How elites ate the social justice movement

Who are the "elites" and what was the historical process by which they "ate the social justice movement"? These questions are never answered by deBoer, who describes himself as a Marxist academic and organizer. In his introduction he promises to identify "how we got to the heady days of 2020," "outline the differences between effective and ineffective Left social movements," and "spell out why a class-focused approach is appropriate" (p. 11). Unfortunately, this is not a scholarly work that reviews relevant literature, approaches its topic fairly from multiple sides, or considers historical evidence to make solid arguments. What could have been an interesting study of 21st-century Left social movements is more an angry memoir, replete with complaints and axes to grind. How Elites Ate the Social Justice Movement is thinly sourced and insufficiently cited, relying on familiar generalizations, anecdotes, tropes, and straw-man arguments on subjects like Black Lives Matter, identity politics, nonprofits, and liberals (though it is more evenhanded on #MeToo). Even DeBoer's suggested future movement blueprint is historically decontextualized. Ironically, in this book published by a major trade press, deBoer rants against those "obsessed with white people interrogating their privilege" (p. 72). Summing Up: Not recommended. --Philip F. Rubio, North Carolina A&T State University

A wide-ranging critique of leftist politics as not being left enough. Continuing his examination of progressive reform movements begun with The Cult of Smart, Marxist analyst deBoer takes on a left wing that, like all political movements, is subject to "the inertia of established systems." The great moment for the left, he suggests, ought to have been the summer of 2020, when the murder of George Floyd and the accumulated crimes of Donald Trump should have led to more than a minor upheaval. In Minneapolis, he writes, first came the call from the city council to abolish the police, then make reforms, then cut the budget; the grace note was "an increase in funding to the very department it had recently set about to dissolve." What happened? The author answers with the observation that it is largely those who can afford it who populate the ranks of the progressive movement, and they find other things to do after a while, even as those who stand to benefit most from progressive reform "lack the cultural capital and economic stability to have a presence in our national media and politics." The resulting "elite capture" explains why the Democratic Party is so ineffectual in truly representing minority and working-class constituents. Dispirited, deBoer writes, "no great American revolution is coming in the early twenty-first century." Accommodation to gradualism was once counted heresy among doctrinaire Marxists, but deBoer holds that it's likely the only truly available path toward even small-scale gains. Meanwhile, he scourges nonprofits for diluting the tax base. It would be better, he argues, to tax those who can afford it rather than allowing deductible donations and "reducing the availability of public funds for public uses." Usefully, the author also argues that identity politics centering on difference will never build a left movement, which instead must find common cause against conservatism and fascism. Deliberately provocative, with much for left-inclined activists to ponder. Copyright (c) Kirkus Reviews, used with permission.

Author of the New York Times best-booked The Cult of Smart, DeBoer argues that recent social justice movements like Black Lives Matter, #MeToo, and the Gen Z crusade for economic and environmental justice haven't effected significant change because they tend to be dominated by educated, well-off individuals not as personally vested as grass-rooters in the outcomes. Here he suggests how such individuals can contribute without taking over. Prepub Alert. Copyright 2023 Library Journal