On a recent binge of dystopian novels, I unearthed this old classic by Sinclair Lewis.

The book stands as one of the earliest 20th-century novels that aimed to suggest that political ideological views could infiltrate the American psyche and transform the foundation of the country's views, long before Orwell's 1984 or Atwood's The Handmaid's Tale.

While Lewis' focus lies on fascist views taking hold during the Great Depression, it remains deeply poignant and quite sobering.

A blend of dystopia and alternative history, Lewis compels the reader to think carefully and wonder what might have been, had America been swept up in the national socialist sentiments that pervaded other countries between the two World Wars.

After the Great War, the world teetered on a precarious edge. The powers of democracy reached a crossroads, highlighting their inherent fragility.

The Great Depression brought the world to its knees, leaving no country unscathed.

It was this vulnerability that made the idea of national socialism—fascism—a means of strengthening the core.

Lewis描绘了一个试图自力更生、寻找政治途径来增强自身实力的美国，与一些欧洲国家同行类似。

随着1932年新总统的当选，这位民主选举产生的领导人承担起了“必要独裁者”的角色，以让国家重回正轨。

为了保护民众，权利和宪法保障不得不被暂停，这使得官僚和总统身边的人纷纷谈论提供前进动力的必要性，一切都是为了让国家朝着好的方向发展。

有一些人对此表示反对，但他们要么因其观点而遭到诋毁，要么被作为政治犯监禁。

他们的命运只能猜测，因为焦点在于向前推进，并试图打破那些会质疑来自白宫的道路的人。

虽然这本书写于近一个世纪前，但其原则对于现代美国社会以及为允许即将上任的政府采取超出其宪法能力的行动所找的一些借口有着深远的意义。

要过几年才能看到事情会发展到什么程度，但刘易斯在这本书中的观点肯定会成为一个必须评估的基准。

也就是说，这本书中的总统角色比现任当选总统要聪明得多、狡猾得多，这让很多人想知道他在试图保持微妙（如果他能够做到的话）的同时会走多远。

这是一个令人不寒而栗的故事，在权利和基本期望被仇外心理和法西斯情绪所冲淡的时代，它清晰地引起了共鸣，而这种情绪只会破坏民主基础，并以可能难以轻易修复的方式使美国与世界疏远。

辛克莱·刘易斯提供了一些非常值得耐心读者花时间和精力去阅读的东西。

虽然我并非与世隔绝，但我选择相信美国会从噩梦中醒来，让新政府回到其应有的位置，通过立法部门限制其权力，并让司法部门限制其古怪的命令。

然而，我也看到许多人已经喝下了“酷爱”饮料，准备对仇外和种族主义观点视而不见，担心他们的国家变得太“不美国”。

虽然他们会将其解释为对经济的选择或确保美国人有工作的承诺，但看不到其他问题的无知确实令人担忧。

刘易斯在一本易于理解的小说中提供了一个令人惊叹的叙事。

主题以相对直接的方式呈现，为读者提供了一条了解在“重置”之前事情可能会变得多么糟糕的途径。

伟大的人物和令人惊叹的视角涌现出来，因为尊重被搁置一旁，取而代之的是盲目的民族主义情绪；这是一个“给猪涂口红”的时刻。

这部反乌托邦小说的情节令人清醒，让读者想知道这是否真的会发生。

现在，九十年过去了，事情正在逐渐成为现实，从而使这部噩梦般的虚构作品变成了现实。

刘易斯很好地展示了如果有机会，事情可能会变得多么糟糕。

民主是脆弱的，其参与者绝不能被给予太多的宽松。

然而，没有人选择听从这个警告，现在我们即将看到事情会有多糟糕。

我只能希望我能够屏住呼吸足够长的时间，以免最终成为这个新法西斯国家的北方邻国，尽管这个国家拥有核武器。

四年的时间过得再快也不够，不过如果事情继续沿着目前的道路发展，宪法限制可能会被暂停，并被解释为美国稳定的必要条件。

刘易斯先生，为这些现在正惊人地应验的预言点赞。

喜欢/讨厌这篇评论？更多评论请访问：
http://pecheyponderings.wordpress.com/

My guess at Amazon sale positions a couple of years ago was as follows:

