What do you think?
Rate this book
Them: Why We Hate Each Other - and How to Heal
From the New York Times bestselling author of The Vanishing American Adult, an intimate and urgent assessment of the existential crisis facing our nation.
Something is wrong. We all know it.
American life expectancy is declining for a third straight year. Birth rates are dropping. Nearly half of us think the other political party isn’t just wrong; they’re evil. We’re the richest country in history, but we’ve never been more pessimistic. What’s causing the despair?
In Them, bestselling author and U.S. Senator Ben Sasse argues that, contrary to conventional wisdom, our crisis isn’t really about politics. It’s that we’re so lonely we can’t see straight—and it bubbles out as anger.
Local communities are collapsing. Across the nation, little leagues are disappearing, Rotary clubs are dwindling, and in all likelihood, we don’t know the neighbor two doors down. Work isn’t what we’d hoped: less certainty, few lifelong coworkers, shallow purpose. Stable families and enduring friendships—life’s fundamental pillars—are in statistical freefall.
As traditional tribes of place evaporate, we rally against common enemies so we can feel part of on a team. No institutions command widespread public trust, enabling foreign intelligence agencies to use technology to pick the scabs on our toxic divisions. We’re in danger of half of us believing different facts than the other half, and the digital revolution throws gas on the fire.
There’s a path forward—but reversing our decline requires something radical: a rediscovery of real places and real human-to-human relationships. Even as technology nudges us to become rootless, Sasse shows how only a recovery of rootedness can heal our lonely souls.
America wants you to be happy, but more urgently, America needs you to love your neighbor. Fixing what’s wrong with the country depends on you rebuilding right where you’re planted.
Something is wrong. We all know it.
American life expectancy is declining for a third straight year. Birth rates are dropping. Nearly half of us think the other political party isn’t just wrong; they’re evil. We’re the richest country in history, but we’ve never been more pessimistic. What’s causing the despair?
In Them, bestselling author and U.S. Senator Ben Sasse argues that, contrary to conventional wisdom, our crisis isn’t really about politics. It’s that we’re so lonely we can’t see straight—and it bubbles out as anger.
Local communities are collapsing. Across the nation, little leagues are disappearing, Rotary clubs are dwindling, and in all likelihood, we don’t know the neighbor two doors down. Work isn’t what we’d hoped: less certainty, few lifelong coworkers, shallow purpose. Stable families and enduring friendships—life’s fundamental pillars—are in statistical freefall.
As traditional tribes of place evaporate, we rally against common enemies so we can feel part of on a team. No institutions command widespread public trust, enabling foreign intelligence agencies to use technology to pick the scabs on our toxic divisions. We’re in danger of half of us believing different facts than the other half, and the digital revolution throws gas on the fire.
There’s a path forward—but reversing our decline requires something radical: a rediscovery of real places and real human-to-human relationships. Even as technology nudges us to become rootless, Sasse shows how only a recovery of rootedness can heal our lonely souls.
America wants you to be happy, but more urgently, America needs you to love your neighbor. Fixing what’s wrong with the country depends on you rebuilding right where you’re planted.
288 pages, Hardcover
First published October 16, 2018
About the author
Ben Sasse
3 books204 followersBen Sasse is the 13th president of the University of Florida. Immediately prior to his appointment, he served as a U.S. Senator from Nebraska from 2015 to 2023. Ben Sasse is also a fifth-generation Nebraskan. The son of a football and wrestling coach, he attended public school in Fremont, Neb., and spent his summers working soybean and corn fields. He was recruited to wrestle at Harvard before attending Oxford and later earning a Ph.D. in American history from Yale. Prior to serving in the U.S. Senate, Sasse spent five years as president of Midland University back in his hometown. As perhaps the only commuting family in the U.S. Senate during his service, Ben and his wife, Melissa, lived in Nebraska but homeschooled their three children as they commuted weekly back and forth to Washington, DC.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 760 reviews
October 16, 2018
Ben Sasse is a Republican senator from Nebraska. I do not always agree with him, but according to his book, Them: Why We Hate Each Other – And How to Heal, that's OK. This book talks about the circumstances that have exacerbated divisions in the United States, and it provides guidance for how to see commonalities among one another and overcome political rifts.
I gave this book five stars because it was exactly the book I needed to read at exactly the right time. I feel that it is important to understand and follow current events, but the news often leaves me feeling angered rather than enlightened. Senator Sasse discusses why this anger exists and why many Americans see those who disagree with them as enemies.
The biggest thing I took away from this book is that if anything is going to change, I have to start with myself, my family and my community. I need to gain a deeper understanding of an issue instead of reading the snippet that Facebook provides me. I need to spend more time in a technology-free zone with my family, and I need to remember that there is a lot more to a person than his or her political views.
This is a valuable book that I will come back to time and again to keep me focused on what America’s all about.
Thanks to NetGalley and St. Martin’s Press for the advance copy.
I gave this book five stars because it was exactly the book I needed to read at exactly the right time. I feel that it is important to understand and follow current events, but the news often leaves me feeling angered rather than enlightened. Senator Sasse discusses why this anger exists and why many Americans see those who disagree with them as enemies.
The biggest thing I took away from this book is that if anything is going to change, I have to start with myself, my family and my community. I need to gain a deeper understanding of an issue instead of reading the snippet that Facebook provides me. I need to spend more time in a technology-free zone with my family, and I need to remember that there is a lot more to a person than his or her political views.
This is a valuable book that I will come back to time and again to keep me focused on what America’s all about.
Thanks to NetGalley and St. Martin’s Press for the advance copy.
January 2, 2022
2.5 stars rounded up for the attitude of honesty, concept of effort toward fairness, and just plain facts too upon the nature of social life and culture in the USA. But honestly, that's just about it. I had to convince myself to round it up and not give it a 2 star. Because as much as he defines why the unhappiness of the individual to "connection" in their everyday life is factual, much else of what he defines as present or past conditions or current "mindset" for media, governmental history toward individual rights, and many other historic and real world situations RIGHT NOW, is not stat accurate. Often it is an 180 degree direction from Ben correct or optimal to the present reality. He is also constantly redefining abstracts for these situations, as well. And doesn't "hear" the same words as "similar" or what they connote either. He is very much an elite. He, like the media of both sides, hears the same exact words "differently" in contexts to his own pre-boxed interpretations of "real" meaning (for them as "listeners") than the folks of opposite politico. Or even from what Independents of other income levels "hear".
Some of the aspects of tribal discussion/ definition, media qualifying categories, and mobile / community connectiveness he absolutely deems are some "one way" absolutes presently in 2017/18- they just aren't. He's wrong on great chunks of USA reality. He speaks for possibly more toward the urban and mobile (upwardly mobile especially "eyes") and posits himself in the central position for most USA citizens . He's not. Not even close to central. Not in politico, not in cultural core, not in community habits, etc. Not even his Chicago experience is "central" norm. Not at all.
I didn't understand how he could make certain qualifying judgments so easily in each and every section of this, until I got to the 52% mark and he started a paragraph this way. "Having been a past college President, etc." Then I "got " it. His "eyes". He also states his audience had a 99% hand raise upon the question "did a parent graduate college" in one of his lectures. That told me why he is redefining the way he is and "hearing" what he thinks he hears in this "middle" place to braid the "sides" of progressive/ conservative beliefs. He may vote and act and believe he has a Conservative agenda, but he lacks the prime "eyes".
Most of the categories he divides this "question" into are also composite "false" by the very definitions he uses. He makes some excellent points in each of them regardless. Especially upon what homo sapiens need for job/ work, undue stress, strong anchors to community and other humans of loving interest etc. And that with average American mobility of most working adults moving homes every 4 years by average? Well, just that alone is extremely problematic. He skirts the entire onus of work itself immensely too. Just naming how it will be scarcer is no answer. Being idle and useless IS the worst stress.
The hate on both sides is not equal either as he posits it to be in several various scenarios. Not even if you just singularly consider the social aspects of both sides- and not consider the action fall outs of the economic faces at all. It hasn't been in my lifetime of 70 plus years in Chicago. And so his "healing" measures- I find mere preaching and without the life experiences (actions and interface both) to begin to answer the "heal" to what some of us have observed and lived in assault for just BEING and there from the get-go, at all. The hate levels against Trump, against people who disagree about going against their own religious beliefs, being a "different" moral example etc. etc. (I could add dozens of other aspects/ categories here that are hated with white hot expressed vitriol consistently)- many of those EXIST within full expression today. Oftentimes with "we think" mob evincing approvals to their viscous behaviors beyond the words. I guess Ben hasn't faced much of that? Maybe he only gets the viscous and mean spirited name call email or two- and not the shove on the bus- or a spit in the face for shopping in a store "you don't belong". Or hasn't had to move for work repeatedly for the last 25 years as many rural folks have. Not because they WANT to either, but because they HAVE to.
