Democracy Awakening: Notes on the State of America Essay Questions

Does Richardson end on a hopeful note?

Not exactly. Richardson's conclusion and most recent afterword end with hesitancy, reluctant to claim we've saved democracy or irrevocably lost it. In the conclusion, she writes that "So far, the hopes of our Founders have never been proven fully right. And yet they have never been proven entirely wrong. Once again, we are at a time of testing. How it comes out, as it always has, rests in our hands" (253). In the afterward, she brings the narrative all the way up to Kamala Harris taking over for Biden as the Democratic nominee in 2024, and ends with a quote from Lincoln during the early years of the Civil War in which he warned Americans that history was essentially watching and this was the moment to behave honorably or dishonorably.

What are some critiques of the text?

While the book has been very well-received, there are a few critiques. One, Adam Gopnik for The New Yorker notes, is that "Opposing arguments aren’t seriously entertained, even to be dismissed. No conservative thinker, ancient or modern, is given much dignity or even credit for good intentions; nor is any right-leaning politician. Conservative political theory is taken to be a merely reactive body of thought." Current day Democrats receive no blame for their bad politicking, hypocrisies, or missteps. In The Nation, Kim Phillips Fein says "we hear little about the abolitionists, the socialists, or the Industrial Workers of the World, and certainly not the Communist Party of the 1930s—which, with its slogan 'Communism is 20th-century Americanism' and its embrace of the iconography of Thomas Paine and Abraham Lincoln—also sought to claim the mantle of democracy. The New Left, Black Power, the radical feminist and gay and lesbian activists of the 1960s are barely mentioned; Richardson says little about the various anti-war movements as well, either in the 1960s or at other points." Gopnik also says "But, for the most part, she offers in almost storybook prose—one-sentence paragraphs abound—a storybook version of American history. It is not manifestly false, or simpleminded, just simplified, with good guys and bad guys lined up neatly in rows and familiar facts delivered with a sense of revelation... Yet, in her patient, accumulative narration of yesterday’s news, one often feels as if one were reading yesterday’s newspapers, and this in an age when there are no more yesterday’s newspapers to read."

How does Richardson think we should talk about history?

Richardson asserts that it is key we look at and talk about history in all of its nuance, messiness, and complications. We should not obfuscate or sugarcoat; we need to acknowledge that there were hypocrisies and failings but that Americans largely agreed on the principles set forth in the Declaration of Independence and worked to uphold them throughout the centuries. We should recognize the real heroes of democracy, such as the abolitionists and activists and regular people. Richardson said in an interview, "we can reclaim and expand our democracy by recognizing true history—democratic history— acknowledging that democracy is always under construction and that we have been able to preserve and expand it in the U.S. because marginalized Americans have always kept the Declaration of Independence front and center."

Does Richardson believe Trump is an outlier or inevitable?

Richardson absolutely believes Trump is inevitable, that his rise to power was made possible by decades of Republicans pandering to big business, Christian nationalists, and racists; by their rewriting of history to make it seem like there was some golden age in which people were doing better and life was easier and fairer; and by their skillful manipulation of the political system to get themselves elected and stay in power. Trump knew exactly what he needed to do to secure the nomination and win. Richardson writes that "Years of right-wing media had prepared Trump's audience for his narcissistic vision. He was at the top of a hierarchy that sat above Black Americans, people of color, disabled Americans, and women" (85).

What is the real historical meaning of conservatism in America?

Contemporary Republicans think conservatism means adhering to a traditional economic, social, and political structure, in which the government largely stays out of public affairs, does not regulate business, protects Christianity, privileges private property, etc. Richardson convincingly argues that if you look closely at American history, this is NOT what conservatism really means. In fact, what the Republicans are calling for is radical, because to be conservative is to conserve what is already there, to make changes slowly, to use the government as a positive force in the economy. And for the United States, founded on principles of equality, it was a radical ideological position to want to subvert those principles.