Only the Super-Rich Can Save Us!

by Ralph Nader

"In the cozy den of the large but modest house in Omaha where he has lived since he started on his first billion, Warren Buffett watched the horrors of Hurricane Katrina unfold on television in early September 2005. . . . On the fourth day, he beheld in disbelief the paralysis of local, state, and federal authorities unable to commence basic operations of rescue and sustenance, not just in New Orleans, but in towns and villages all along the Gulf Coast. . . He knew exactly what he had to do. . ."

So begins the vivid fictional account by political activist and bestselling author Ralph Nader that answers the question, "What if?" What if a cadre of superrich individuals tried to become a driving force in America to organize and institutionalize the interests of the citizens of this troubled nation? What if some of America's most powerful individuals decided it was time to fix our government and return the power to the people? What if they focused their power on unionizing Wal-Mart? What if a national political party were formed with the sole purpose of advancing clean elections? What if these seventeen superrich individuals decided to galvanize a movement for alternative forms of energy that will effectively clean up the environment? What if together they took on corporate goliaths and Congress to provide the necessities of life and advance the solutions so long left on the shelf by an avaricious oligarchy? What could happen?

This extraordinary story, written by the author who knows the most about citizen action, returns us to the literature of American social movements—to Edward Bellamy, to Upton Sinclair, to John Steinbeck, to Stephen Crane—reminding us in the process that changing the body politic of America starts with imagination.

Genres: Fiction, Politics

736 pages, Hardcover

First published September 1, 2009

About the author

American attorney, author, lecturer, political activist, and candidate for President of the United States in five elections, including the last election 0f 2008, with his role in the 2000 election in particular being subject to much debate.

Areas of particular concern to Nader include consumer rights, humanitarianism, environmentalism, and democratic government. Nader is the first Arab American presidential candidate in the U.S.

Reviews

[Chad · Rating 4 out of 5]

Oh, Ralph, you starry-eyed dreamer. The sheer amount of ridiculous optimism and faith in humanity is almost enough to make you gag. If your political views skew away from Mr. Nader's particular vision of utopia, there is no way you'd make it past even the first ten pages of this book. If you're a fan of his populist brand of civic-mindedness, you may still find yourself unable to get through a few chapters. This is not an elegently written novel, and is chock-full of tediously detailed speeches and proposals and philosophical political talk. It is essentially the Ralph Nader playbook, laid out in meticulous detail. An elaborate vision of how everything would play out if 17 American billionaires were suddenly possessed by the spirit of populist activism, and decided to spend their money on remaking America into a Naderian utopia.

What it lacks in style it makes for up with bountifully over-flowing substance. It would have been easy to award this 3 stars on its literary merits, but it earns the extra star (in my book anyway) just for the sheer gumption it required to concoct so many drastically optimistic assumptions about how easy it would be to get everyone in America to wake up and confront the corruption and massive ideological rut that corporate America represents. Much eye-rolling occured as I read how Nader posits one could potentially tackle everything from corporate welfare, campaign finance reform, political lobbyists, anti-union sentiments, third-party political candidates, negative political campaigning, ultra-conservative talk radio, green energy, to just about every other domestic political issue every politician has ever talked about for the last 30 years.

I recently read "Advise and Consent", a rather amazing novel that deals with politics by way of humanizing the various players on Capitol Hill as they work through a Senate confirmation hearing. In that work, author, Alan Drury, gets into the heads of several politicians and shows you all their perspectives on the issue and how their different backgrounds and philosophies and good intentions tangle together to create the chaotic and brilliant democracy that makes America great. Nader has written an equally political novel here, but he doesn't even attempt to show you all the shades of grey. Everything is black and white. This doesn't necessarily reflect the reality of democracy, but it does effectively demonstrate many of the injustices and inequalities present in our society. The CEOs and lobbyists and idealogue politicians of real life may not actually be the cartoon characters that Nader writes, but I don't think Nader is trying to accurately represent reality as much as he's trying to create some story-telling shortcuts that allow him to focus more on the specifics of his agenda.