He also discounts huge, huge basic right/ wrong issues of core beliefs. Like how does one "forget" that 42 million humans were destroyed last year. Because they are not deemed human at all, their state itself redefined as "stuff". And that is "tolerance" to overlook for his "definitions" of urging for a state that MIGHT approach "less angry"?
I was extremely disappointed in this book. It's short, and that gained a star. He preaches and rather chides at times. And at others he describes human sociology quite well. But he isn't embedded as he thinks he is at all. One of his associates is quoted as saying "you don't get it, Ben, why the anger exists on the right- and how it has grown". And Ben refutes it (that associate's quip) very poorly. His friend was correct in his assessment of Ben, IMHO. Ben also extremely underestimates the level of Alinsky technique and manner of treating "the other" by progressives in large city environments, schools, courtrooms, real life interchange-taught and observed within the last 10 years too by huge numbers of the regulars- the left has named them "Walmart" people. Those people listen and understand the ridicule. Constant ridicule. Did he ever read Alinsky to realize what they are and who/ what cores them? Nice-nice is not the answer that is "heard" by the Left. Period. And appeasement also doesn't at all quell their anger and demand and abuse for the "next" "we want" issue.
Also he was totally wrong on the point that few people to no one "watches" the other side's media presently. (Actually I believe I remember he said "nobody".) That's just not true. Many Conservatives only have CNN listed to watch in their markets (rural MI market is on this page), in airports, in doctor offices, at the public square restaurant etc. etc. And many do watch ALL. Not more than 10% of the population perhaps, but we absolutely do exist. Tech chucks up great globs of it constantly too (liberalspeak and posits of Republican as "other" wearing swastikas or horns- with foul vitriol added made "funny")- and tech has destroyed and taken over great webs of TRUE and individual human communications. Enough to obliterate the most significant parts of it.
This book offers very few bridges that core policy (and the lies that accompanied their passing into law for instance which are heralded from one side and ignored by the other) or any true real life policy of law completed and administrated by our government within the last 15 years. In fact, I found this book extremely unsatisfying to any concept of ideal or possible compromise for most USA issues that reflect our Constitutional founding particularly. The Democrat side has not compromised on any single particular or minutia of any (even minor) law of any level/ governmental onus of "we want" since 2011. And only minutely then. So it seems, to me, that compromise (as Ben describes it) is just not compromise but compliance/ laying down to any true opposition by the weaker voice side. For aspects at times also toward non-compromisable positions that hold family, social manners, long life structure and connectiveness (much more than just the bland theory connection he names it) that IS necessary human for masses of the "peons" at their cores. Self-identity is tied within that integrity.
Ben's arguments are also at points counterpoint to his own human "needs" arguments/ definitions. Most leaving our belief and integrity structures will result in even higher suicide, mood RX, drug or substance addictions, pure misery economically for the average homo sapiens life span, IMHO. Not to even mention the slashing of "allowance" for individual privilege of/for religious belief expression or other freedom of speech issues of American founding onus which are censored currently and often. Or impossible to be utilized too in each human "other's" real life without some heavy "know better" dictates of constant (and just plain mean/ viscous) authoritarian reaction to them.
Ben Sasse expresses his "compromise" as a true RINO, which he is. Very well. He is Republican only in the sense of his economic Conservative leanings and some belief in principles of USA founding to be preserved. Reading some of the other reviewers for this? They would love a Ben Sasse to run as a Republican for president. He could just lay down and back stab his own "folks" as Romney did so "nicely" when he ran. And call that "lay down" process "the compromise".
Some of the aspects of tribal discussion/ definition, media qualifying categories, and mobile / community connectiveness he absolutely deems are some "one way" absolutes presently in 2017/18- they just aren't. He's wrong on great chunks of USA reality. He speaks for possibly more toward the urban and mobile (upwardly mobile especially "eyes") and posits himself in the central position for most USA citizens . He's not. Not even close to central. Not in politico, not in cultural core, not in community habits, etc. Not even his Chicago experience is "central" norm. Not at all.
I didn't understand how he could make certain qualifying judgments so easily in each and every section of this, until I got to the 52% mark and he started a paragraph this way. "Having been a past college President, etc." Then I "got " it. His "eyes". He also states his audience had a 99% hand raise upon the question "did a parent graduate college" in one of his lectures. That told me why he is redefining the way he is and "hearing" what he thinks he hears in this "middle" place to braid the "sides" of progressive/ conservative beliefs. He may vote and act and believe he has a Conservative agenda, but he lacks the prime "eyes".
Most of the categories he divides this "question" into are also composite "false" by the very definitions he uses. He makes some excellent points in each of them regardless. Especially upon what homo sapiens need for job/ work, undue stress, strong anchors to community and other humans of loving interest etc. And that with average American mobility of most working adults moving homes every 4 years by average? Well, just that alone is extremely problematic. He skirts the entire onus of work itself immensely too. Just naming how it will be scarcer is no answer. Being idle and useless IS the worst stress.
The hate on both sides is not equal either as he posits it to be in several various scenarios. Not even if you just singularly consider the social aspects of both sides- and not consider the action fall outs of the economic faces at all. It hasn't been in my lifetime of 70 plus years in Chicago. And so his "healing" measures- I find mere preaching and without the life experiences (actions and interface both) to begin to answer the "heal" to what some of us have observed and lived in assault for just BEING and there from the get-go, at all. The hate levels against Trump, against people who disagree about going against their own religious beliefs, being a "different" moral example etc. etc. (I could add dozens of other aspects/ categories here that are hated with white hot expressed vitriol consistently)- many of those EXIST within full expression today. Oftentimes with "we think" mob evincing approvals to their viscous behaviors beyond the words. I guess Ben hasn't faced much of that? Maybe he only gets the viscous and mean spirited name call email or two- and not the shove on the bus- or a spit in the face for shopping in a store "you don't belong". Or hasn't had to move for work repeatedly for the last 25 years as many rural folks have. Not because they WANT to either, but because they HAVE to.
He also discounts huge, huge basic right/ wrong issues of core beliefs. Like how does one "forget" that 42 million humans were destroyed last year. Because they are not deemed human at all, their state itself redefined as "stuff". And that is "tolerance" to overlook for his "definitions" of urging for a state that MIGHT approach "less angry"?
I was extremely disappointed in this book. It's short, and that gained a star. He preaches and rather chides at times. And at others he describes human sociology quite well. But he isn't embedded as he thinks he is at all. One of his associates is quoted as saying "you don't get it, Ben, why the anger exists on the right- and how it has grown". And Ben refutes it (that associate's quip) very poorly. His friend was correct in his assessment of Ben, IMHO. Ben also extremely underestimates the level of Alinsky technique and manner of treating "the other" by progressives in large city environments, schools, courtrooms, real life interchange-taught and observed within the last 10 years too by huge numbers of the regulars- the left has named them "Walmart" people. Those people listen and understand the ridicule. Constant ridicule. Did he ever read Alinsky to realize what they are and who/ what cores them? Nice-nice is not the answer that is "heard" by the Left. Period. And appeasement also doesn't at all quell their anger and demand and abuse for the "next" "we want" issue.
Also he was totally wrong on the point that few people to no one "watches" the other side's media presently. (Actually I believe I remember he said "nobody".) That's just not true. Many Conservatives only have CNN listed to watch in their markets (rural MI market is on this page), in airports, in doctor offices, at the public square restaurant etc. etc. And many do watch ALL. Not more than 10% of the population perhaps, but we absolutely do exist. Tech chucks up great globs of it constantly too (liberalspeak and posits of Republican as "other" wearing swastikas or horns- with foul vitriol added made "funny")- and tech has destroyed and taken over great webs of TRUE and individual human communications. Enough to obliterate the most significant parts of it.
This book offers very few bridges that core policy (and the lies that accompanied their passing into law for instance which are heralded from one side and ignored by the other) or any true real life policy of law completed and administrated by our government within the last 15 years. In fact, I found this book extremely unsatisfying to any concept of ideal or possible compromise for most USA issues that reflect our Constitutional founding particularly. The Democrat side has not compromised on any single particular or minutia of any (even minor) law of any level/ governmental onus of "we want" since 2011. And only minutely then. So it seems, to me, that compromise (as Ben describes it) is just not compromise but compliance/ laying down to any true opposition by the weaker voice side. For aspects at times also toward non-compromisable positions that hold family, social manners, long life structure and connectiveness (much more than just the bland theory connection he names it) that IS necessary human for masses of the "peons" at their cores. Self-identity is tied within that integrity.
