
Why Nothing Works
Who Killed Progress—and How to Bring It Back
Failed to add items
Add to Cart failed.
Add to Wish List failed.
Remove from wishlist failed.
Adding to library failed
Follow podcast failed
Unfollow podcast failed
3 months free
Buy for $28.79
No default payment method selected.
We are sorry. We are not allowed to sell this product with the selected payment method
-
Narrated by:
-
David de Vries
A provocative exploration about the architecture of power, the forces that stifle us from getting things done, and how we can restore confidence in democratically elected government.
America was once a country that did big things—we built the world’s greatest rail network, a vast electrical grid, interstate highways, abundant housing, the Social Security system, the Tennessee Valley Authority, and more. But today, even while facing a host of pressing challenges—a housing shortage, a climate crisis, a dilapidated infrastructure—we feel stuck, unable to move the needle. Why?
America is today the victim of a vetocracy that allows nearly anyone to stifle progress. While conservatives deserve some blame, progressives have overlooked an unlikely culprit: their own fears of “The Establishment.” A half-century ago, progressivism’s designs on getting stuff done were eclipsed by a desire to box in government. Reformers put speaking truth to power ahead of exercising that power for good. The ensuing gridlock has pummeled faith in public institutions of all sorts, stifled the movement’s ability to deliver on its promises, and, most perversely, opened the door for MAGA-style populism.
A century ago, Americans were similarly frustrated—and progressivism pointed the way out. The same can happen again. Marc J. Dunkelman vividly illustrates what progressives must do if they are going to break through today’s paralysis and restore, once again, confidence in democratically elected government. To get there, reformers will need to acknowledge where they’ve gone wrong. Progressivism’s success moving forward hinges on the movement’s willingness to rediscover its roots.
Listeners also enjoyed...




















Critic reviews
People who viewed this also viewed...

















Sort of boring
Something went wrong. Please try again in a few minutes.
Only through the beginning, so still on the fence about the argument. Why was Biden so unpopular if he was doing the right thing?
Bad sound quality!
Something went wrong. Please try again in a few minutes.
Must Read
Something went wrong. Please try again in a few minutes.
More historical than practical
Something went wrong. Please try again in a few minutes.
This is a fine and interesting contribution to modern political debates. However, the book struggles when it comes to defining solutions. Although it acknowledges their excesses, the book mourns the disappearance of bold government leaders like Robert Moses. I sympathize with this feeling, but we restricted the power of figures like Moses for good reason. The author distances himself from recent movements that aimed to fix some of these problems Like the so-called “YIMBYs,” because they are too “Jeffersonian“ for his tastes.
Instead, he calls for a return to “Hamiltonian“ governance. Meaning a stronger state wielding power boldly. However, he is not able to define what he thinks this means in practical terms. This would entail hard trade-offs, so I can forgive him for avoiding the subject. But for real change, we must face these issues head on. I think the book suffers for not taking “Jeffersonian“ solutions more seriously. In particular supporting the free market to do what it does more effectively.
Regardless, this book will be a good introduction to the complexities facing reform minded Progressives, and a useful supplement to other texts like Abundance.
A fine contribution to the abundance discourse, but lacking in solutions
Something went wrong. Please try again in a few minutes.
Probably the most frustrating feature is an insistence on labeling everything either Hamiltonian or Jeffersonian. Every other sentence is one or the other, and there are even gems like "These were the ripples created by throwing a Jeffersonian rock into a Hamiltonian pond". The first hundred times I saw Jeffersonian, I was wondering did he mean the Jefferson that was a slave-owning country squire, or the Jefferson who celebrated the bloodbath of the French revolution, or the Jefferson whose slippery political machinations make Mitch McConnell look straight by comparison. By extensive repetition and contrast, it became clear what the author meant was centralization vs decentralization, which are concepts which exist in any democracy and don't need to be tied to particular historical figures loaded with baggage. The book could likely be 20% shorter if he'd written H for Hamiltonian and J for Jeffersonian, or better yet D vs C.
As a political analysis of the 20th century, it falls far behind What's the Matter with Kansas or Nixonland.
Contents don't match the label
Something went wrong. Please try again in a few minutes.
No Timer
Something went wrong. Please try again in a few minutes.