And lord have mercy do you get the specifics of his agenda! One of the things most people probably don't realize about politicians and business-people is that success does not just fall into these people's laps. Success comes from hard work and meticulous planning and a patient, bull-headed, blunt-force approach to learning and strategizing and planning for all contigencies. The amazing thing about this book, and the very thing that will prevent most people from finishing it (or even picking it up in the first place), is that Nader shows you step by super-specific step exactly what would have to be done in order to inact his utopia. There are huge chunks of the work that read like detailed power-point slides. Here is a sample of dialogue from one of Nader's billionaires, Bill Cosby:

"One thing's for sure. We'll need every tool and idea we can muster to reach, inform, and organize the people. And we'll need all the power of the media and arts to immunize them against the anticipated pack of lies and smears and manipulative propaganda from the plutocrats. This is essential, to head off the master foolers who can command large audiences in every medium."

Who talks like that?? Certainly not Bill Cosby!! But all 17 of Nader billionaires do. And yet, in addition to spouting idealized platitudes about how to fight such a great and important battle, there are also big chunks of mind-numbingly practical idea-spouting that betray just how banal business and politics can be. Here is a passage were Warren Buffett explains how to keep one of the group's projects running smoothly:

"First, each Redirectional project will have one manager and one clerk - that is all. Their function will be to keep things moving, locate glitches, and report any crucial logjams or opposition to the Secretariat for higher-lever action. Keeping the staff slim accors with a managerial philosophy of devolution, which means always pushing the work and energy down to the community or to the best real-life platform. Otherwise we'll end up building a top-heavy apparatus, and we all know where that leads."

Boy do we.

Its almost absurd the sheer volume of practical thought Nader has put into how to manage the dozens of projects his billionaires put into play. But if you can wade through all the planning and meetings (the billionaires meet once a month in Maui to stay current on the progress of their plans, so there are no less than TEN such meetings described in every logistical detail!) you will be entertained to no end by some of the plans themselves.

Things like running Warren Beatty against Arnold in the Californian gubernatorial campaign. Its out there, but honestly, who wouldn't vote for Beatty if he rounded up dozens of billionaires in the state and got them all to donate all the money they saved in ill-gotten tax cuts back to the state treasury? That would never happen in a million years, but wouldn't it be cool if it did? Or Bill Cosby and Paul Newman trying to pass legislation to change the national song to "America the Beautiful" (which is far more peaceful and representative of the American ideal than the violent and militaristic "The Star Spangled Banner") and to change the end of the Pledge of Allegiance to "...and justice for SOME." Pie-in-the-sky? Absolutely! But for Nader, in addition to drawing attention to social injustices, it also works to distract conservative pundits while the less famous billionaires in the group (like Max Palevsky and Joe Jamail) organize labor groups on the down-low or develop strategies to widen access for the middle class and the poor to the legal system. And there's just something stupidly naive and charming about Yoko Ono designing logos that Nader describes as being so immediatley evocative of hope and peace and civic duty that millions of people will be wearing them on buttons and t-shirts in a few months time.

And the bad guys of the piece are so transparently evil, you can tell that Nader just tossed them in there for comic relief. He's pretty kind to some of his portrayals of a few corrupt politicians and even President Bush, all of whom see the error of their ways and give into the sweeping legistative agenda the Meliorists (what the billionaires decide to call themselves) set in motion. Our heroes are practically palling around with the President at the end of the novel. And one formerly corporate-owned politician practically makes a public apology declares himself for the opposition after being defeated in election by a third-party candidate. No, Nader saves his scorn for a few choice characature-villains, most notably Lancelot Lobo, a corporate raider who literally makes out with his pet pit-bull to relieve stress and has primal and uncontrollable yearnings for Yoko Ono. Again, the villany is so over-the-top, you can't believe Nader wants you to take it seriously. And although the biggest bad-guy is obviously fabricated, Nader does get in a few good licks on some real-life blowhards, who he cryptically calls Bush Bimbaugh and Pawn Vanity. And you know the author is just indulging himself when he has Ted Turner appear on Bimbaugh's show, then proceed to shove him into a corner and hijack his radio show for a few seconds.

In the end, its a combination of seemingly disparate elements that helped me to really enjoy this book. The meticulous detail of the plans, the audacity of the initiatives, the over-the-top flogging of the representative bad-guys. Somehow, it all worked for me.