Ben's arguments are also at points counterpoint to his own human "needs" arguments/ definitions. Most leaving our belief and integrity structures will result in even higher suicide, mood RX, drug or substance addictions, pure misery economically for the average homo sapiens life span, IMHO. Not to even mention the slashing of "allowance" for individual privilege of/for religious belief expression or other freedom of speech issues of American founding onus which are censored currently and often. Or impossible to be utilized too in each human "other's" real life without some heavy "know better" dictates of constant (and just plain mean/ viscous) authoritarian reaction to them.
Ben Sasse expresses his "compromise" as a true RINO, which he is. Very well. He is Republican only in the sense of his economic Conservative leanings and some belief in principles of USA founding to be preserved. Reading some of the other reviewers for this? They would love a Ben Sasse to run as a Republican for president. He could just lay down and back stab his own "folks" as Romney did so "nicely" when he ran. And call that "lay down" process "the compromise".
November 30, 2018
I double-dog-dare a politician to write a better book.
This book isn't about politics (though politics come up) but is about the cracking and splintering we all have felt in our society's alarmingly fracturing world. Senator Sasse argues that we are living in a truly unique and revolutionary time; a time that will be written down in history books for future generations to look back upon; a time where America is teetering on the precipice of some great, terrible, and awesome changes. His aim in this book is to call Americans back to the foundational values and ideas that America was originally founded on: the inalienable rights of all individuals, the freedom of conscience and the right to exercise it, and the robust strength of our local communities. As a professional politician, the author is surprisingly skeptical that politics has any hope of rescuing us from the worst problems we are experiencing today. Our divisive political landscape today is more of a symptom rather than the cause of our woes. The only way we as a country will be able to keep ourselves from committing societal suicide, according to the good Senator, will not come from a political knight in shining armor, but will come from (essentially) focusing on fostering a love for neighbor.
A number of the major problems Sasse highlights are...
-The pervasive problems of loneliness and the absence of meaningful community among most Americans today, and the way technology is used as a further means of keeping people at a distance (sitting at home alone, binging on Netflix while we flick through our Newsfeed rather than having neighbors over for dinner). He argues that our opioid epidemic is primarily fueled by a loneliness epidemic.
- Our addiction to "politatainment." We all, supposedly, hate how ugly the rhetoric of politicians has become, but at the same time (according to the ratings) we apparently love it. Whether we are Democrats or Republicans, there is nothing we love being outraged over more (and announcing that outrage on social media) than outrage at politicans. Sasse reminds us that what happens on Twitter or cable news is not a good depiction of what most of America actually looks like.
- Our inability to learn from people we disagree with or enter into meaningful, constructive dialogue. We all just want to "own" idiots in Twitter fights.
- The complex future and economy that technology is bringing and our need to be able to adapt to it. We ought to be more suspicious of every new shiny piece of technology that comes out, waiting to see what consequences come with this new gadget. But we also need to prepare our economy and workforce for the undeniable future that is coming with new innovations such as self-driving cars, artificial intelligence, etc.
- The absence of strong families, or at the very least, two-parent homes. Families are the building blocks of society, and the more we erode that fundamental block, the more wobbly our society becomes.
Ben Sasse presents the most attractive vision of principled Conservatism I know of today. He is a Republican, but avoids the common dog whistles, mud flinging, and screeds one usually (at least recently) associates with Republicans. And yet, while he is critical of President Trump (he voted third-party in 2016), he doesn't swing to the opposite screeching and arm-flailing commonly associated with Democrats. He is driven by ideals, philosophy, theology--not an "anti-tribe" polemical groupthink. This book is not a Republican manifesto. A Bernie Sanders Democrat could read this book and heartily agree with the majority of what is written. It is a book about the problems in the souls of Americans. A problem that, if not remedied, while sink our Republic under the waters of destruction.
I think Senator Sasse's book is exactly what we need today. I hope everyone reads it.
This book isn't about politics (though politics come up) but is about the cracking and splintering we all have felt in our society's alarmingly fracturing world. Senator Sasse argues that we are living in a truly unique and revolutionary time; a time that will be written down in history books for future generations to look back upon; a time where America is teetering on the precipice of some great, terrible, and awesome changes. His aim in this book is to call Americans back to the foundational values and ideas that America was originally founded on: the inalienable rights of all individuals, the freedom of conscience and the right to exercise it, and the robust strength of our local communities. As a professional politician, the author is surprisingly skeptical that politics has any hope of rescuing us from the worst problems we are experiencing today. Our divisive political landscape today is more of a symptom rather than the cause of our woes. The only way we as a country will be able to keep ourselves from committing societal suicide, according to the good Senator, will not come from a political knight in shining armor, but will come from (essentially) focusing on fostering a love for neighbor.
A number of the major problems Sasse highlights are...
-The pervasive problems of loneliness and the absence of meaningful community among most Americans today, and the way technology is used as a further means of keeping people at a distance (sitting at home alone, binging on Netflix while we flick through our Newsfeed rather than having neighbors over for dinner). He argues that our opioid epidemic is primarily fueled by a loneliness epidemic.
- Our addiction to "politatainment." We all, supposedly, hate how ugly the rhetoric of politicians has become, but at the same time (according to the ratings) we apparently love it. Whether we are Democrats or Republicans, there is nothing we love being outraged over more (and announcing that outrage on social media) than outrage at politicans. Sasse reminds us that what happens on Twitter or cable news is not a good depiction of what most of America actually looks like.
- Our inability to learn from people we disagree with or enter into meaningful, constructive dialogue. We all just want to "own" idiots in Twitter fights.
- The complex future and economy that technology is bringing and our need to be able to adapt to it. We ought to be more suspicious of every new shiny piece of technology that comes out, waiting to see what consequences come with this new gadget. But we also need to prepare our economy and workforce for the undeniable future that is coming with new innovations such as self-driving cars, artificial intelligence, etc.
- The absence of strong families, or at the very least, two-parent homes. Families are the building blocks of society, and the more we erode that fundamental block, the more wobbly our society becomes.
Ben Sasse presents the most attractive vision of principled Conservatism I know of today. He is a Republican, but avoids the common dog whistles, mud flinging, and screeds one usually (at least recently) associates with Republicans. And yet, while he is critical of President Trump (he voted third-party in 2016), he doesn't swing to the opposite screeching and arm-flailing commonly associated with Democrats. He is driven by ideals, philosophy, theology--not an "anti-tribe" polemical groupthink. This book is not a Republican manifesto. A Bernie Sanders Democrat could read this book and heartily agree with the majority of what is written. It is a book about the problems in the souls of Americans. A problem that, if not remedied, while sink our Republic under the waters of destruction.
I think Senator Sasse's book is exactly what we need today. I hope everyone reads it.
November 8, 2018
2 Stars=Finished the book but didn't really enjoy it
3 Starts=Enjoyed it
I would give this a 2.5 if I could. There were several times that I thought about stopping the book because of the limited examples the author used to explain his point.
I picked this book on the title alone. I had no clue that Ben Sasse was a senator nor that he was republican. Not that it matters, but it does tie into some of the issues I have with the book. When discussing a book about how we need to stop vilifying "them" and try to get back to a community of "us," it became frustrating when the vast majority of his examples are from a republican viewpoint. That one-sidedness reinforces a "them" mentality. He even concedes several times throughout the book that most of his examples are from the right because that is who he is and what he knows, but he self-describes himself as a historian. If he is a historian, I think he would have the skills to find examples to show how the "them" mentality is from both sides. Not doing so just seems lazy.
Now that being said, I agree with almost every point that he makes. As a country, we have tribalized ourselves into very anti-"them" groups. He offers many reasons why this has happened, mainly the erosion of neighborhoods and community groups. He goes into much more detail and explanation, all of which I agree with. His argument, however, works only in a vacuum of very specific conditions. He talks of his youth being one of closeness in his hometown where everyone knew his dad and the whole community looked out for him. He argues that we need to return to that, but what if "that" was never an option? What if the community one grew up in was gang infested, drug-ridden, and untrustworthy? His solutions fit his concept of community, but he also argues the entire time that the current economy doesn't fit with his nostalgic past.
Ben Sasse sounds like a very nice man with a huge heart, and let's face it, he's tackling a subject that is not easy to fix. His book definitely has made me think more about this topic, but it didn't deliver on the How to Heal of his title.
3 Starts=Enjoyed it
I would give this a 2.5 if I could. There were several times that I thought about stopping the book because of the limited examples the author used to explain his point.
