Change They Can't Believe In

The Tea Party and Reactionary Politics in America

By: Christopher S. Parker, Matt A. Barreto

Narrated by: Ax Norman

Length: 8 hrs and 32 mins

Publisher's Summary

Are Tea Party supporters merely a group of conservative citizens concerned about government spending? Or are they racists who refuse to accept Barack Obama as their president because he's not white? Change They Can't Believe In offers an alternative argument--that the Tea Party is driven by the reemergence of a reactionary movement in American politics that is fueled by a fear that America has changed for the worse. Providing a range of original evidence and rich portraits of party sympathizers as well as activists, Christopher Parker and Matt Barreto show that what actually pushes Tea Party supporters is not simple ideology or racism, but fear that the country is being stolen from "real Americans"--a belief triggered by Obama's election. From civil liberties and policy issues, to participation in the political process, the perception that America is in danger directly informs how Tea Party supporters think and act.

The authors argue that this isn't the first time a segment of American society has perceived the American way of life as under siege. In fact, movements of this kind often appear when some individuals believe that "American" values are under threat by rapid social changes. Drawing connections between the Tea Party and right-wing reactionary movements of the past, including the Know Nothing Party, the Ku Klux Klan of the 1920s, and the John Birch Society, Parker and Barreto develop a framework that transcends the Tea Party to shed light on its current and future consequences.

Linking past and present reactionary movements, Change They Can't Believe In rigorously examines the motivations and political implications associated with today's Tea Party.

©2013 Princeton University Press (P)2013 Audible, Inc.

best book to understand the tea party & trump

this provides the best reasoned researched explanation of the highly partisin nature of politics today.

Helpful but slow

Would you recommend this book to a friend? Why or why not?

Maybe -- there are interesting ideas in it but they're framed within bigger sociological studies, and it seems like the authors needed to define their terms very explicitly in each study. That can get repetitive and dull to listen to; if I were reading it I would skim these. Seems most useful for academics.

Intriguing research, but not much of a book

I very much appreciate the research upon which this book is based, and I find that the authors make a very credible case for their thesis that the Tea Party is just the latest manifestation of America's long history of reactionary, right-wing movements.

But in the end, for readers, it would have been better as a substantial, 30-40 page article. Simply put, the authors are researchers, not writers and it shows in constant summing up and "Here's what we're going to tell you ... now we're telling you ... now here's what we told you" academic approach. The prose is fairly dry and lifeless and the entire book feels inflated far beyond its interesting premises.

Also, it seems that there are some graphics, charts and so on in the printed version that obviously don't come through in an audiobook. Perhaps they make it more engaging.

Pretty Painful Read

Would you try another book from Christopher S. Parker and Matt A. Barreto and/or Ax Norman?

Yes, although I didn't like the book I do appreciate books supported by empirical evidence. I particularly enjoy hearing about experiments/surveys involving content analysis.

What do you think your next listen will be?

One of Ann Coulter's books or a book on immigration reform

Which character – as performed by Ax Norman – was your favorite?

Ax Norman did the best job that could possibly have been done with such an empirical and academic book. This book is very very dry. He did not play characters.

Did Change They Can't Believe In inspire you to do anything?

No

Any additional comments?

Much of this book was redundant. The authors need to attempt to make their material more interesting. Interesting topic but not an interesting book. I don't really feel like a learned a lot from it. It was very repetitive and somewhat common sensical.