This book isn't even close to being for everybody. But if you've ever wondered what the world would be like if really rich people suddenly became ultra-altruistic, and offered the lower and middle classes the same resources as big business uses to steer legislation in thier favor, then this is a fascinating read. If you like Ralph Nader even a little bit, then this book is a very detailed glimpse into how things would work if he had his way.

[Sam · Rating 2 out of 5]

I read this whole book. It nearly killed me, but I read every word. All 734 boring, boring, boring pages of it.

Let me start by saying I love Ralph Nader for his integrity, his idealism, and his uncompromising morality. He's done more for this country on any random day of his life than most people do in the entirety of theirs. He has some great ideas for this country, and a clear vision of justice for all Americans.

That said, he can't write fiction for crap. Excuse me, he calls this book a "practical utopia." Either way, it's a terribly written novel.

The dialogue sounds like Nader's stump speeches, regardless of who's speaking. There is zero character development, no reversals or twists, and the villains are impotent in their threat to the hero's pursuits. Every challenge they face is met with a graceful and easy solution. The only scene that really contained any excitement for me was the two pages where Ted Turner had an entertaining altercation on Rush Limbaugh's show.

Dramatic shortcomings aside, what Nader has created is a step-by-step playbook for how to transform the country by eliminating corruption and waste by arousing and empowering a disenfranchised electorate, should any group with $15 billion to spare want to try it.

I hope that Nader comes out with a slim guidebook to the undertakings and strategies employed by the hero's of this book, because it's all important, brilliant, necessary changes that need to happen for the sake of democracy, equality, and justice; but in this format they are practically inaccessible.

[Tabitha · Rating 2 out of 5]

It is very obvious this book was written before 2008. Had I read it when it was a new release, I think I would have been enamored of it. Nadar writes, in this work of fiction, what would happen if the super-rich combined their fortunes, power, intellect and creativity to make the U.S. a better and more egaliterian place to live. Many of the ideas presented a great, like making corporations rent to public airwaves (rather than have them given away, as they currently are), or having stockholders approve CEO pay, or allowing humans to register as corporations to demonstrate the incredible breaks corporations are given in this country, or flooding regulatory institutions with petitions and lawsuits to make them actually regulate industries. These are wonderful ideas that could really help change this country for the better.

The problem lies in the old saying that you can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink. Nadar supposes that, having been lead to water, the American people will take up the banner and push reforms through Congress because they recognize the need. It is clear in 2011, seven years after the book's publication, that America does not work like that. One of the reforms the super-rich in Nadar's fiction push for is universal healthcare. The super-rich propose legislation for universal healthcare, and it becomes law in the book because Americans rally behind the cause. Nadar's Americans see the benefit of universal healthcare and push for it. In reality, Americans relate universal healthcare to 'death panels' that will shoot grandma like she were old yeller.

Nadar's fiction pre-supposes that the progressive movement started with the super-rich will be better sold that the message of any opposition. Conservatives are the best salesmen in the nation; no patriotic parrot is going to beat conservatives at their own game. The financial meltdown, and the lack of financial change to come from it, exemplify the abilities of conservatives and corporations alike to dictate the terms of the debate.

There are great ideas in Nadar's book, and for a moment you can be inspired that a person that has spent his entire life as a community organizer still has hope that the nation can change for the better. Then, however, you realize that the past few years saw events that brought us as close to the reforms Nadar offers in his book, and, each time, we dropped the ball. The past few years, in fact, are evidence that the biggest fiction in Nadar's book is not that the super-rich might part with billions of their dollars and try to better the world. The biggest fiction of the book is Americans will rally around common-sense reforms and organize themselves to make life easier and more fair for themselves and millions of others. No, Mr. Nadar, this is the biggest dream of your book, and the one most likely to never come true.

[David · Rating 1 out of 5]

I am not finished with this, and I probably won't, but here are some preliminary thoughts, as I’ve almost put this book down about a dozen times already in annoyance:

--Nader writes very clumsy fiction, where all the characters are interchangeable. If you covered up the names next to the quotes, you would not be able to determine who was speaking by the mannerisms or personalities of the person speaking.
--Much like when a TV show is billed as an “event,” this book is almost presented as an “event,” something “Important,” being compared to Thomas Paine’s Common Sense. Much like a TV show being labeled an “event” makes it self-important and silly, so it goes with this book. It’s fiction, no more, even if it is Ralph Nader writing it.
--700 pages? Doris Kearns Goodwin writing about Lincoln deserves 700 pages. Nader just going off about super-rich people trying to save the world in a fictional setting might be interesting for a short story, or better yet, a story written by someone who could better express Nader’s vision. But it does not deserve 700 pages. 700 pages requires a dedication from his readers that even someone like me, an avid reader, cannot muster. Nader is just not the right man for the job, and that is sad.