I picked this book on the title alone. I had no clue that Ben Sasse was a senator nor that he was republican. Not that it matters, but it does tie into some of the issues I have with the book. When discussing a book about how we need to stop vilifying "them" and try to get back to a community of "us," it became frustrating when the vast majority of his examples are from a republican viewpoint. That one-sidedness reinforces a "them" mentality. He even concedes several times throughout the book that most of his examples are from the right because that is who he is and what he knows, but he self-describes himself as a historian. If he is a historian, I think he would have the skills to find examples to show how the "them" mentality is from both sides. Not doing so just seems lazy.
Now that being said, I agree with almost every point that he makes. As a country, we have tribalized ourselves into very anti-"them" groups. He offers many reasons why this has happened, mainly the erosion of neighborhoods and community groups. He goes into much more detail and explanation, all of which I agree with. His argument, however, works only in a vacuum of very specific conditions. He talks of his youth being one of closeness in his hometown where everyone knew his dad and the whole community looked out for him. He argues that we need to return to that, but what if "that" was never an option? What if the community one grew up in was gang infested, drug-ridden, and untrustworthy? His solutions fit his concept of community, but he also argues the entire time that the current economy doesn't fit with his nostalgic past.
Ben Sasse sounds like a very nice man with a huge heart, and let's face it, he's tackling a subject that is not easy to fix. His book definitely has made me think more about this topic, but it didn't deliver on the How to Heal of his title.
November 15, 2018
I’m a progressive Yellow Dog Democrat who has not supported a republican since John Anderson so reading this book was not an exercise in confirmation bias for me. I fully expected to be at odds with the author based on my assumptions about his politics and worldview. Well, you know what they say about happens when you assume! This was a thoroughly enjoyable and challenging read. While I disagree with some of his assumptions, I found no fault in his sincerity or research. Sen. Sasse provides a thoughtful look at our current culture and a reasonable critique of it. I was very pleasantly surprised to find myself in such agreement on so many things with a leader from “the other side.”
January 8, 2019
This is probably my favorite book of 2018 (though I actually finished it in 2019). Ben Sasse has so much common sense, it's hard to believe he's able to survive in the finger-pointing, photo-opping, self-serving world of national politics. Everyone should read this book: liberal, conservative, or non-political, it doesn't matter; this is about "US," and how to keep from losing our country. (And as a side note, whoever designed that cover should get an award for it - pure genius.)
Content: Minimal profanity, some sexual references, not gratuitous or graphic, but enough to make the book unsuitable for younger readers.
Content: Minimal profanity, some sexual references, not gratuitous or graphic, but enough to make the book unsuitable for younger readers.
October 25, 2018
I'll read anything Ben Sasse has to write. Anything. The man is a thinker. He has peered into the future and seen what America needs to do to be prepared for the immense challenges facing her. In this book he deals particularly with the issue of tribalism. He blames loneliness, social media, and news programs who seek to entertain and divide. But this is no glib screed against the dangers of Facebook (which are real enough). He has pondered deeply why some people are so lonely with their smart phones and Sean Hannity. He has considered how we can ween ourselves off of the need for instant electronic affirmation of our every move. How we can love our fellow neighbor (he is very big on localism in the old-fashioned sense). How we can be challenged by other view points instead of demonized (or to demonize them in return).
As far as I am considered, Sasse might be the wisest man in the Senate, even if he is one of the least senior. He is not playing game. He has good, non-governmentally-intrusive, ideas for how we can "heal," to use his subtitle. There is a strong Reformed ethic running underneath the whole book, one that popped its head up only very occasionally; but it's clear the foundation is there, and it roots his thoughts in the moral will of God, expressed through the common grace we all receive.
As far as I am considered, Sasse might be the wisest man in the Senate, even if he is one of the least senior. He is not playing game. He has good, non-governmentally-intrusive, ideas for how we can "heal," to use his subtitle. There is a strong Reformed ethic running underneath the whole book, one that popped its head up only very occasionally; but it's clear the foundation is there, and it roots his thoughts in the moral will of God, expressed through the common grace we all receive.
February 7, 2019
Irenic. Hopeful. Mr. Sasse goes to Washington—but this Mr. Sasse comes without the naïveté of Jimmy Stewart’s character. He is a creedal Calvinist Christian, and he knows we are all fallen. His prescriptions take that fallenness into account. He is no utopianist.
Sasse sees massive forces pulling us apart, destroying the communities that make up our nation. He offers solutions that often boil down to focusing on people and place rather than on screen.
Christians who have fallen under the sway of right wing anger-mongers need to read this book. Leftists who have given up on seeing any goodwill in their political opponents need to read it, too. Parents who wonder how to raise kids in this tech-addled world could benefit as well. Sasse is by far my favorite national politician.
Sasse sees massive forces pulling us apart, destroying the communities that make up our nation. He offers solutions that often boil down to focusing on people and place rather than on screen.
Christians who have fallen under the sway of right wing anger-mongers need to read this book. Leftists who have given up on seeing any goodwill in their political opponents need to read it, too. Parents who wonder how to raise kids in this tech-addled world could benefit as well. Sasse is by far my favorite national politician.
January 18, 2021
Not only do Americans no longer know their neighbors, but in many cases they simply don’t know many people who aren’t like them. (p. 43)
Sen. Sasse describes himself as "the second- or third-most-conservative member of the Senate" (p. 99). I am definitely not in his ballpark, but if nothing else, the soon-to-be ex-US president – referred to as X hereafter – has made me nostalgic for legislators who are thoughtful and knowledgeable, respecting conservative values, small government, and the Constitution. I feared that there were no longer legislators who would consider reaching across the aisle rather than blocking their opponents reflexively. Sen. McConnell, for example, famously said in 2010, "The single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term president." From my perspective, regardless of what you thought of President Obama, that shouldn't even have been one of the top ten things to want to achieve.
I agree with Sasse's reading of the data on many issues: We should be more skeptical about the journalism we consume; decrease our social media use; provide stronger social supports for children and teens (he and I disagree on how); and develop deeper connections of community across "tribes." As Sasse argued, "we’re building 'pillow forts' of comfortable information around us and making it more and more difficult for anything we don’t want to hear to penetrate" (p. 128).
I agree with Sasse that we have increasingly become a click-bait culture, which values journalism based on its "hits" or "likes" rather than on the accuracy of its journalism. Clearly, many journalists on both the left and right have made mistakes. As a family member commented, however, X could throw gold nuggets at members of the crowd and receive negative reactions from the left-leaning media – but could you imagine him doing so? On the other hand, Sasse made the following false equivalency, "MSNBC and Fox are, at bottom, not all that different" (p. 124). From my (admittedly liberal) perspective, MSNBC's mistake may be to be overly gleeful about X's errors, while Fox – Sean Hannity especially but not only – makes things up out of whole cloth.
What we do need is to see and acknowledge the strengths of "the other side" and the weaknesses of our own. We need to be willing to work together.
Sasse is a senator from Nebraska, which is 88% White (the US as a whole is currently 60% non-Hispanic White). That may excuse Sasse for seeming to talk about small town, White Christians rather than considering the experiences of other groups. He referred to Blacks three times, African Americans six, and Christians 15. Other racial and ethnic groups (Asian Americans, Latinx, Native Americans, Muslims) don't get more than a single mention, mostly to situate someone Sasse quoted. Them feels focused on people who look like him. This criticism may be unfair, as perhaps he would write differently in 2021, where the climate (at least on the left) is very different than in 2018 when Them was published.
Nonetheless, Sasse is a Republican who I might consider voting for. As such, even though Them made me irritable and downright angry at points – sometimes for his conclusions (he is against Obamacare), sometimes because the thread of his thesis was unclear – this was a healing book to read during this period in the US when the news cycle is dominated by conspiracy theorists. He asks us to reach across the aisle, to recognize that we are more similar to than different from each other, to remember that we all share at least one tribe, whether than be American or Human. These are good aspirations for during this period.
There is a deep and corrosive tribal impulse to act as if “the enemy of my enemy is my friend.”
But sometimes the enemy of your enemy is just a jackass. (p. 156)
Sen. Sasse describes himself as "the second- or third-most-conservative member of the Senate" (p. 99). I am definitely not in his ballpark, but if nothing else, the soon-to-be ex-US president – referred to as X hereafter – has made me nostalgic for legislators who are thoughtful and knowledgeable, respecting conservative values, small government, and the Constitution. I feared that there were no longer legislators who would consider reaching across the aisle rather than blocking their opponents reflexively. Sen. McConnell, for example, famously said in 2010, "The single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term president." From my perspective, regardless of what you thought of President Obama, that shouldn't even have been one of the top ten things to want to achieve.
I agree with Sasse's reading of the data on many issues: We should be more skeptical about the journalism we consume; decrease our social media use; provide stronger social supports for children and teens (he and I disagree on how); and develop deeper connections of community across "tribes." As Sasse argued, "we’re building 'pillow forts' of comfortable information around us and making it more and more difficult for anything we don’t want to hear to penetrate" (p. 128).
