The Bottom Line
Reads as if Zúniga set out to write a guide for activists, and ended up writing a scrambled history of post-9/11 liberal e-activism instead. If you already love Kos, pick it up; the stories are worth reading. If you don't already love Kos, this book will not make you a believer.
Pros
- Surveys liberal e-activism over the past seven years, from the point of view of a netroots leader.
- Includes an interesting, if brief, overview of how Markos Moulitsas Zúniga created DailyKos.
- A must-read for any and all DailyKos addicts.
Cons
- Contrary to subtitle, actually contains almost no useful information on how to effect change.
- Voice is very impersonal. You don't feel like you know Kos much better after you've finished.
- The book is not organized very well.
- Zúniga doesn't sound like a radical.
Description
- New York: Celebra/Penguin, 2008. $23.95. ISBN 978-0-451-22519-1. 288 pages.
- The DailyKos founder explains his philosophy of e-activism.
- Written as a modern-day counterpart to Saul Alinsky's Rules for Radicals.
Guide Review - Markos Moulitsas Zúniga, Taking on the System (2008)
In his classic Rules for Radicals, community organizer Saul Alinsky begins by comparing his book to Machiavelli's The Prince. In The Prince, Alinsky explains, the Haves learn how to hold on to power; in Rules for Radicals, the Have-nots learn how to take it away. Alinsky packs a lot of material in his little book, and you can imagine a group of young radicals working their way through it discussing a page a day, like Talmud scholars. It's infuriating as often as it is enlightening, and you come away from it not necessarily sure that you like or agree with Alinsky, but quite sure that he made you think and think hard.
Zúniga set a high bar when he intentionally patterned Taking on the System after Alinsky's classic and, as often happens when people set a high bar, he didn't jump it.
The most important difference between Taking on the System and Rules for Radicals is that the latter actually tells you how to do community organizing. Kos' book is more of a ramble. He tells you about nearly every major e-activism issue he's been involved in over the past seven years, providing examples of various types of activism along the way, but he doesn't tell you what you, personally, can do to become the next Kos. He seems much more interested in making the reader feel like part of a movement--whether the reader is ready to commit or not. By the time I finished chapter five (on the dangers of "Feeding the Backlash" by criticizing liberal allies), I felt better about not sending my dog to obedience school.
This is not to say that Kos is a bad writer. Kos is an excellent writer--with, I hope, many decades of work ahead of him--and when he's really ready to take on his own version of Rules for Radicals, I'm sure it'll be worth reading.
Unfortunately, this ain't it.
Zúniga set a high bar when he intentionally patterned Taking on the System after Alinsky's classic and, as often happens when people set a high bar, he didn't jump it.
The most important difference between Taking on the System and Rules for Radicals is that the latter actually tells you how to do community organizing. Kos' book is more of a ramble. He tells you about nearly every major e-activism issue he's been involved in over the past seven years, providing examples of various types of activism along the way, but he doesn't tell you what you, personally, can do to become the next Kos. He seems much more interested in making the reader feel like part of a movement--whether the reader is ready to commit or not. By the time I finished chapter five (on the dangers of "Feeding the Backlash" by criticizing liberal allies), I felt better about not sending my dog to obedience school.
This is not to say that Kos is a bad writer. Kos is an excellent writer--with, I hope, many decades of work ahead of him--and when he's really ready to take on his own version of Rules for Radicals, I'm sure it'll be worth reading.
Unfortunately, this ain't it.