I like Ralph Nader, and generally agree with his politics. But I hate this book, and I just don’t see this book as helping anyone.

[Liza]

Oh, Ralph Nader, you know I love you, so it pains me that I can't continue to read your novel. It's just too painful and awkward an experience for me. Bill Cosby as a superhero who stars in an activist commercial? More awkward than those sweaters he wears.

This novel is hawked as his answer to Atlas Shrugged. Well, that was a terrible book, and one that I struggled through at age 16, because I lived in Texas and it seemed the right thing to do for those skeptical about government. So I just imagine some teenager in, say, Vermont trying to read this, and that makes me sad.

Consumer advocate extraordinaire doth not a novelist make!

[Melanie · Rating 3 out of 5]

Excellent guide to a bloodless revolution disguised as a novel.

[Nia]

This book is difficult to rate and also difficult to review because, although the subject matter and the vast majority of Nader's ideas are quite near and dear to my heart, the writing was rather difficult to get into, as he is not a novelist. I personally found it verbose, sagging, and despite working to make myself read it, as intriguing as the ideas are and as much as I hope that those named in this book do read and act on his suggestions via this ficitonal work, it was not a work that gets you into a story. Reading it was rather like, well, work.

Read, Write, Dream, Walk !

#PublicDomainInfrastructure
ShiraDest

March 23rd, 12018 HE

[Cara Wood]

An interesting thought experiment, published in 2009, that has not aged perfectly. Still, this outlines some of the principles of power and change in a readable (sometimes cheesy) way. Nadar's proposal to fast-track practical improvement for mass impact, recategorize patriotic responsibility and build sub-ecomonomies around alternative fuels are sound, albeit rooted in a narrow neo-conservative take on fiscal policy. I can't help but wonder what today's version of this fantasy would look like and how it could better account for a global economy, not just a US-centric view, or accounted for more community-based, collective models.

[Tony Laplume · Rating 3 out of 5]

Fifty years ago, Ralph Nader made a name for himself with the publication of Unsafe at Any Speed. Some thirty years later, I was made aware of this in a high school classroom. And then I watched as the last several of his attempts to be elected to the highest office in the country were dashed spectacularly.

I always wondered why. After reading "Only the Super-Rich Can save Us!" I don't wonder anymore. No doubt Nader envisioned it as his Gulliver's Travels, or at least An Inconvenient Truth (the latter being more accurate, an attempt to save face by deploying one last grand salvo on the national stage). It is, as some of the less enthusiastic reviewers have suggested, little more than Nader's wet dream about his fondest ambitions.

I'm not saying that his ideas are terrible. (If I did that, I'd give him fodder for his amateur Dante smackdowns that proliferate in the book.) What I am saying is that he still has no idea how to get them across. He dreams of utopia. Hey, we all do. And his vision is sound in so many ways, but where he gets it wrong, even in this fantasy of everything finally going right for him, is a more than decent demonstration of the limits that always stifled him.

Let's start at the basic premise. In the aftermath of Katrina, Warren Buffett takes a tour of New Orleans, where he experiences a woman bewailing the situation with the phrase that Nader took as the name of the book. Except nowhere else are the circumstances that actually created the Katrina disaster actually referenced. This is merely an excuse to give Buffett motivation to do everything Nader wants him to. And also, a bunch of other famous movers and shakers of the past half century or so.

They begin their adventures by going to Maui. This is where Nader truly underestimates his reader's analytical abilities. Everything Nader's heroes do, they do from a comfortable distance (it's anonymous billionaires who support an imagined Warren Beatty bid for the California governorship in the wake of Arnold Schwarzenegger's emerging struggles). Like the young Nader himself who benefited from every advantage, these are all people comfortably ensconced in positions of privilege, retaining all their privilege, and generally talking about "the people" the way, say, a presidential candidate would. As does Nader, throughout the book.