I agree with Sasse that we have increasingly become a click-bait culture, which values journalism based on its "hits" or "likes" rather than on the accuracy of its journalism. Clearly, many journalists on both the left and right have made mistakes. As a family member commented, however, X could throw gold nuggets at members of the crowd and receive negative reactions from the left-leaning media – but could you imagine him doing so? On the other hand, Sasse made the following false equivalency, "MSNBC and Fox are, at bottom, not all that different" (p. 124). From my (admittedly liberal) perspective, MSNBC's mistake may be to be overly gleeful about X's errors, while Fox – Sean Hannity especially but not only – makes things up out of whole cloth.
What we do need is to see and acknowledge the strengths of "the other side" and the weaknesses of our own. We need to be willing to work together.
Sasse is a senator from Nebraska, which is 88% White (the US as a whole is currently 60% non-Hispanic White). That may excuse Sasse for seeming to talk about small town, White Christians rather than considering the experiences of other groups. He referred to Blacks three times, African Americans six, and Christians 15. Other racial and ethnic groups (Asian Americans, Latinx, Native Americans, Muslims) don't get more than a single mention, mostly to situate someone Sasse quoted. Them feels focused on people who look like him. This criticism may be unfair, as perhaps he would write differently in 2021, where the climate (at least on the left) is very different than in 2018 when Them was published.
Nonetheless, Sasse is a Republican who I might consider voting for. As such, even though Them made me irritable and downright angry at points – sometimes for his conclusions (he is against Obamacare), sometimes because the thread of his thesis was unclear – this was a healing book to read during this period in the US when the news cycle is dominated by conspiracy theorists. He asks us to reach across the aisle, to recognize that we are more similar to than different from each other, to remember that we all share at least one tribe, whether than be American or Human. These are good aspirations for during this period.
There is a deep and corrosive tribal impulse to act as if “the enemy of my enemy is my friend.”
But sometimes the enemy of your enemy is just a jackass. (p. 156)
August 7, 2019
I want to give this book a rating but I just don’t know where I stand yet. This was a book club pick and while so much truth was spilled there was also so much conservative bs tossed in. Ben is clearly a right of center Republican (capital r) senator. He loves to use the parenthetical which I found disengaging and unnecessary. He is very correct about our rootlessness and lack of community and dependence on technology. But by simplifying the solution to us building community where we are vs gov’t policy changes is also too simple. The entire country is not going to turn off their tv and shut down their social media. We need a new solution for a new age and that involves people with power making changes that benefit all Americans. Maybe I do know how I feel...
April 17, 2020
Ben Sasse and I would likely disagree with each other on most policy issues, but he's one of the few politicians I see right now who is trying to unite both sides around common values instead of intensifying and exploiting our perceived differences. He's conservative in traditional ways that I can absolutely respect and see the wisdom in, even when I might not agree on implementation.
I'd recommend his book to liberals who'd sincerely like to understand the other side better and to both liberals and conservatives who are willing to confront their own weaknesses.
I felt like his arguments fell a little short in a couple of places - mostly when talking about freedom of religion and freedom of speech. He talked about religious people feeling unrepresented and misrepresented in the media, which I think is true and unfortunate. He also talks a lot about freedom of religion being endangered, which I'm inclined to think is silly (at least for American Christians). I wanted him to prove me wrong, and he didn't give a lot of examples or arguments to change my mind. Having people criticize you for your religious views is not oppression. As long as it's not the government doing it, no force is used and no one is being threatened or harmed, it's not a violation of freedom of religion.
As for his discussion of freedom of speech, I have similar frustrations. Sure, people are legally free to say whatever they want. Except for in rare cases, they are constitutionally protected from government silencing. They are not entitled to a platform, though, and they are not protected from personal and professional backlash. You can think the backlash is dumb, but that doesn't make it a violation of free speech. Having consequences to your speech is not the same as having your freedom of speech suppressed, and I would have appreciated more clarity from Sasse on that.
At the same time, I agree with him that we should all grow a thicker skin and try to listen more to ideas that make us uncomfortable. Doing so can either change our minds or reinforce our existing views for the better. We need more empathy and better critical thinking skills. I just think framing that claim in terms of freedom of speech is a straw man argument.
On a final critical note, the desire to return to a past golden time of community togetherness fails to acknowledge just how crappy that past was for a whole lot of Americans - particularly people of color, immigrants, and women. Native Americans, slaves, and their descendants had their sense of place and community brutally torn away from them - family togetherness and rootedness often weren't really options for them. If you're going to call for returning to traditional values, you HAVE to acknowledge that some of those traditional values were pretty sucky and we shouldn't want those ones back. Sasse kind of acknowledges this sometimes, but his argument could have been strengthened by discussing the ways our political and cultural structures have historically destroyed community and family for a significant portion of the population
My quibbles came up rarely, though, in comparison to what I liked in this book. I loved Senator Sasse's main argument that social upheaval and isolation have pushed us into basing our sense of community on anti-tribes. We might not know our neighbors' names, but we know we hate (insert people of opposite political and social views here). My friends shouldn't just be the enemies of my enemies. That's no path to happiness or sound governing.
He also has great points on the media, and makes good arguments for both for liberal journalists being more balanced in their reporting and for conservatives to stop dismissing legitimate reporting as "fake news." He also makes an impassioned case for all of us to be wary of outrage "journalism" that feeds on our anger and our desire for entertainment.
Overall, this really got me thinking and self-evaluating. I'm going to see if there are ways for me to be more integrated into my real community - to find my tribes - instead of obsessing over the ugliness of national politics. I can do more good right where I am, and I'll probably be happier in the process.
I'd recommend his book to liberals who'd sincerely like to understand the other side better and to both liberals and conservatives who are willing to confront their own weaknesses.
I felt like his arguments fell a little short in a couple of places - mostly when talking about freedom of religion and freedom of speech. He talked about religious people feeling unrepresented and misrepresented in the media, which I think is true and unfortunate. He also talks a lot about freedom of religion being endangered, which I'm inclined to think is silly (at least for American Christians). I wanted him to prove me wrong, and he didn't give a lot of examples or arguments to change my mind. Having people criticize you for your religious views is not oppression. As long as it's not the government doing it, no force is used and no one is being threatened or harmed, it's not a violation of freedom of religion.
As for his discussion of freedom of speech, I have similar frustrations. Sure, people are legally free to say whatever they want. Except for in rare cases, they are constitutionally protected from government silencing. They are not entitled to a platform, though, and they are not protected from personal and professional backlash. You can think the backlash is dumb, but that doesn't make it a violation of free speech. Having consequences to your speech is not the same as having your freedom of speech suppressed, and I would have appreciated more clarity from Sasse on that.
At the same time, I agree with him that we should all grow a thicker skin and try to listen more to ideas that make us uncomfortable. Doing so can either change our minds or reinforce our existing views for the better. We need more empathy and better critical thinking skills. I just think framing that claim in terms of freedom of speech is a straw man argument.
On a final critical note, the desire to return to a past golden time of community togetherness fails to acknowledge just how crappy that past was for a whole lot of Americans - particularly people of color, immigrants, and women. Native Americans, slaves, and their descendants had their sense of place and community brutally torn away from them - family togetherness and rootedness often weren't really options for them. If you're going to call for returning to traditional values, you HAVE to acknowledge that some of those traditional values were pretty sucky and we shouldn't want those ones back. Sasse kind of acknowledges this sometimes, but his argument could have been strengthened by discussing the ways our political and cultural structures have historically destroyed community and family for a significant portion of the population
My quibbles came up rarely, though, in comparison to what I liked in this book. I loved Senator Sasse's main argument that social upheaval and isolation have pushed us into basing our sense of community on anti-tribes. We might not know our neighbors' names, but we know we hate (insert people of opposite political and social views here). My friends shouldn't just be the enemies of my enemies. That's no path to happiness or sound governing.
He also has great points on the media, and makes good arguments for both for liberal journalists being more balanced in their reporting and for conservatives to stop dismissing legitimate reporting as "fake news." He also makes an impassioned case for all of us to be wary of outrage "journalism" that feeds on our anger and our desire for entertainment.
Overall, this really got me thinking and self-evaluating. I'm going to see if there are ways for me to be more integrated into my real community - to find my tribes - instead of obsessing over the ugliness of national politics. I can do more good right where I am, and I'll probably be happier in the process.
November 13, 2018
This book does have much good information in it, but I found it to be ultimately unsatisfying.
