You need to sign in or sign up before continuing.
Take a photo of a barcode or cover
18 reviews for:
The Conservative Heart: How to Build a Fairer, Happier, and More Prosperous America
Arthur C. Brooks
3.63 AVERAGE
18 reviews for:
The Conservative Heart: How to Build a Fairer, Happier, and More Prosperous America
Arthur C. Brooks
3.63 AVERAGE
I am fairly progressive - growing up I was fairly conservative, but in my 20s I started identifying more as a progressive due to social issues and the Iraq war. (In terms of changing views, the author and I are opposites). I enjoyed this book and think that it is something that most people who care about politics could get something out of it. This book has some really interesting ideas and there were many places where I nodded along and highlighted things I agreed with - even some of the times when he was criticizing progressive policy ideas.
On the other hand, there were so many times when I became frustrated with the author and the words that he put into the mouths of progressives – I felt like that was inaccurate a lot of the time. I know that President Obama was not perfect and I know the impacts of the Great Recession are still causing hardships, but I felt the author was unfair to him and came off as whiny. He discusses a couple times that Obama was unkind to conservatives, but fails to mention the multitude of times that conservatives were much worse to him.
He and I also have very different views of the Tea Party and why they formed and what their core believes are. He ignores how much they have tried to obstruct the government and accomplished very little, and he doesn't seem bothered by the fact that they have brought almost nothing feasible to the table in terms of creating jobs - I really wonder what could have happened if Republicans had brought some of the ideas in this book into legislation under Obama and tried to work to a compromise. I hope that it would have worked, but I don't know.
This book is almost solely about economic issues, it does not address important things like climate change or racial issues in the United States - and so there's a part of me that agrees with him on some of his economic views, but I could never see myself voting Republican because of their treatment of many other issues.
On the other hand, there were so many times when I became frustrated with the author and the words that he put into the mouths of progressives – I felt like that was inaccurate a lot of the time. I know that President Obama was not perfect and I know the impacts of the Great Recession are still causing hardships, but I felt the author was unfair to him and came off as whiny. He discusses a couple times that Obama was unkind to conservatives, but fails to mention the multitude of times that conservatives were much worse to him.
He and I also have very different views of the Tea Party and why they formed and what their core believes are. He ignores how much they have tried to obstruct the government and accomplished very little, and he doesn't seem bothered by the fact that they have brought almost nothing feasible to the table in terms of creating jobs - I really wonder what could have happened if Republicans had brought some of the ideas in this book into legislation under Obama and tried to work to a compromise. I hope that it would have worked, but I don't know.
This book is almost solely about economic issues, it does not address important things like climate change or racial issues in the United States - and so there's a part of me that agrees with him on some of his economic views, but I could never see myself voting Republican because of their treatment of many other issues.
According to Arthur Brooks:
That Americans don't trust conservatives to fight for struggling people is the result of a misunderstanding. Somehow conservatives aren't as good at liberals at showing they care. "Too often, the right has failed even to acknowledge the problems of poverty and inequality." I guess they care too darn much. Conservatives are happier than liberals. Conservatives give more to charity than liberals. Liberals are clueless. Liberals think that poor people can't take care of themselves and will require government assistance for the rest of their lives. Liberals don't understand economics. Liberals are materialists. Work is essential to human dignity. This point is so important that he makes it at least a dozen times. Liberals think of work as punishment.
Globalisation, free trade, property rights, rule of law, entrepreneurship are conservative principles, apparently not part of liberalism.
His prescriptions are generic: charter schools, making higher education less expensive, no minimum wage, expansion of the earned income tax credit, help people move to where the jobs are.
Of Obamacare: "We dislike the health law because it hurts people. It has caused millions to lose their doctors and their health plans. By shifting employer's incentives, it is stripping valuable work hours away from people who are already underemployed. It is raising premiums and deductibles of people who cannot afford to pay more.
His suggestions? Health Savings Accounts and association health plans. Conservatives may care, but this list seems to show that at least one conservative doesn't care enough to give it much thought.
That Americans don't trust conservatives to fight for struggling people is the result of a misunderstanding. Somehow conservatives aren't as good at liberals at showing they care. "Too often, the right has failed even to acknowledge the problems of poverty and inequality." I guess they care too darn much. Conservatives are happier than liberals. Conservatives give more to charity than liberals. Liberals are clueless. Liberals think that poor people can't take care of themselves and will require government assistance for the rest of their lives. Liberals don't understand economics. Liberals are materialists. Work is essential to human dignity. This point is so important that he makes it at least a dozen times. Liberals think of work as punishment.
Globalisation, free trade, property rights, rule of law, entrepreneurship are conservative principles, apparently not part of liberalism.
His prescriptions are generic: charter schools, making higher education less expensive, no minimum wage, expansion of the earned income tax credit, help people move to where the jobs are.
Of Obamacare: "We dislike the health law because it hurts people. It has caused millions to lose their doctors and their health plans. By shifting employer's incentives, it is stripping valuable work hours away from people who are already underemployed. It is raising premiums and deductibles of people who cannot afford to pay more.