I will refrain from commenting on Nader's general lack of literary finesse except to say he clearly did not write this book because he thought he could tell a really good story. This is his version of a political miracle, rather than the disaster he saw in losing the 2004 election.

The biggest irony is that this book was written in 2006 but released in 2010. Nader couldn't have known about Barack Obama (despite Obama being the clear rising star at the DNC in 2004) or the so-called Great Recession that would coincide with the 2008 election. (Or Occupy Wall Street, for that matter.) For Nader's purposes, these facts don't really matter anyway.

Far thornier, perhaps, is the inclusion of Bill Cosby as one of the heroes. Perhaps his recent precipitous fall would have been the hardest to prognosticate. Inconveniently, Cosby is the hero who early on chimes in about how their enemies will use character assassination against the good guys. (I personally suspect that at least in part Cosby has been attacked because of his efforts a decade ago at social reform within the black community, the very efforts Nader was thinking of when he included Cosby to begin with. Character assassination, and very successful, for someone who dared voice very much the opposite of the passionate talk we've heard in the wake of much-publicized shootings of black youths.)

There's also Nader's weird obsession with Yoko Ono. Technically it's the main antagonist who has a sexual obsession with her. But, y'know. She's the only woman in the group of heroes, too. And the only person to be sexualized. This is odd for so many reasons.

It's possible to come to different conclusions from Nader and still be fascinated by his demonstration of the kind of effort he sees necessary to enact reform in the modern era. The problem is, Nader constantly stymies the very idea of nuance. He presents and apparently very much lives in a black and white world. And that's, I will argue, Nader's biggest problem. He was repudiated, in some sense, but still thinks he was right, and to prove it he has presented the most outlandish way of proving so possible. And in doing so, proves all over again the flaws in his reasoning.

This book is catnip for Nader's supporters. And that's ironic, because the very idea of Nader's supporters is what he always thrived on and what he still believes is absolutely necessary to get the job done, some rich famous dude to rally around (and his righteous cause). Except here in America, our heroes tend to emerge in hindsight. Washington, for instance, during the Revolutionary War, was hardly the perceived hero who later became the first president. And Lincoln was despised in his lifetime.

Anyway, if you're still wondering about Ralph Nader, too, this really is a good way to find out for yourself. For good or ill. Be happy that he always fought for the little guy. But after this, wonder if it wasn't all about self-aggrandizement. The heroes in the book are painted, in their twilight years, as suddenly selfless. But you may conclude differently.

[Robert Pinto · Rating 5 out of 5]

Finished reading this remarkable novel recently. This book is very Naderesque in the sense that you feel as though you are reading through manuscripts of Ralph Nader's own speeches. The book is very well written. Creative, dazzling, and exciting with each of the characters animated and motivated as they are. I won't spoil the story for anyone who is enthusiastic about reading this book. What I will include is this book gives the reader the idea of billionaires convening in Hawaii to create citizen groups which motivate the masses of people to create change in the United States.

[Jr · Rating 2 out of 5]

Hard to believe this is not an ironic parody. Ralph Nader has dedicated his career to improving the country and I have enormous respect for him. But like all of us, he is imperfect and sometimes he goes off in misguided directions.

[Sahil Hajiyani · Rating 1 out of 5]

This book does not add anything to the human knowledge.
Exactly something Charlie munger would say.

[Trish Schneider · Rating 1 out of 5]

made it about 50 pages and couldnt do it, gave up

[Michael Zutis · Rating 2 out of 5]

I tried very, very hard to enjoy this but it just wasn’t very good.

[Vanessa Fuller · Rating 4 out of 5]

Great idea; never going to happen sadly.

[Kurtbg · Rating 4 out of 5]

What if the the super rich got together and decided to fight US corporatocracy?
That's what Ralph Nader takes on in this fictional story about Warren Buffett putting together
a rich dream team to counter the control of self-serving individuals and corporations over American politics. This was apropos as Warren Buffett just had his NYT op-ed piece about the mega-rich giving something back published.

In the book was a basic plan to counter and support taking back the country for the people. The strategy is broken into chapters which are told via the characters of Bill Cosby, Ted Turner, George Soros, Yoko Ono, and more.