I picked up this book as soon as I heard about it because I do respect that Senator Sasse is one of the few adults left in the Republican Party in the Senate and I wanted to hear his views. He puts the cause of the current polarization and hyper-partisanship primarily down to the reduction of community involvement. He fondly recalls the "Friday night game" environment of his home town where the community came together to cheer on the local high school teams. Since Senator Sasse's father was a high school coach, he and his family were in the thick of it, and I think this gave Senator Sasse a somewhat distorted view of the extent of community. His father naturally got to know many more people in the community than most because of the nature of his profession. But I do agree that community was different back before social media added an entirely new dimension to a community's interaction and communication. People do interact with each other on a more personal level when face-to-face, and are usually more respectful. (Sadly, I think even that is eroding in the last few years). I agree that the trend towards more online communication is feeding the polarization.
I did find Senator Sasse's several examples of how conservatives feel marginalized to be helpful and somewhat enlightening. I felt he was giving a balanced view until he hit the subject of free speech on campus. He explained that when protestors began to successfully suppress conservative speakers and viewpoints, conservative students responded by escalating to inviting provocateurs such as Milo Yiannopoulos. He does expressly say that Yiannopoulus does not have conservative views, and that the students promoting him are doing it out of reaction to their speech being suppressed. But he doesn't criticize or condemn that escalation, and I feel that is one of the big causes of how we are as polarized as we are: Each side feels that they need to escalate their action in response to a harm done to them. I do agree with his points that legitimate conservative speakers should be given a voice, and that there should be open debate on ideas on campus, but stopping the escalation is important too.
I liked that Senator Sasse called Sean Hannity out as being a huckster who is getting rich off of fomenting fear and hate. I wish he had called out others more strongly as well (Limbaugh and Alex Jones come to mind). An angry audience is a loyal audience, but I believe that right wing pundit media has done tremendous damage to the country over the past 30 years.
So I was with Senator Sasse for the vast majority of his book. I might have veered off in a slightly different direction in places, but I agree with the general gist of the book. As we neared the end of the book, Senator Sasse was putting great emphasis on the need for rational, civil discussion of the issues. However, he said twice that he was not for a compromised "mushy middle ground". I heard this to mean he is willing to talk about the issues, but don't expect him to come around to a different opinion. What is the point of the discussion then? Is it only to give him a chance to convince everyone his way is best? I found this to be extremely disappointing.
Finally, he ignored the elephant in the room: He gives many examples of behavior that is driving the country apart, but fails to mention that most of them are practiced by the current resident of the White House who relishes in "owning the libs" at every opportunity, and offers no remedy to that. He can lead by example in the Senate, but when the Majority Leader supports Trump and uses any means to justify his ends, Senator Sasse's good example get lost in the noise. This was the most depressing conclusion I came to after finishing the book.
I picked up this book as soon as I heard about it because I do respect that Senator Sasse is one of the few adults left in the Republican Party in the Senate and I wanted to hear his views. He puts the cause of the current polarization and hyper-partisanship primarily down to the reduction of community involvement. He fondly recalls the "Friday night game" environment of his home town where the community came together to cheer on the local high school teams. Since Senator Sasse's father was a high school coach, he and his family were in the thick of it, and I think this gave Senator Sasse a somewhat distorted view of the extent of community. His father naturally got to know many more people in the community than most because of the nature of his profession. But I do agree that community was different back before social media added an entirely new dimension to a community's interaction and communication. People do interact with each other on a more personal level when face-to-face, and are usually more respectful. (Sadly, I think even that is eroding in the last few years). I agree that the trend towards more online communication is feeding the polarization.
I did find Senator Sasse's several examples of how conservatives feel marginalized to be helpful and somewhat enlightening. I felt he was giving a balanced view until he hit the subject of free speech on campus. He explained that when protestors began to successfully suppress conservative speakers and viewpoints, conservative students responded by escalating to inviting provocateurs such as Milo Yiannopoulos. He does expressly say that Yiannopoulus does not have conservative views, and that the students promoting him are doing it out of reaction to their speech being suppressed. But he doesn't criticize or condemn that escalation, and I feel that is one of the big causes of how we are as polarized as we are: Each side feels that they need to escalate their action in response to a harm done to them. I do agree with his points that legitimate conservative speakers should be given a voice, and that there should be open debate on ideas on campus, but stopping the escalation is important too.
I liked that Senator Sasse called Sean Hannity out as being a huckster who is getting rich off of fomenting fear and hate. I wish he had called out others more strongly as well (Limbaugh and Alex Jones come to mind). An angry audience is a loyal audience, but I believe that right wing pundit media has done tremendous damage to the country over the past 30 years.
So I was with Senator Sasse for the vast majority of his book. I might have veered off in a slightly different direction in places, but I agree with the general gist of the book. As we neared the end of the book, Senator Sasse was putting great emphasis on the need for rational, civil discussion of the issues. However, he said twice that he was not for a compromised "mushy middle ground". I heard this to mean he is willing to talk about the issues, but don't expect him to come around to a different opinion. What is the point of the discussion then? Is it only to give him a chance to convince everyone his way is best? I found this to be extremely disappointing.
Finally, he ignored the elephant in the room: He gives many examples of behavior that is driving the country apart, but fails to mention that most of them are practiced by the current resident of the White House who relishes in "owning the libs" at every opportunity, and offers no remedy to that. He can lead by example in the Senate, but when the Majority Leader supports Trump and uses any means to justify his ends, Senator Sasse's good example get lost in the noise. This was the most depressing conclusion I came to after finishing the book.
December 3, 2018
Ben Sasse is worth reading. He adds to an ongoing conversation about what it means to live in a democratic republic, and even more basic, what it means to live in community. There is much in this book to commend, but Sasse spent a little more time on issues of technology than I felt necessary to make his points. I also came away from the book with an underlying feeling that I needed to live in a farming town in rural America to live out the principles advocated. Sasse didn't say as much, but the many anectdotes from his own life paint a picture of Mayberry life in rural America. Those living in different regions, or not experiencing yet the kind of community Sasse speaks of, may not fully appreciate the points behind the stories.
Sasse excels when speaking about the core issues of conservatism - home and community. He give practical advice for families struggling to navigate a high tech world with children. And he rightly speaks of politics being downstream from culture. We can learn much from Sasse and the many thinkers and writers he quotes. Whether or not the answers to hating one another are found in this book, it's a worthy contribution to the discussion.
Sasse excels when speaking about the core issues of conservatism - home and community. He give practical advice for families struggling to navigate a high tech world with children. And he rightly speaks of politics being downstream from culture. We can learn much from Sasse and the many thinkers and writers he quotes. Whether or not the answers to hating one another are found in this book, it's a worthy contribution to the discussion.
December 14, 2018
This is an excellent book which I listened to and now want an actual book so I can check things and research ideas. This book made me think outside my normal bubble. Senator Sasse I is from the Midwest where I was born and raised and I relate to his style and personality which seems familiar. I have been book talking this book to my coworkers at the library and I will keep on recommending it. Thank you, Ben Sasse.
December 31, 2020
First time I’ve ever given a book by a politician 5 stars (and I’ve gone out of my way to read quite a few). This book knocked my socks off. S/O Ean Snell for being my favorite person to get book ideas from on Goodreads!!
Sasse offered a concise and helpful discussion of the underlying currents that threaten a flourishing America. The book is mostly apolitical, and regardless of how you vote, I think you’d get a lot out of it. I’d suggest this book to anyone.
The only consistent flaw in this book, I thought, was the fact that Sasse was seeking to tackle enormous ideas in bite-size chapters. Consequently, I thought a lot of chapters only contained a pretty low resolution picture of their topic. BUT, if you’re gonna cast your net as wide as “what are America’s biggest challenges today”, and try to keep it under 300 pages, then it’s impossible to lend every idea the number of pages it’s worth. So this book is only topical. But it’s real real good.
Sasse offered a concise and helpful discussion of the underlying currents that threaten a flourishing America. The book is mostly apolitical, and regardless of how you vote, I think you’d get a lot out of it. I’d suggest this book to anyone.
The only consistent flaw in this book, I thought, was the fact that Sasse was seeking to tackle enormous ideas in bite-size chapters. Consequently, I thought a lot of chapters only contained a pretty low resolution picture of their topic. BUT, if you’re gonna cast your net as wide as “what are America’s biggest challenges today”, and try to keep it under 300 pages, then it’s impossible to lend every idea the number of pages it’s worth. So this book is only topical. But it’s real real good.
October 16, 2018
This is not a book about politics (if it was I would not be reading it) but that is not to say that politics does not come into play in the book. This is a book about how we became tribal and how we can start to fix that.
America is unique in the fact that we are a country of immigrants and we are not a country of shared heritage but America is an idea. This means it takes work to keep her stable. Sasse's theory is that we have become tribal through the breakdown of the community. We are more involved in our technology and do not take the time to build face to face relationships with people. He spoke about the idea of the mobile, the rooted, and the stuck. Each of these groups of people have their own issues. I am part of the mobile group (and my family has been for generations) so it is harder understand the rooted and the stuck. This does not help us communicate and empathize with each other.