#25,000 in Books > Literature & Fiction > United States > Classics

#5,000 in Books > Literature & Fiction > Genre Fiction > Political

#50,000 in Books > Literature & Fiction > Classics

- - - - - - - - - -

I think my rating can serve as a review considering the time that has passed since I read it. Anyhow, we all know that the book has gained a new topicality.

Currently (June 2 '17) on Amazon:

#2 in Books > Literature & Fiction > United States > Classics

#12 in Books > Literature & Fiction > Genre Fiction > Political (up 5 in the last few days)

#48 in Books > Literature & Fiction > Classics (up 18 in the last few days)

** Estimates were based on numbers for William Faulkner's The Hamlet - comparable writers and books far less popular than their best - plus the assumption that the "political genre" rating would have been higher than the other two.

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

Previous review: Ender's Game sci-fi

Next review: What if? SERIOUS SCIENTIFIC ANSWERS to Absurd Hypothetical Questions

Older review: Eaarth Making a Life on a Tough New Planet

Previous library review: Riders of the Purple Sage Zane Gray

Next library review: Arrowsmith Lewis

4 stars

I will admit that I am not very politically motivated. In fact, I actually hate politics! I have my own beliefs, and one of them is that our form of government is in a sorry state and could be soooooooooooooo much better than it is currently. Now, having said that, I don't want to live anywhere else or experience any other form of government than the 'democracy' that I live under, even though I believe it is broken. However, I have just read a book that was published in 1935 and it is the epitome of today's problems.

This political satire points out everything that is so fragile with today's politics. It goes right down to our political candidates and past presidents. This book is truly timeless. The rise of a President who becomes a Fascist Dictator - one has to wonder who that could be?

It is a hard book to read, but one that closely mimics our politics today, despite being written in 1935. It is scary to think how history seems to cycle back around. It makes one realize that perhaps we haven't learned as much as we thought from the past.

"It Can’t Happen Here" is a dystopian and political novel set during the Great Depression. In 1933, Franklin Delano Roosevelt promised a New Deal in his inaugural address, but also acknowledged the grim state of America due to the stormy economic and social climate. Sinclair Lewis tapped into the nervous undercurrent accompanying the volatile politics of this period. As Michael Meyer stressed in the Introduction, with the rise of Hitler and Mussolini in Europe and the alarming popularity of demagogues in the US, there was widespread concern about a possible fascist dictatorship. Lewis placed these concerns at the center of his satirical and somewhat prescient novel, predicting the rise of Donald J Trump. His intention was to shock the complacent American electorate. Sinclair Lewis's marriage to Dorothy Thompson, a foreign correspondent who had interviewed Hitler and warned Americans about the Nazi propaganda machine, may have added to his insight.

The times were frightening in 1935 when the book was published. It imagines Roosevelt being defeated by the improbable election of an authoritarian Berzillius (Buzz) Windrip, modeled after Huey Long. The theme of journalism as a bulwark against tyranny runs throughout the book, with the hero being an editor of a liberal Vermont newspaper. The author uses the character to denounce and satirize various aspects of society. The similarities between this fictional tale and the reality facing the US today are alarming. This is a turning point, and how we react is crucial.

The quotes in the book highlight the initial disbelief and complacency of the people. They believed that a police state could never rise in the midst of democracy. However, as the story progresses, the reality becomes all too clear. The once-dismissed idea of a fascist dictatorship becomes a terrifying reality.

