A review by kamila79
Age of Anger: A History of the Present by Pankaj Mishra

4.0

Opening newspapers, turning on the TV, checking out social media we see anger pouring at us. Pankaj Mishra in “Age of Anger. A History of the Present”, published shortly after the election of Trump for the president of the USA, seems to suggest that this is just the beginning. In his very well researched book he goes back several centuries to explain how European elites have created the world order that now sees hundreds of millions of people angrily showing that they’ve had enough.

Current protests in the US and social unrest in much of the rest of the world are a direct result of marginalisation and exclusion of large groups of the population in societies focused on economic profit and the exploitation of others. We are observing the crisis of values such as empathy, compassion and kindness even though the legislation in many parts of the world is aimed at improving the lot of a greater number of people. However, the increase of nationalism all over the world and the support for chauvinist, misogynistic, racist bigots as countries’ leaders prove that many aren’t ready for equality and justice for all. Oftentimes the countries which gained independence from European colonisers repeat the mistakes of Western countries. Their leaders, usually educated in the West, transform the politics of these countries along Western lines. Anger of the disenfranchised continues to boil.

Mishra’s aim for this book is not to give solutions for how to deal with that anger but rather to contextualise it, help readers understand where it comes from and look for the common denominator regarding societies, from India to Egypt to Poland. Populists in power, eager to blame Islam, immigrants, global institutions for their own inability to connect with their citizens and represent their interests, are responsible for the escalation of anger.

I must say though that while I appreciate Mishra’s writing my mind often wandered while reading “Age of Anger”. I find his books rather boring and his arguments a trifle too convoluted. I also found the balance unequal - too much space devoted to history, too little of it to the present. It’s an important book, but one must love history to enjoy it and argue with the author.