I think my favorite part of the book was when he took on cable news and their part in the polarization of the country. Now there is probably very little (if anything) that Sasse and I would agree on policy wise but I could appreciate this book and the story he is trying to tell. I think I was more willing to give this book a try because of his background as an American History major and University President. This is a book more routed in history and facts as a result.
If you are someone who is interested in these types of micro-history books I would suggest giving it a try (it is in the same vane as a Malcolm Gladwell book). I would also say that if you are looking for a book to validate your political view point this is not your book.
America is unique in the fact that we are a country of immigrants and we are not a country of shared heritage but America is an idea. This means it takes work to keep her stable. Sasse's theory is that we have become tribal through the breakdown of the community. We are more involved in our technology and do not take the time to build face to face relationships with people. He spoke about the idea of the mobile, the rooted, and the stuck. Each of these groups of people have their own issues. I am part of the mobile group (and my family has been for generations) so it is harder understand the rooted and the stuck. This does not help us communicate and empathize with each other.
I think my favorite part of the book was when he took on cable news and their part in the polarization of the country. Now there is probably very little (if anything) that Sasse and I would agree on policy wise but I could appreciate this book and the story he is trying to tell. I think I was more willing to give this book a try because of his background as an American History major and University President. This is a book more routed in history and facts as a result.
If you are someone who is interested in these types of micro-history books I would suggest giving it a try (it is in the same vane as a Malcolm Gladwell book). I would also say that if you are looking for a book to validate your political view point this is not your book.
March 7, 2019
In a world that gravitates towards painting one another either red or blue in a dehumanizing move of creating an "us" verse "them" culture, Ben Sasse's newest volume comes as a breath of fresh air. Senator Sasse examines multiple perceived causes for the rift between citizens in our hyper-politicized culture and offers a healing way forward. Moreover, Sasse demonstrates what it looks like to operate and write out of one's worldview, without seeming embarrassed by it, while constructively and sometimes critically engaging with those who disagree. Finally, the Senator from Nebraska exhibits for readers how to remain consistent in one's worldview even if it puts you at odds with those who share your positions, even if in name only. I recommend this work to anyone who, like me, feels politically homeless or to those who are just tired from the lack of nuance and antagonization we see in our modern American society.
March 22, 2019
I took this one out because I thought it would get political. I was pleasantly surprised.
People in America are divided along many lines; race, religion, political ideals, socioeconomic status, and other demographics. Ben Sasse explores the reasons why in this timely and incisive book. It is fantastically interesting while being clear at the same time.
Historically, Americans had many tribes; groups that they could join to stave off the intense pain of loneliness. However, those traditional bastions of togetherness are gradually eroding away. From Church service to Rotary Clubs and other such programs, people are dropping out and not being replaced. Little Leagues are fading, neighbors don’t check on each other, our social structure is losing its stability. Now you may read that previous sentence and smile at the maudlin sentimentality dripping from it, but loneliness is a serious issue.
To illustrate this, Sasse turns to the 1995 Chicago heatwave. Many of the people that died in that heatwave did not have someone to check on them or make sure that they were okay. So their rotting corpses weren’t found until days later when they were fully ripe and perceptible from outside their door. Is that what you would want? Probably not. I can’t imagine someone wanting to die alone and unwanted.
Even when it comes to job satisfaction Sasse says we are losing. Back in the day you lived in your neighborhood, knew everyone and played with everyone. The child of the police officer would play with the child of the mechanic. This was aided by the fact that people kept their jobs and felt an identity with them. However, that too has changed. People keep the same job for about four years now on average, electing to have some kind of long-distance impersonal relationship with their co-workers. The advancement of technology has also exacerbated the rift between classes. The rich are getting richer while the poor are getting poorer. When you are poor, you don’t have a lot of the same advantages that a rich person would have. Say you are the child of a single mom. Dad is a deadbeat that hasn’t ever paid child support, you live practically hand to mouth. Do you really have the money or connections to enter into college and drag yourself up by your bootstraps? The answer to that is also probably not.
Take me for instance. I don’t particularly like my neighbors; they are rude and noisy. They have a terrible taste in music and the source of their income is rather veiled and unusual. I wouldn’t trust them to check on my home or even mow my lawn if I wasn’t around.
Sasse has solutions to this in his book. This too is interesting. I would recommend this book to almost anyone I know, and even those I don't know. The book is just that good.
People in America are divided along many lines; race, religion, political ideals, socioeconomic status, and other demographics. Ben Sasse explores the reasons why in this timely and incisive book. It is fantastically interesting while being clear at the same time.
Historically, Americans had many tribes; groups that they could join to stave off the intense pain of loneliness. However, those traditional bastions of togetherness are gradually eroding away. From Church service to Rotary Clubs and other such programs, people are dropping out and not being replaced. Little Leagues are fading, neighbors don’t check on each other, our social structure is losing its stability. Now you may read that previous sentence and smile at the maudlin sentimentality dripping from it, but loneliness is a serious issue.
To illustrate this, Sasse turns to the 1995 Chicago heatwave. Many of the people that died in that heatwave did not have someone to check on them or make sure that they were okay. So their rotting corpses weren’t found until days later when they were fully ripe and perceptible from outside their door. Is that what you would want? Probably not. I can’t imagine someone wanting to die alone and unwanted.
Even when it comes to job satisfaction Sasse says we are losing. Back in the day you lived in your neighborhood, knew everyone and played with everyone. The child of the police officer would play with the child of the mechanic. This was aided by the fact that people kept their jobs and felt an identity with them. However, that too has changed. People keep the same job for about four years now on average, electing to have some kind of long-distance impersonal relationship with their co-workers. The advancement of technology has also exacerbated the rift between classes. The rich are getting richer while the poor are getting poorer. When you are poor, you don’t have a lot of the same advantages that a rich person would have. Say you are the child of a single mom. Dad is a deadbeat that hasn’t ever paid child support, you live practically hand to mouth. Do you really have the money or connections to enter into college and drag yourself up by your bootstraps? The answer to that is also probably not.
Take me for instance. I don’t particularly like my neighbors; they are rude and noisy. They have a terrible taste in music and the source of their income is rather veiled and unusual. I wouldn’t trust them to check on my home or even mow my lawn if I wasn’t around.
Sasse has solutions to this in his book. This too is interesting. I would recommend this book to almost anyone I know, and even those I don't know. The book is just that good.
Read
April 1, 2019I read this book for my church’s book club and it fostered some excellent discussion. Sasse’s point is that our identity as Americans should be bigger than our identity as Republican or Democrat or pro-this, pro-that. Maintaining the republic means that we have the capacity to disagree but that we also maintain the dignity of all human persons, including those with whom we disagree. Sasse believes that we’re living in a time of unprecedented change with technology and our digital economy, and that these changes have tendencies to isolate us from each other when it’s purposefully living in our local communities that will give us the very tools we need to maintain the republic and to put politics in its proper place (the means to the end of upholding the dignity of each person). I loved reading this book in community. It’s not the kind of book I normally gravitate towards, but the concepts are worth considering and, more than that, essential to understanding life and the world of politics in America today.
February 8, 2019
Wow what an outstanding and enlightening book! You would have to be living under a very large rock if you didn’t feel the immense polarization of the two political parties in this nation these days. I had to long ago stop watching cable news and log off social media it was too full of overwhelming rage and political chaos for my liking. This is exactly what Senator Sasse suggests in his book. Refocus our priorities. Put down your smartphone and play with your kids. Go out into your community and help one another. Socialize. Ask questions why a person feels the way they do and listen! I can’t say enough good about Senator Sasse - and it’s not just because he’s a fellow Nebraskan either! Common sense get off your phone and treat your fellow Americans with dignity and respect! Read this book! It just might change your life!
October 27, 2018
A good compilation of others’ writing on social capital (or the lack thereof) in our society (e.g., Robert Putnam, Yuval Levin, et al.). I kept thinking Sasse must be reading Wendell Berry given the emphasis on place, but no Berry reference at all. One way to summarize the book: place matters, so be rooted. Be the kind of person who is rooted in a particular place and loves a particular people. For Christians, that’s fundamentally the role of the local church—and the church at its finest.
November 15, 2018
My great frustration with this book is how correct I believe his thesis to be and how easy it could be for us as a country/nation/world to look beyond the small tribal boundaries that divide us to the greater tribal beliefs that unite us and how slim I fear the chances are that enough folks who COULD make a difference would be willing TO make a difference.
April 17, 2021
Dear every single American: *please* read this!!
