Right out of California
"In a major reassessment of modern conservatism, noted historian Kathryn S. Olmsted reexamines the explosive labor disputes in the agricultural fields of Depression-era California, the cauldron that inspired a generation of artists and writers and that triggered the intervention of FDR's New Deal. Right Out of California tells how this brief moment of upheaval terrified business leaders into rethinking their relationship to American politics--a narrative that pits a ruthless generation of growers against a passionate cast of reformers, writers, and revolutionaries. Olmsted reveals how California's businessmen learned the language of populism with the help of allies in the media and entertainment industries, and in the process created a new style of politics: corporate funding of grassroots groups, military-style intelligence gathering against political enemies, professional campaign consultants, and alliances between religious and economic conservatives. The business leaders who battled for the hearts and minds of Depression-era California, moreover, would go on to create the organizations that launched the careers of Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan. A riveting history in its own right, Right Out of California is also a vital chapter in our nation's political transformation whose echoes are still felt today"--
Reviews
Popular Reviews
Reviews with the most likes.
Well... first off, I don't read nonfiction often. I read this book to do a book review on for my Historical Analysis class. Thankfully this was an interesting read. Had I not been seeking to answer specific questions I might have enjoyed it more.
This book's purpose I believe was to talk about the labor disputes and how it shaped American politics today. The book does go into depth with that but, I felt she occasionally had tangents.
-Did we need to know about Communist party member's backgrounds in order to understand Growers political views? no.
-Was John Steinbeck a huge contributor to anything this book dealt with? Not as much as the author brought him up. In fact she kept repeating and repeating the same story about him talking to Chambers yet, I still don't see the how it supported her thesis.
-Did the Red Scare need to be that talked about? Yes, but I think she could have included it in the intro or explained more about because of the 1930s the 1960s Red Scare was as bad as it was.
-Also, I'm so tired of hearing about Hoover who, like Steinbeck, was brought up way too much.
Interesting read though.
Recommend to people who live in California, have an interest in labor, or trying out a nonfiction book. Was a pretty easy read and the author gives you characters (with background and details) to cheer on and many chapter ending ‘cliffhangers.'