His suggestions? Health Savings Accounts and association health plans. Conservatives may care, but this list seems to show that at least one conservative doesn't care enough to give it much thought.
According to Arthur Brooks:
That Americans don't trust conservatives to fight for struggling people is the result of a misunderstanding. Somehow conservatives aren't as good at liberals at showing they care. "Too often, the right has failed even to acknowledge the problems of poverty and inequality." I guess they care too darn much. Conservatives are happier than liberals. Conservatives give more to charity than liberals. Liberals are clueless. Liberals think that poor people can't take care of themselves and will require government assistance for the rest of their lives. Liberals don't understand economics. Liberals are materialists. Work is essential to human dignity. This point is so important that he makes it at least a dozen times. Liberals think of work as punishment.
Globalisation, free trade, property rights, rule of law, entrepreneurship are conservative principles, apparently not part of liberalism.
His prescriptions are generic: charter schools, making higher education less expensive, no minimum wage, expansion of the earned income tax credit, help people move to where the jobs are.
Of Obamacare: "We dislike the health law because it hurts people. It has caused millions to lose their doctors and their health plans. By shifting employer's incentives, it is stripping valuable work hours away from people who are already underemployed. It is raising premiums and deductibles of people who cannot afford to pay more.
His suggestions? Health Savings Accounts and association health plans. Conservatives may care, but this list seems to show that at least one conservative doesn't care enough to give it much thought.
That Americans don't trust conservatives to fight for struggling people is the result of a misunderstanding. Somehow conservatives aren't as good at liberals at showing they care. "Too often, the right has failed even to acknowledge the problems of poverty and inequality." I guess they care too darn much. Conservatives are happier than liberals. Conservatives give more to charity than liberals. Liberals are clueless. Liberals think that poor people can't take care of themselves and will require government assistance for the rest of their lives. Liberals don't understand economics. Liberals are materialists. Work is essential to human dignity. This point is so important that he makes it at least a dozen times. Liberals think of work as punishment.
Globalisation, free trade, property rights, rule of law, entrepreneurship are conservative principles, apparently not part of liberalism.
His prescriptions are generic: charter schools, making higher education less expensive, no minimum wage, expansion of the earned income tax credit, help people move to where the jobs are.
Of Obamacare: "We dislike the health law because it hurts people. It has caused millions to lose their doctors and their health plans. By shifting employer's incentives, it is stripping valuable work hours away from people who are already underemployed. It is raising premiums and deductibles of people who cannot afford to pay more.
His suggestions? Health Savings Accounts and association health plans. Conservatives may care, but this list seems to show that at least one conservative doesn't care enough to give it much thought.
I am as liberal as it gets, so every now and then, I try to read accounts "from the other side." This one was not too bad. I did not agree with all of the author's points, but he shared some interesting facts (Conservatives donate more to charity, statistically), that are interesting to ponder.
A pretty worthwhile read for more liberal folks like myself who want a simplified perspective of conservative ideals. Brooks has some nice ideas, but boy, does he fall flat on his face when predicting conservative strategy for the 2016 election. Hindsight is 20/20, though, and otherwise the complaints with the book are few other than simple ideological disagreements.
Working to gain a new perspective, this book held a lot of promise. However, when I got into the text and was confronted with more us v. them language and less ideological framing, I began to check out. I do appreciate the arguments that Brooks shares regarding meaningful work and social justice - I was able to find common ground where I anticipated there would be none. Overall, my head and heart remain unmoved and recognize this book was not intended to make friends or win influence with liberals like myself.
While it had a rocky start, I am really glad I read this book. Some pros: interesting and valuable data with sources, lots of real world examples given to defend opinions, acknowledges flaws in conservative rhetoric and failures of both parties. Some cons (largely present at the beginning, unfortunately): using church attendance statistics as a measure of morality, making very generalized statements about America's influence in foreign countries without data, too often citing the Bible as a source for moral instruction (without additionally citing other religious texts).
I would like to note that I think everyone should read political nonfiction and fiction from the left and the right. I do. It's helpful and surprising.
(If the inclusion of Christianity makes you shy away from this book, I do want to state that some leftist writers, I think first of Chomsky whom I recently read, cite Christianity and church attendance statistics as a measure of ignorance and foolishness, which is equally upsetting to me. It is good for political texts to address humanitarianism and morality, but they need not use religion to do this).
I would like to note that I think everyone should read political nonfiction and fiction from the left and the right. I do. It's helpful and surprising.
(If the inclusion of Christianity makes you shy away from this book, I do want to state that some leftist writers, I think first of Chomsky whom I recently read, cite Christianity and church attendance statistics as a measure of ignorance and foolishness, which is equally upsetting to me. It is good for political texts to address humanitarianism and morality, but they need not use religion to do this).
4.5 stars. Most of this book is making the moral case for fiscal conservatism and defending the social safety net. The last bit is more a "Republicans are from Mars, Voters are from Venus" playbook, but that's fair enough.