May 6, 2023
Five stars for his message.
Sasse contends that the bonds that used to unite us as communities and Americans have weakened—families are scattered as people become more mobile, neighbors have become less important to us as we follow more individual pursuits, and we participate less in various groups that used to promote and unify our civic life. The result is that our political beliefs, which should be of only secondary importance, have come to serve as major identifiers for many, creating new communities and “tribes.” But this can cause a toxic hostility toward those outside of our tribe. Mass media and social media benefit from this separation and further perpetuate it. This is the problem that Sasse describes and hopes to reverse.
The changes he argues for are predominantly cultural rather than political. He urges that we stop treating the political opposition as the enemy, and instead renew our commitments to what people on both sides agree are the most important things in life.
Here are a couple quotes:
- Progressives see the world as a battle between victims and oppressors;
- Conservatives see the world as a battle between civilization and barbarism;
- Liberarians see the world as a battle between freedom and coercion.
‘... Progressives, "in their eagerness to empathize with the victim ... can turn the victim into an object rather than an independent actor. Poor people are so oppressed in the liberal view, they don't just have limited agency to choose and live life in meaningful ways."
Conservatives, on the other hand, "in their zeal to preserve civilization and the American way of life," often " demonize those that they see as a threat to civilization. They can forget that most immigrants are hard-working individuals who want a better life for their children." Finally, libertarians…"often romanticize the power of economic freedom. We struggle to imagine that some people are poorly served by markets, that some transactions involve exploitation of ignorance and that the self-regulation of markets can fail.
[…]
‘When we understand these different starting points, it's easier to empathize with political opponents, even if we still passionately disagree with their policy preferences. Understanding each other better doesn't mean that we stop debating and join hands around the campfire- but it does help us to talk, having dispensed with the self-deceptive assumption that our opponents simply hate and want to crush us. When we start from the assumption that our opponents are like us—decent folks who want what's best but who start from a different place—we are more likely to be respectful and to have a conversation that's productive. We can treat our opponents as individuals rather than as representatives of some malevolent bloc.’
‘There is a deep and corrosive tribal impulse to act as if "the enemy of my enemy is my friend."
But sometimes the enemy of your enemy is just a jackass.’
Sasse contends that the bonds that used to unite us as communities and Americans have weakened—families are scattered as people become more mobile, neighbors have become less important to us as we follow more individual pursuits, and we participate less in various groups that used to promote and unify our civic life. The result is that our political beliefs, which should be of only secondary importance, have come to serve as major identifiers for many, creating new communities and “tribes.” But this can cause a toxic hostility toward those outside of our tribe. Mass media and social media benefit from this separation and further perpetuate it. This is the problem that Sasse describes and hopes to reverse.
The changes he argues for are predominantly cultural rather than political. He urges that we stop treating the political opposition as the enemy, and instead renew our commitments to what people on both sides agree are the most important things in life.
Here are a couple quotes:
- Progressives see the world as a battle between victims and oppressors;
- Conservatives see the world as a battle between civilization and barbarism;
- Liberarians see the world as a battle between freedom and coercion.
‘... Progressives, "in their eagerness to empathize with the victim ... can turn the victim into an object rather than an independent actor. Poor people are so oppressed in the liberal view, they don't just have limited agency to choose and live life in meaningful ways."
Conservatives, on the other hand, "in their zeal to preserve civilization and the American way of life," often " demonize those that they see as a threat to civilization. They can forget that most immigrants are hard-working individuals who want a better life for their children." Finally, libertarians…"often romanticize the power of economic freedom. We struggle to imagine that some people are poorly served by markets, that some transactions involve exploitation of ignorance and that the self-regulation of markets can fail.
[…]
‘When we understand these different starting points, it's easier to empathize with political opponents, even if we still passionately disagree with their policy preferences. Understanding each other better doesn't mean that we stop debating and join hands around the campfire- but it does help us to talk, having dispensed with the self-deceptive assumption that our opponents simply hate and want to crush us. When we start from the assumption that our opponents are like us—decent folks who want what's best but who start from a different place—we are more likely to be respectful and to have a conversation that's productive. We can treat our opponents as individuals rather than as representatives of some malevolent bloc.’
‘There is a deep and corrosive tribal impulse to act as if "the enemy of my enemy is my friend."
But sometimes the enemy of your enemy is just a jackass.’
March 20, 2019
Ben Sasse proved to me in this book why I'm proud to be a conservative. Sasse's conservatism is rooted in a Tocquevillian sensibility that the bonds that make us human and whole are the bonds of those closest to us, our family, our friends, our communities and our neighbors. More than any other politician in my lifetime Sasse masterfully uses the lingo of great conservatives like Russell Kirk. He makes the case for this kind of conservatism with a clear eye on the nation's problems and a responsible analysis on changes that will remake our economy and society. Sasse demonstrates how we meet these changes by holding on to what is authentic. Loved learning more about Sasse and his ideas throughout this book.
But despite how compelling I found the book I do not think it would be persuasive to many of my friends on the left. Sasse is interested in acknowledging the concerns of the left in this book but does not take the time to engage their ideas. Race and poverty are major blind spots for American conservatism and the kinds of social bonds Sasse praises have not been available to many people of color in this country. Slavery made them impossible and the nasty history of this country through Jim Crow, white flight, and disparities in the criminal justice system have made these things difficult to attain. These deep problems cannot just be solved by people going to high school basketball games together or putting their phones down. The critique that civility does protect the status quo too often is acknowledged by Sasse but only so that it can be glossed over. Sasse throughout the books takes pains to show he is aware of the arguments of the left but engages them a little less than I desired. But I hope he writes more.
Again, this is a political book which does show that first rate minds and conscientious citizens do make it to Washington D.C. and I'm glad I read it. Recommend others give it a try but I don't think this will appeal to anyone outside the Sasse fan club.
But despite how compelling I found the book I do not think it would be persuasive to many of my friends on the left. Sasse is interested in acknowledging the concerns of the left in this book but does not take the time to engage their ideas. Race and poverty are major blind spots for American conservatism and the kinds of social bonds Sasse praises have not been available to many people of color in this country. Slavery made them impossible and the nasty history of this country through Jim Crow, white flight, and disparities in the criminal justice system have made these things difficult to attain. These deep problems cannot just be solved by people going to high school basketball games together or putting their phones down. The critique that civility does protect the status quo too often is acknowledged by Sasse but only so that it can be glossed over. Sasse throughout the books takes pains to show he is aware of the arguments of the left but engages them a little less than I desired. But I hope he writes more.
Again, this is a political book which does show that first rate minds and conscientious citizens do make it to Washington D.C. and I'm glad I read it. Recommend others give it a try but I don't think this will appeal to anyone outside the Sasse fan club.
February 24, 2021
Ben Sasse has an amazing work in "Them", his assessment of the issues plaguing American society and politics. With his background in history and philosophy, he approaches the topic not with a partisan politics approach, but by analyzing the underlying issues causing intense division and rapid disintegration of classical American values. My favorite quote from the book comes in the last chapter:
"We are in a period of unprecedented upheaval. Community is collapsing, anxiety is building, and we're distracting ourselves with artificial political hatreds. That can't endure. And if it does, America won't."
"We are in a period of unprecedented upheaval. Community is collapsing, anxiety is building, and we're distracting ourselves with artificial political hatreds. That can't endure. And if it does, America won't."
May 1, 2021
To be very honest this just wasn't that interesting and didn't provide any new information. I'm sure it's something I'll forget within the week.
It also just felt like the book kept preaching non-partisanship while inserting mini conservative jabs and arguments; there is perhaps no such thing as objectivity in a book about politics, written by a politician.
(Also, Sasse may be Gen X but this book is rife with boomer energy)
It also just felt like the book kept preaching non-partisanship while inserting mini conservative jabs and arguments; there is perhaps no such thing as objectivity in a book about politics, written by a politician.
(Also, Sasse may be Gen X but this book is rife with boomer energy)
August 11, 2023
Much less political than I expected, but an intellectually stimulating analysis of the challenges we face as a society, the additional struggles that likely lie ahead, and some potential micro-level solutions we can each adopt to live more satisfying lives in the digital era.
November 17, 2021
Amen, Mr. Sasse. Amen. And the length of the book was perfect. I enjoyed the in-depth discussion surrounding community, technology, and connection. I didn’t find this book to be politically driven at all, but rather a call for civility and increased community. I loved that he doesn’t put stock into political entertainment (and doesn’t feel threatened by it either). I actually felt hope that the majority of people aren’t actually watching Fox News and MSNBC. Limiting my news intake to Reuters only has been one of the best decisions I have made recently.
December 22, 2021
Another important book. As clear a summary of the current "lay of the land" as I've read.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 760 reviews