Michael Lind
Any ambitious summary of the state of politics is bound to inspire disagreement from those who do not share the author's view of the world. Although his prescriptions will not persuade everyone, Derek Bok has performed a public service by discrediting a number of popular but misconceived political panaceas based on false diagnoses of what ails the American body politic.
— New York Times Book Review
Publishers Weekly
- Publisher's Weekly
In The State of the Nation, published in 1996, Harvard President Emeritus Bok compared America's progress in 17 different fields over the past 40 years to the progress of six other advanced industrial democracies. This companion volume seeks to explain and propose remedies for government failings that affect the wide range of areas in which America lags. Bok first considers and largely rejects common diagnoses of what ails American government--politicians and parties, the media and special interests--then proposes his own theory of the four basic weaknesses that afflict this country: poorly designed legislation, burdensome regulation, the neglect of working-class interests and failed antipoverty policies. Three chapters examine and perceptively criticize widely proposed antidotes, before considering solutions specifically targeting the four basic weaknesses. Despite the short shrift given some arguments, Bok's reasoning is generally persuasive, impressively informed and deft at unearthing root causes behind supposed sources of distress. He's especially convincing in tracing regulatory dysfunction to our adversarial, individualistic culture, fragmented government and lack of broadly inclusive organizations representing business, labor and other relevant interest groups. But while the relative successes of certain social democracies justifies his inquiry, Bok shuns any systematic examination of those nations' achievements or of how they might be adapted. He runs out of steam pondering remedies with an individualist focus that seem more symptom than cure--a disappointing conclusion to an illuminating, vitally important quest. (Mar.) Copyright 2001 Cahners Business Information.
Library Journal
The one American institution as notoriously difficult to manage as our federal government might be Harvard University, which gives Harvard's president emeritus standing to analyze why the government does not govern better than it does. In his previous book, The State of the Nation, Bok compared the United States with other industrialized democracies in areas such as the economy, environment, and education and found a mixed picture of success and want. Here he looks at why our laws and regulations are often badly designed and executed, why other nations surpass us in creating opportunities and safeguards for low-income citizens, and how we might improve. Examining hundreds of remedies, he concludes that policy is less the culprit than "causes deeply rooted in our institutions, our political system, and even our culture," with public apathy more than public officials largely at blame. The ambition and scope of this book are its strength as well as weakness. Readers will hardly find its match as an accessible and fair summary of current policy and institutional questions. Yet when Bok is done weighing one proposal against another, against yet another, only the resolute will still be with him. Even so, this is a book for nearly every library. Robert F. Nardini, Chichester, NH Copyright 2001 Cahners Business Information.
Kirkus Reviews
An academic's notes, alternately gloomy and optimistic, on a troubled republic. Continuing the survey of contemporary American politics that he began with The State of the Nation (1996), Harvard President Emeritus Bok looks closely at an apparent conundrum: Americans trumpet the superiority of their system of government, while at the same time holding an ever-sinking estimation of the work of their public officials. Such distrust of government is nothing new, he allows; it was a common trope in the days of Washington, Jefferson, and Adams. What is different, he suggests, is that today, for the first time in history, American citizens demand services—police protection, health care, subsidies of various kinds—from a government in which they have no faith, a situation that is a cynic's delight. The author argues that, in many respects, government is better than it has ever been in delivering such services, and that Americans today enjoy more personal freedom, a higher standard of living, and an ever-escalating quality of life. This is not to say that we have nothing to complain about, but rather that the basis of our complaining is often groundless and reactionary. American politicians have harmed themselves and their constituents by giving that culture of complaint too much heed, Bok suggests, and have given far too much credence to the opinion of a public that has taken no trouble to do any homework. An obvious answer, of course, is to demand more involvement of informed citizens in government, and this Bok calls for at several points. Less rhetorically, he offers thoughts on reforming the electoral process, lessening the influence of lobbyingorganizationsandspecial-interest groups, and other matters of concern. Bok raises many thoughtful questions in this timely extended civics lesson, even if his solutions are sometimes half-baked.