Over the past few weeks, I embarked on a rereading of Sinclair Lewis’ 1935 novel, It Can’t Happen Here. This book witnessed a surge in popularity and extensive discussion both before and after Donald Trump’s 2016 election. As a literature enthusiast, I was eager to explore how it might shed light on our contemporary times.

This review combines elements of a traditional review and partial analysis. Naturally, it is rife with spoilers. I will commence with a summary, offer some rapid observations, and then delve into the question of fascism in 1935 and 2018. Unusually, I will not have the space to discuss the future.
This piece is also rather lengthy, so it would be advisable to grab a cup of coffee or tea and settle in for a comprehensive read.
The novel’s plot revolves around the ascent and subsequent crisis of a fascist government in the United States. In the literal sense, Lewis’ tyrant is closely modeled on his contemporaries Hitler and Mussolini, drawing significantly on the reporting of his wife, Dorothy Thompson. This American political catastrophe is observed and then opposed by an elderly, small-town newspaper editor, Doremus Jessup, along with his family and friends. The book commences as a barbed bucolic satire and then hurtles into a political nightmare, traversing from small-town characters to concentration camps.
In many respects, it is a strange book to read, especially considering its genre. It reads like a form of alternate history, with the major divergence from our timeline being that FDR somehow loses the 1936 Democratic nomination (a point not well-explained), initiates a new political party (the Jeffersonians) which fractures the general election, and then simply vanishes from the scene (67; Signet Classics edition). At the time, this was not history but a speculative future, making the book an example of science fiction in two ways: future history and alternative history.
Simultaneously, there are numerous period details that endow the alternate history with texture and weight, much like a good historical novel, which is yet another genre that It Can’t Happen Here evokes. There are also significant political details in the book, especially in its final two-thirds, ranging from international relations and political ideology to the rearrangement of state and local government, which nudges the novel into the territory of a political novel. Ultimately, and perhaps less usefully, I was reminded of that curious offshoot of British fiction, the invasion story of imagined near-future wars and social calamities. It’s like Ninety Eight-Four without the memory hole.
It Can’t Happen Here is also a comic novel. Well, not entirely, but it is far funnier than I had anticipated. Lewis takes great delight in bestowing goofy or satiric names: Mrs. Adelaide Tarr Gimmitch, Doc Itchitt, Captain Cowlick, Brigadier General Herbert Y. Edgeways, Bishop Paul Peter Prang, Treasury Secretary Webster Skittle, Senator Porkwood, Effingham Swan, governor John Sullivan Reek, Professor Almeric Trout, and my personal favorite, Dr. Hector Macgoblin. “Berzelius Windrip” is a truly remarkable name for a tyrant, combining deprecation with fierce energy (try saying it out loud).
Lewis also frequently offers excellent one-liners, even in the second, darker half of the book. For instance, “Malcolm had the insolent self-assurance of beef.” (46) or “[T]he rumbling Shad [was] a man for whom the chaplain might even have been a little sorry, after he was safely hanged.” (133). There is also a quiet undercurrent of academic comedy that runs throughout the book. When the fascist government restructures local government, a “District Commissioner merely chased the Dartmouth students out and took over the college buildings for his offices, to the considerable approval of Amherst, Williams, and Yale.” (72).
However, some of the comedy has not aged well and may depend on the audience. The satires of women now come across as sexist, especially the portrayal of Emma Jessup, Doremus’ wife, which is mostly a maternal blank. Calling Louise May Alcott a man (97) is no longer humorous. I am truly not well-versed enough in Lewis or the 1930s to determine whether the portrayal of Windrip’s aide, Lee Sarason, as a gay man would have been regarded as comedy or denigration at the time of publication; in either case, it would not hold up today.
Moreover, some of the jokes might be too bleak for 2018. Consider these examples: “Probably many of them cared nothing about insults to the Corpo state, but had only the unprejudiced, impersonal pleasure in violence natural to most people.” (90) or “Father Stephen Perefixe, when he read the Fifteen Points, was considerably angrier than Doremus. He snorted, ‘What? Negroes, Jews, women—they all banned and they leave us Catholics out, this time? Hitler didn’t neglect us. He’s persecuted us. Must be that Charley Coughlin. He’s made us too respectable!’” (37).