The read is interesting, but sometimes slowed by the device of the fictional voices of non-fictional people. I'm sure few people can see how a corporation is different than an individual citizen. Understanding how corporations are able to be given citizen-like status to lobby and sway the direction of regulations and the country - all the while being able to expense those dollars unlike a citizen - is a much more challenging effort. Hence the fictionalization.

My opinion on the "mega-rich": they made out like bandits due to the deregulation, underfunding and dismantling of public watch dog groups (GOA, etc), and general corporate corruption. What is their opinion of the United States if they don't want to pay a few more cents on the dollar during desperate and disparate times? An economy doesn't care about who has money and how it is obtained or dispersed.
The quality of life of the citizenry and the economy is both served when money (and power) is in the hands of the many, moreso than in the hands of the few. After all, the feudal and oligarchical systems already failed (see past US and UK histories).

Is there class warfare? There is always and nothing but who has the money and how can more be gained.

[Jared Della Rocca · Rating 4 out of 5]

Ralph Nader's latest novel is both uplifting and depressing, not a common combination of feelings. The novel's uplifting nature is that with the proper organizational framework, the capital-p People of this nation could change the direction with seven pieces of legislation. The legislation would move this country from its steady progress towards oligarchical fascism (oligarchy: government by the few for selfish purposes; fascism: utilizing the ideals of nation over the individual, combined with suppression of opposition for dictatorial control) and instead back towards capital-d Democracy.

But at the same time it's depressing because to put that framework together required, in the book, the super-rich (Warren Buffett, Bill Gates, Sr., Yoko Ono, etc.) These individuals while perhaps working towards betterment of society, have not done so collectively. The opposition we have currently, at least those with Democracy in mind, are mainly single-issue groups who haven't seen that working as a larger group may bring greater results.

And so while I was continually inspired by what could be as I read this book, it only took a few minutes reading the daily headlines to erase that inspiration. Once again, Ralph Nader has encapsulated my hopes and dreams, only for me to see them erased by the current state of our government.

[John J. · Rating 4 out of 5]

I saw Mr. Nader at the bookstore in Union Station while I was waiting for my train to board. He seemed a bit lonely, so I went over to say hello. He had stacks of several of his books on the table, but this was the only one I hadn't yet read, so I bought a copy and he signed it.

Daunting to get into (running at 700+ pages) and slow to develop, this absurdly optimistic American utopian fantasy is easy to abandon. But I'm glad I didn't. Yes, the characters are indistinguishable from one another, the dialogue is pretentious, and the villains are cartoonish... but if you accept this book for what it is, i.e., a speculative philosophical-socio-political "what if?", then you will find that it is chock-full of fascinating and inspiring ideas, peppered with some damn-good progressive speeches and firebrands.

Sadly, I tend to be more Vonnegut than Nader, and the fact that we haven't yet implemented any of these obvious, empowering ideas only entrenches my disappointment in our species. By the time alien archaeologists dig through the ruins of Earth's civilization and discover a digital copy of this book, the "what if" scenario will have become an "if only."

[Lucy Tierney · Rating 2 out of 5]

I occasionally have voted for Ralph Nader for president. This book could be adapted into a humorous movie. It is a blueprint for a revolution whose only violence is the kidnapping of a parrot that squawks “wake up wake up.”
16 well-known men and Yoko Ono mastermind “chaordic” actions, this word being a blend of “chaos” with “order.” Sample chaordic actions are: change the Pledge of Allegiance to “liberty & justice for some” while administering a lie detector test—to get people to think; sun God festivals, corporations run for office; and after-school Egalitarian clubs.
Unfortunately the book is chock full of boring conversation. But otherwise it reminds me of Huey Long’s novel My First Days in the White House except that historic Louisiana Senator strong-armed deals with his super-rich. Only the Super-Rich is the obverse of Ayn Rand’s greedy Atlas Shrugged.

[Susan]

This is a book that I really want to read; it fascinates me. I got to almost page 200. However, it takes more time and concentration than I am willing or able to give right now, so I'm taking it back to the library and keeping it in my queue for later. Ralph Nader is my hero. He thinks about things in a way no one else does, and this novel is his way of showing the world that we can make things better. The Super-Rich in the novel spearhead the changes, but it's the people, you and I, who really make things change. What we do, how and where we spend our money, who we vote for and how much we watch those who are in office. . . there are lots of ways to make changes, and this novel highlights many of them. I'll by this book, if only to get some ideas of what I can do to make America a better, more equal place.

