http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/0060973331/ref=aw_d_detail?pd=1&qid=1315174873&sr=8-1"From Library Journal The "central character" in this breezy foray nto popular sociology is the "professiona middle class," a loosely defined group the author castigates as elitist, self-absorbed, and selfish. Other players include the lower and working classes, the New Class (the iberal wing of the middle class), and yuppies, who are passionately denounced and, oddly, spoken of only in the past tense. Ehrenreich, an active socialist and author of The Hearts of Men ( LJ 7/83) and For Her Own Good ( LJ 8/78), concludes that the middle class needs to become more caring and inclusive ("welcoming everyone, until there remains no other class"). An interesting but ephemeral book. The Hearts of Men ( LJ 7/83) and For Her Own Good ( LJ 8/78), concludes that the middle class needs to become more caring and inclusive ("welcoming everyone, until there remains no other class"). An nteresting but ephemeral book.- Kenneth F. Kister, Poynter Inst. for Media Studies, St. Petersburg, Fla. Copyright 1989 Reed Business"
http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/0061965588/ref=mp_s_a_6?qid=1315175078&sr=8-6"Zinn views the Bill of Rights, universal suffrage, affirmative action and collective bargaining not as fundamental (albeit imperfect) extensions of freedom, but as tactical concessions by monied elites to defuse and contain more revolutionary impulses; voting, in fact, is but the most insidious of the "controls." It's too bad that Zinn dismisses two centuries of talk about "patriotism, democracy, national interest" as mere "slogans" and "pretense," because the history he recounts is in large part the effort of downtrodden people to claim these ideals for their own. Rights, universal suffrage, affirmative action and collective bargaining not as fundamental (albeit imperfect) extensions of freedom, but as tactical concessions by monied elites to defuse and contain more revolutionary impulses; voting, in fact, is but the most insidious of the "controls." It's too bad that Zinn dismisses two centuries of talk about "patriotism, democracy, national interest" as mere "slogans" and "pretense," because the history he recounts is in large part the effort of downtrodden people to claim these ideals for their own. freedom, but as tactical concessions by monied elites to defuse and contain more revolutionary impulses; voting, in fact, is but the most insidious of the "controls."'