Scan barcode
flexmentallo's review against another edition
dark
informative
reflective
sad
slow-paced
5.0
Perhaps the best book about how we got to where we are today. Truly, we all live in Nixon’s shadow every day in this hellish nightmare word.
Content Warnings
Graphic: Racial slurs
Moderate: Violence
bird_smuggler's review against another edition
5.0
In Nixonland, author Rick Perlstein makes the case that the consensus liberalism of the Lyndon B. Johnson administration belied a dangerous beast being awakened by the groundbreaking changes fostered through the Great Society programs and an unpopular ground war in Asia. The emergent politics of the Nixon coalition would soon overshadow the crumbling remains of the New Deal coalition and Perlstein successfully chronicles the whole depth of these changes. Nixonland makes liberal use of information and facts most of us have heard nothing about that will challenge the ways we've been led to believe the world worked at the time. Even something as extreme as Watergate is successfully recast as merely one of many sinister workings underlying the deeply paranoid Nixon administration. This book is extremely long but extremely worth it.
jakewritesbooks's review against another edition
4.0
I liked this one a lot. I think it's designed for me to like it more, but it falls short of greatness for reasons that I'll get into below.
It paints a thorough picture of the socio-political mess that was the USA from 65-72. Detailed and balanced in covering all aspects, it shows a narrative of strong resentment in the wake of rising freedoms for people who weren't white or male. Equally, it captures how those sentiments were politicized and marketed for the sake of electoral votes. I can't imagine a book doing much better in this regard.
Where I think it falls short is its portrayal of Nixon. This isn't a bio on Nixon, mind you, but a tale of how the man came to capitalize on this resentment and rule. Perlstein's Nixon is a straw man, dragged out when the author needs to make a point of the evils of a Republican executive branch and shelved when another target suffices. I don't need a sympathetic portrayal of Nixon. But I was looking for something more thorough than what Perlstein provides.
Still, if you're eager to check this out, you should. It is a good, readable work of history, a history that still affects us today.
It paints a thorough picture of the socio-political mess that was the USA from 65-72. Detailed and balanced in covering all aspects, it shows a narrative of strong resentment in the wake of rising freedoms for people who weren't white or male. Equally, it captures how those sentiments were politicized and marketed for the sake of electoral votes. I can't imagine a book doing much better in this regard.
Where I think it falls short is its portrayal of Nixon. This isn't a bio on Nixon, mind you, but a tale of how the man came to capitalize on this resentment and rule. Perlstein's Nixon is a straw man, dragged out when the author needs to make a point of the evils of a Republican executive branch and shelved when another target suffices. I don't need a sympathetic portrayal of Nixon. But I was looking for something more thorough than what Perlstein provides.
Still, if you're eager to check this out, you should. It is a good, readable work of history, a history that still affects us today.
davenash's review against another edition
1.0
The author uses big words to make up for his poor prose and lack of primary sources.
ethanhedman's review against another edition
5.0
The author makes the argument that concrete and cyclical divisions existed between Americans and argues that Nixon heightened those contradictions in order to exploit them for political gain. It is this paradigm, Perlstein argues, of domestic politics between two factions, factions that come to hate each other so much they are willing to kill and maim each other, that is “Nixonland”.
Perlstein ends with this: “Do Americans not hate each other enough to fantasize about killing one another, in cold blood, over political and cultural disagreements? It would be hard to argue they do not. How did Nixonland end? It has not ended yet.”
Perlstein ends with this: “Do Americans not hate each other enough to fantasize about killing one another, in cold blood, over political and cultural disagreements? It would be hard to argue they do not. How did Nixonland end? It has not ended yet.”
abdiel47's review against another edition
5.0
I want to like Richard Nixon. He started out poor and worked his way to the top. And he was a political genius. But he seems to have had a seething absence of self worth. There is a story that Perlstein tells of Nixon in college in Southern California where Nixon tried to join a social organization called the Franklins and was rejected because his impoverished upbringing means he lacked the proper social connections. Rather than take rejection, he started his own social club called the Orthogonians.
The first thought is to get excited for Nixon taking things into his own hands, building his own bridge when he’s not allowed to use the one others are using. But Nixon didn’t want to be an Orthogonian and the Franklin rejection burned inside him. Perlstein describes Nixon as seeing the world as full of Orthogonians and Franklins. And he spends his entire career prostrating himself before the wealthy and well connected in the hopes they will give him some of what they have. Which means he’s always doing the dirty work, humiliating himself, playing bad cop to get ahead. And still there’s always a Franklin like Kennedy to put him in his place.
Nixon sees the world as divided, and sees himself as not really belonging anywhere. And in the mid 60s the US was truly divided: race riots, Vietnam, etc. Nixon charges into this divide trying to burn it all down, divide America, do anything it takes to become president because he, and he alone, is suited to lead the US through those trying times. The ends justify the means.
Rick Perstein once again writes a breathtaking but dense narrative of American politics. These 800 pages cover four election cycles: 1965-66, 1967-68, 1969-70, and 1971-72. They include some of the most explosive events in US political history. There are a number of common themes: the increasingly chaotic Democratic party, the increasingly immoral and opportunistic Republican party, and a free press that consistently fails to comprehend what’s happening while it’s happening.
The first thought is to get excited for Nixon taking things into his own hands, building his own bridge when he’s not allowed to use the one others are using. But Nixon didn’t want to be an Orthogonian and the Franklin rejection burned inside him. Perlstein describes Nixon as seeing the world as full of Orthogonians and Franklins. And he spends his entire career prostrating himself before the wealthy and well connected in the hopes they will give him some of what they have. Which means he’s always doing the dirty work, humiliating himself, playing bad cop to get ahead. And still there’s always a Franklin like Kennedy to put him in his place.
Nixon sees the world as divided, and sees himself as not really belonging anywhere. And in the mid 60s the US was truly divided: race riots, Vietnam, etc. Nixon charges into this divide trying to burn it all down, divide America, do anything it takes to become president because he, and he alone, is suited to lead the US through those trying times. The ends justify the means.
Rick Perstein once again writes a breathtaking but dense narrative of American politics. These 800 pages cover four election cycles: 1965-66, 1967-68, 1969-70, and 1971-72. They include some of the most explosive events in US political history. There are a number of common themes: the increasingly chaotic Democratic party, the increasingly immoral and opportunistic Republican party, and a free press that consistently fails to comprehend what’s happening while it’s happening.
pacvarez's review against another edition
4.0
i've always had a fascination with nixon mostly because though in many ways he's my opposite, we have two big things in common: we share the same birthday, and we both run entirely on spite