[Neil · Rating 2 out of 5]

At the center of this book is a terrific idea that has gained traction with Buffett in the real world, although the reality is a lot less political to it's detriment. But in the novel's completed form, Ralph missed an opportunity to speak to a new audience. A Nader novel? That might get some traction, but when people see the yellowed cover behemoth on the shelf, they leave it be. It's WAY too long. And it's missing many fiction elements like character development, a rising plot a well defined conflict. Ralph needed a much heavier handed editor for this. He tried to go to a place he had never been before without a guide and he got lost.

[Christina]

Finally reading my copy of this- Brooke bought it when Ralph Nader was signing copies in an airport bookstore a few years ago.
This is my pick for the Politics category of the 2016 Read Harder challenge! (My last one!)

**** Several Days Later ****

Ok, this is going on my Started-but-Didn't-Finish shelf. I read the first 20 pages or so and found it so ridiculous that I knew I would never make it through the another 600. Especially given our current situation, I can't stomach Nader's fantastical idealism. I'll be counting A Land Twice Promised for the Politics category instead.

[Molly · Rating 2 out of 5]

Ralph, I love you so much, but I can't do this to either one of us. If I keep reading, I won't be able to look you in the face. It's too awkward.

Also, I'm already convinced. I don't need to read this. Except the 30 pages I read before stopping.

One question: why did the library who bought this book catalog it as non-fiction??? I don't know if a book could be much more fictitious than Warren Buffet hanging out in a cave with Yoko Ono planning to save the world.

[David Jedeikin · Rating 2 out of 5]

Another great idea that fell flat: Ralph Nader's bit of speculative fiction about "what if" the super-rich actually took on the task of explicitly saving the world (something many of us feel they should be doing with their oft-unfairly-begotten gains). It's too long, too pedantic, too rambling... if this were a terse 200-pager, possibly done as a fictitious series of print articles, it would be captivating and gripping... but in this form it just doesn't work.

[Barbara · Rating 2 out of 5]

I have always admired Ralph Nader and his passion for consumer protection. I was quite intrigued with his ideas and the idealism he displays. However, the reading became tedious. I don't know whether it as too detailed or too long winded. I was interested in the concepts brought forward but I could not finish the book. I may, in the future, try to wade through the many pages again. I loved the content, but could not stay motivated to continue to the end. Very puzzling.

[Gwenyth · Rating 3 out of 5]

Although I think Ralph Nader is fascinating, I found this book excruciating to read, and I gave up with about 100 pages left. Not because of the ideas proposed, but just because of the format - it's basically an extended Nader speech disconcertingly funneled through the mouths of people like Yoko Ono. I will definitely try to pick up some of Nader's nonfiction in the future, though.

[Rachel · Rating 2 out of 5]

I'm a totally receptive audience, and still this book was long, annoying, and boring. It's entirely uninteresting as a novel, since it doesn't really have plot or characters. And how can I get fired up about issues discussed if I don't know for certain what bits of them might be fictional? I know it would have added even more length, but a footnote or two would have helped clarify things.

[James Stout]

I pulled this off the new releases shelf in the library today because it looked funny. I started to read it and found that it was actually pretty entertaining. The idea is Nader creating some kind of utopia where the Buffets and Gates type people decide to use their massive hoards to save the world.

[Dawn Wallhausen]

Fiction by Ralph Nader... who knew? Great plot using one real set of actions taken by Warren Buffet to alleviate suffering in NOLA after Hurricane Katrina as a springboard. Many characters and facts are real.

The dialog is a little bit awkward in places, it's not perfect, but very entertaining and informative, thus far.

[Joseph Young · Rating 4 out of 5]

Was unable to finish the book in the time allotted. Nader makes some great points and arguments for the left wing, and does a great job of ripping apart the not altogether obvious mistruths propagated by those with their own interests, and those not unaware of other consequences.

The one downside is that in the book the left can do no wrong. It's a pure good vs evil type of book.