This is an incredible book, one that should be read by everyone who believes the federal programs put in place during the 1960s are successful. The detail of how these programs were set up, the arguing between governments, and their out of control growth are all covered, as well as the individuals that were involved in implementing them (Lyndon Johnson, Sargent Shriver and Richard Nixon in particular). The escalation of the Vietnam War is also covered.

The author clearly demonstrates how government programs often do not accomplish things that are projected and how their growth simply gets out of control despite attempts to control costs.

Another excellent history recap by this author. ( )

"...socialism was a process, something you built toward, a utopia you aimed for. The idea justified any protest, any shift in target. As long as socialism was never complete, as long as socialists were still protesting and building, no one could dismiss socialism. That was the beauty of it."

The quote above could describe the philosophy of today's political Left. But it captures one of the themes of Great Society: A New History, Amity Shlaes eye-opening history of the ambitious social programs of the 1960s.

Although I was just a boy, I remember the early 1960s as a time of great optimism, especially with the success of the U.S. space program and the race to the Moon. But for the leading public figures of the day, this optimism bordered on hubris, as many believed that the primary purpose of government was to cure society's ills through top-down planning. Some also had a love affair with European-style democratic socialism, and wanted to implement a similar system in the U.S. With a seemingly endless stream of new programs coming out of Washington, there was a concerted push not just for equality of opportunity, but equality of outcomes. It began a new era of federal overreach that is still with us today.

As someone who lived through the times, but was too young to fully understand the events as they unfolded, I found Great Society: A New History very informative, and I highly recommend it to anyone interested in the history of the 1960s.


( )

Not as good as Shlaes's Coolidge or The Forgotten Man but decent enough nevertheless. Shlaes brings her brand of narrative storytelling and dives into policy that informed her book on the Great Depression (The Forgotten Man) to the Great Society. She discusses various important people, their ideas, and their actions. She discusses wide swathes of culture and general feeling among the people. She talks about the motivations behind the Great Society and its mass of programs, but also shows that they did not work the way they were intended, nor did they ever really work. I learned a lot of good information, but it isn't a detailed socio-economic breakdown and takedown of the Great Society. (Again, this is like The Forgotten Man, which wasn't a point-by-point economic analysis of the Depression and New Deal.) It was informative to have some deep dives into Lyndon B. Johnson, Patrick Moynihan, and Arthur Burns, but some of her other dives were not as good. It was also good to note how Nixon did not dismantle the Great Society and failed in any attempt to really alter it into something better. The end kind of fell flat, however. Reagan was left hanging in the air; the rest of the 1970s were left hanging; and oddly, Gerald Ford and "Whip Inflation Now" is pictured in the book's photographs section, but Ford is not even mentioned in the text! Why is Ford there? (Poor Ford!) Without detailing the continued stagflation of the 1970s, the book is incomplete. The informational tables at the end are nice, too, but should have been integrated into the text and a deeper discussion of the failures of the Great Society in particular and federal government welfare policies in general. I think the book should not have ended with the Pruitt-Igoe coda, but a dense economic and historical conclusion chapter bringing the story of the Great Society through the 1970s to 1980/1981, with a little bit on how we are still living with the Great Society's failures today. It loses a star for the abrupt and odd ending. ( )

Earlier this year I read The Forgotten Man by Amity Shlaes and enjoyed it enough that I added her Great Society: A New History to my reading plans. Great Society is a sequel, or perhaps simply a continuation, of the themes Shlaes introduces in The Forgotten Man. Both are titled “A New History” and some reviewers have described them as revisionist history. I view them as a new perspective on these periods in American history. In both she works outlines her themes and conclusions in her Introduction. The Introduction to Great Society is 17 pages in length and is worth reading at the beginning and again after completing Great Society. Whether you agree or not, Shlaes presentation of her perspective of this period, 1961-1972, and the conclusions she draws are quite impressive. She then proceeds to present a narrative history of the period that provides support for her “take” on the period and her conclusions. Does she twist or misrepresent facts to accomplish this goal? I am no expert, but I don’t think so. Certainly, the events she chooses to highlight and emphasize are the ones that support her argument, which seems justified, and I am not aware of significant events she leaves out that would countradict her logic. Also, to her credit, she does not intervene, interject or interrupt throughout the narrative history in order to make her points. She does not say, “See, this demonstrates...” or even “This series of events shows...”. I think to her credit she brings the narrative history to a close without any wrap-up of her arguments or conclusions. Thus, my recommendation to return to the Introduction and reread it.

So what are some of the arguments that Shlaes makes that might not be considered mainstream?

The 1960’s was a time, like the 1930’s, when America experimented with the ideas, vision and objectives of socialism or social democracy.

There were successes: the Man to the Moon program, civil rights legislation and Medicare/Medicaid. Shlaes qualifies these successes, particularly Medicare/Medicaid, to a degree but in general doesn’t spend much time on them as a result.

Greatest failures: the war on poverty and the national housing program.

Programs/reforms were not measured for results and were frequently rebranded, concealing questionable results.

The federal government took on a planning role and relegated private business to a support role.

Consequences: inflation, high interest rates, massive federal debt, shift to federal authority over state rights and a widening gap between white and black unemployment rates.

The youth movement in the 1960’s had its impact on the culture of the United States, but it failed to significantly change the political and economic foundations of the country.

I thought this statement towards the end of the Introduction of Great Society best summarized Ms. Shlaes' assessment of this period in America:

“The trouble with the 1960s leftists was not that they were traitors. Few were. The trouble was that they were wrong.”

While I found myself agreeing with many of Shlaes’ conclusions and agreed that sometimes the vision or objective was simply wrong, I felt more often the problems lay in execution. It is often much easier to come up with a potential solution than it is to implement a plan to achieve that desired objective. Regardless, Ms. Shlaes gave me much to think about here and for that I am grateful. ( )

Of the three books of Ms. Shlaes I own, "Great Society" is my third favorite. Although brimming with details and minutia, the narrative style and ease of story telling so prominent in "Coolidge" and "The Forgotten Man" seems to have gone missing, replaced, as it were, by a deep dive into minutia that other historians might find fascinating. I found it a bit of a slog, especially toward the end, which was a disappointment. 3 stars, sorry to say. ( )