In my field we read books and journal articles in order to find information to make informed decisions based upon the facts. In politics some might do this, but it is common to seek out books which confirm one’s own ideological prejudices. When Republicans don’t like the facts, they can also find a revisionist writer who will give them the facts they want. The Politico reports that “House Republicans are tearing through the pages of Amity Shlaes’ ‘The Forgotten Man’ like soccer moms before book club night.” The reason is that the book differs from conventional historical and economic views of the great depression:
Shlaes’ 2007 take on the Great Depression questions the success of the New Deal and takes issue with the value of government intervention in a major economic crisis — red meat for a party hungry for empirical evidence that the Democrats’ spending plans won’t end the current recession.
“There aren’t many books that take a negative look at the New Deal,” explained Republican policy aide Mike Ference, whose boss, House Minority Whip Eric Cantor of Virginia, invited Shlaes to join a group of 20 or so other House Republicans for lunch earlier this year in his Capitol suite.
As Steve Benen points out:
…the fact that House Republicans would seek out books critical of the New Deal tells us a little something about their approach to problem-solving. For these GOP officials, one starts with the answer — FDR bad, spending bad, government bad, Hoover good — and works backwards, seeking out those who’ll bolster their answers before the questions are even asked. To those ends, Shlaes fills an important Republican niche.
The book will make Republicans happy, but won’t necessarily provide them with any greater knowledge of economics or of the history of the depression. Steve points out this review of the book by Jonathan Chait. David Weigel also wrote about this back in February.
