up into important managerial positions, and the "talents" who are the innovative and creative individuals who by-pass the ordinary and create businesses of their own. Theodore Dalrymple's "The Mandarins and the Masses" argues a similar point, and condemns the abstract and hedonistic ideas of western intellectuals and the other mandarins at the top. Both argue that the lifers and talents play a more positive role for the country than do the mandarins, and that by bringing an overly abstract theoretical approach to leadership positions, we have lost the practical common sense that built the country during its formative first 300 years. Hayes book echoes these earlier studies.

This book is praiseworthy for how it describes the recent failed decade in America where the common people had to endure numerous failures in leadership. Published in 2012, the failures of the recent past include an indictment of Presidents Obama, Bush, and Clinton. For an editor of The Nation he surprisingly skewers Obama's continuation of a corrupt and out of touch meritocracy that has embraced the accelerating inequality that has placed them at the top, and describes the current scene as one more prone to failure and corruption than any that came before.

He criticizes the Obama white House staff for its concentration of Wall Street insiders: Rahm Emmanuel, Bill Daley, Jack Lew, Larry Summers, not to mention Tim Geithner, are all alumni of Citibank, Goldman Sachs, and other major hedge fund and banking institutions. And the inference is that it is these appointees that are the true 1% elites that control the country. While Congress has on occasion independent honest individuals, the real power lies in the "inner rings of the onion;" those with access to the top regulatory and administrative posts in government. "The 1 percent and the nation's governing class are more or less one and the same." And this has been true in the Clinton and Obama administrations as well as the GW Bush presidency. It is crony capitalism and infects the Democratic regimes as much as the Republican. Treasury Secretary Geithner running the Treasury Department is like the fox guarding the chicken coop!

For solutions, Hayes' book is less praiseworthy. He does correctly favor policies that "dramatically reduce" the power of the current elite. But he does not make any specific recommendation of how that should be accomplished. His main thrust is that we must restore "equality" because the gap between the richest and poorest has grown larger than ever. He points out that it isn't just the bottom half but those in the top 50-99% that have been hurt by this destructive elite. The upper middle class "finds itself increasingly dispossessed," seeing the corruption at the top, and the disdain of those inside the beltway. "We are all the 99% now," he writes, with everyone now sharing "a sense that some small, corrupt core of elites can launch an idiotic war, or bail out the banks, or mandate health insurance . . and there's not a damn thing they can do about it." The obvious solution, not mentioned in this book, is to keep the bankers and Wall Street out of controlling positions in government!

The author's apparent solution is for higher taxes and redistribution to reduce income inequality. Like most on the Left he measures equality by results, not fairness of opportunity. The main deficiency is that he shows no awareness of how to maintain a level playing field so that there is an equality of opportunity. And little attention is devoted to the enormous deficit spending that continues unabated under both political parties in their zeal to win the voter support of an ever more demanding populace. It has been said that a people get the government they deserve. More and more people are ignoring the corruption at the top as long as the hand-outs continue. Hayes solution of handing-out more goodies to "create" equality will only exacerbate the problem. The corrupt leadership, which Hayes so clearly exposes, will always stay miles ahead of the 99% beneath them!
9 people found this helpful