Scan barcode
teokajlibroj's review
2.0
This is a fascinating topic that this very short book doesn't discuss near enough. A whole book on the topic would be fascinating, unfortunately this is just some articles raising the issue. Half the book is wasted on historical debate from the 17th century, leaving little for the supposed topic.
tsharris's review
4.0
Really stellar lectures on how, after the industrial revolution, the market economy went from an emancipatory force to a force that gave employers "private government" over their employers. It's a powerful idea to reckon with, and the book is made that much stronger by its inclusion of critiques by prominent scholars and a reply by Anderson herself.
coldprintcoffee's review
4.0
Straightforward and well-researched; built the conversation, theory, and viewpoint of 'private government' and was remarkably thorough. Personally I enjoyed embedding critique into the same book and furthermore, folding in a rebuttal to place the arguments next to a resistant glow. Shouldn't have skimmed the other reviews, as usual - always a joy to read discussions of personal autonomy and rights reduced to the term, "whining." I would have loved a little more breaking up of paragraphs in the formatting; I'm sure it comes from putting lectures to book, but considering the discourse, that would have been swell.
Edit: The sections at the end are useful as a starting point for someone less familiar or entrenched in discussions of labor relations, historical constructions of economy and market, or even just simply to get a better idea on the statistics out there.
Edit: The sections at the end are useful as a starting point for someone less familiar or entrenched in discussions of labor relations, historical constructions of economy and market, or even just simply to get a better idea on the statistics out there.
jpowerj's review
5.0
The second lecture is probably the clearest statement I've read on why arbitrary domination in the workplace should be one of the defining issues for those who care about social justice in the 21st century. We've internalized the notion that democracy is good at the level of the *state*, yet most people spend 8 hours of every waking day subject to the arbitrary whims of their superiors, and this system remains almost universally unquestioned.
owlette's review
4.0
[edited 2023/04/25 for clarity]
I read this book the first time before I got my first corporate job, and I am rereading it after being fired.
Private Government by Elizabeth Anderson is an evocative philosophical piece that introduces the concept of private government, explaining that post-industrial workers are not free under the dictatorship of their employers. The workplace is a private government because 1) our managers have authority over us (i.e., employers and employees can be separated as the governer vs. the governed); 2) this government is private to the managers and excludes the workers from having a say (v.s. a democratic state where its government is public to the governed). The second part makes this government authoritarian.
It makes sense to apply political theory to the place where we spend 40-hours a week. Work is what we try to balance the rest of our lives against, so why shouldn't it be formally analyzed as a space of undemocratic politics?
This book was originally a lecture Anderson gave, and for an argument so paradigm-shifting, there wasn't enough in it. Frankly, I don't think it did enough to answer the two questions in the subtitle. If I have a complaint about this book, it's in the lackluster selection of commenters. Instead of Ann Hughes's historiographical nitpicking on Anderson’s reference of the Levellers or Tyler Cowen's libertarianism, I would have wanted commentaries from labor rights activists and other researchers who could have added more meat to the concept of private government.
As with all philosophy, Anderson gives me a sense of clarity. It's not that I always had positive feelings toward my boss or the company. But I confess: after being fired for a reason my friends call arbitrary and suable (unfortunately, in the U.S., it's not), I've been emotionally struggling with the sense of shame. I rationalize the shame by doubting myself. "Maybe there's something wrong with me, and I deserved to get fired. I'm not fit for a workplace." The concept of a private government helps me shake off these ruminations and center myself.
People like me need to read this book: technical professionals and knowledge workers. The Amazon warehouse workers who are denied bathroom breaks and truck drivers surveilled by the employers of their mileage are much more level-headed about their relationship with their employers than we are. We, with our cushy six-figure jobs (and occasionally TikTokable workplace accommodations and freebies), tend to be blinded into thinking that our employers are benevolent. Like, it couldn’t be THAT bad, right? Our complacency is intellectually delusional and, more importantly, empirically harmful. It's behind our backs that companies tend to oppress the most vulnerable, both within and without. It’s important to not get sucked into corporate-speak, and calling it “private government” demystifies our vision. Let’s keep our eyes open.
I read this book the first time before I got my first corporate job, and I am rereading it after being fired.
Private Government by Elizabeth Anderson is an evocative philosophical piece that introduces the concept of private government, explaining that post-industrial workers are not free under the dictatorship of their employers. The workplace is a private government because 1) our managers have authority over us (i.e., employers and employees can be separated as the governer vs. the governed); 2) this government is private to the managers and excludes the workers from having a say (v.s. a democratic state where its government is public to the governed). The second part makes this government authoritarian.
It makes sense to apply political theory to the place where we spend 40-hours a week. Work is what we try to balance the rest of our lives against, so why shouldn't it be formally analyzed as a space of undemocratic politics?
This book was originally a lecture Anderson gave, and for an argument so paradigm-shifting, there wasn't enough in it. Frankly, I don't think it did enough to answer the two questions in the subtitle. If I have a complaint about this book, it's in the lackluster selection of commenters. Instead of Ann Hughes's historiographical nitpicking on Anderson’s reference of the Levellers or Tyler Cowen's libertarianism, I would have wanted commentaries from labor rights activists and other researchers who could have added more meat to the concept of private government.
As with all philosophy, Anderson gives me a sense of clarity. It's not that I always had positive feelings toward my boss or the company. But I confess: after being fired for a reason my friends call arbitrary and suable (unfortunately, in the U.S., it's not), I've been emotionally struggling with the sense of shame. I rationalize the shame by doubting myself. "Maybe there's something wrong with me, and I deserved to get fired. I'm not fit for a workplace." The concept of a private government helps me shake off these ruminations and center myself.
People like me need to read this book: technical professionals and knowledge workers. The Amazon warehouse workers who are denied bathroom breaks and truck drivers surveilled by the employers of their mileage are much more level-headed about their relationship with their employers than we are. We, with our cushy six-figure jobs (and occasionally TikTokable workplace accommodations and freebies), tend to be blinded into thinking that our employers are benevolent. Like, it couldn’t be THAT bad, right? Our complacency is intellectually delusional and, more importantly, empirically harmful. It's behind our backs that companies tend to oppress the most vulnerable, both within and without. It’s important to not get sucked into corporate-speak, and calling it “private government” demystifies our vision. Let’s keep our eyes open.
jonathonjones's review
5.0
The central idea (that our employers are governments and we should think of the power they wield and how they wield it in similar ways we think about government power) is a good one, and certainly thought provoking. The format is very useful: she has two chapters to really lay out the ideas, and then a few chapters for various critics, and then a chapter of responses to those critics. I felt I had a better sense of the ideas through reading these critical responses.
madamegeneva's review
3.0
I struggled with this book and I think that’s because my brain had a hard time with the theoretical concepts and/or philosophical language, not because the content itself was subpar. It was very academic (and a little dry for me) in some parts, but I understood what the arguments were and thought Anderson did a good job explaining herself.
And honestly? Her rebuttal of Tyler Cowen’s response was so brilliant, I would give that 4 stars alone.
And honestly? Her rebuttal of Tyler Cowen’s response was so brilliant, I would give that 4 stars alone.