The comedy in the book fits well within the contemporary tradition of satirizing fascism, from Chaplin’s Great Dictator (1940) to Spike Jones.
Upon rereading, I had forgotten that this is very much a Vermont novel. The state serves as the setting for most of the action, commencing from the first sentence. Lewis inventively creates the town of Fort Beulah, but it could easily represent any number of the state’s small towns. He has a keen sense of how lightly people regarded and still regard Montpelier. He is aware that Vermont played a crucial role in the Underground Railroad. And he appreciates the state’s beauties: “An upland hollow and mist beneath the moon—a veil of mist over apple blossoms and the heavy bloom of an ancient lilac bush beside the ruin of a farmhouse burned these sixty years and more.” (12). One plot device even involves a sap bucket (124).
It Can’t Happen Here is also a novel about relationships and families. The Jessup family and friends form the main group of characters throughout the story. Members and associates assume various roles, ranging from active anti-fascism to quiet complicity to becoming assassins. There is a captivating subplot regarding Doremus’ romance with the local freethinker Lorinda Pike, strangely encouraged by Ceclia, Doremus’ daughter (63). I believe this was intended to be a celebration of free love or a means of demonstrating how political passions spill over into interpersonal connections. I am not certain how contemporary readers would have viewed the abandonment of Emma Jessup, nor how it would be perceived today. Readers of dystopias will be familiar with the classic trope of the heroic, romantic couple.
What does this novel have to tell us about the Trump era?
Evidently, much of the book is deeply rooted in its own time. Huey Long and Father Coughlin are repeatedly mentioned and clearly inspire certain characters. Multiple writers, popular culture figures, and politicians make appearances, such as Granville Hicks, Albert Einstein, Herbert Hoover, senator La Follette, admiral Byrd, and Father Divine. Upton Sinclair appears as an early Windrip supporter (42) and later becomes America’s ambassador to the United Kingdom (66). We must set aside much of this, as historically entertaining as it may be, in order to identify commonalities.
Readers considering racism in the present day will discover a far more terrifying resonance in the Windrip administration’s plans. For example, this platform plank is worth reading in its horrifying entirety: “(10) All Negroes shall be prohibited from voting, holding public office, practicing law, medicine, or teaching in any class above the grade of grammar school, and they shall be taxed 100 per cent of all sums in excess of $10,000 per family per year which they may earn or in any other manner receive. In order, however, to give the most sympathetic aid possible to all Negroes who comprehend their proper and valuable place in society, all such colored persons, male or female, as can prove that they have devoted not less than forty-five years to such suitable tasks as domestic service, agricultural labor, and common labor in industries, shall at the age of sixty-five be permitted to appear before a special Board, composed entirely of white persons, and upon proof that while employed they have never been idle except through sickness, they shall be recommended for pensions not to exceed the sum of $500.00 per person per year, nor to exceed $700.00 per family. Negroes shall, by definition, be persons with at least one sixteenth colored blood.” (35). This is a chilling amalgamation of 19th-century American white supremacy with early 20th-century fascism, “scientific” racism, and United States eugenics.
Are there other connections between Trump and Windrip in terms of style or personality? Many passages are likely to resonate with today’s readers. For instance, this snarling line: “The [then] Senator was vulgar, almost illiterate, a public liar easily detected, and in his “ideas” almost idiotic” (38).
We can also detect an echo of Trump’s animosity towards some of the press in passages such as this: “I know the Press only too well. Almost all editors hide away in spider-dens, men without thought of Family or Public Interest or the humble delights of jaunts out-of-doors, plotting how they can put over their lies, and advance their own positions and fill their greedy pocketbooks by calumniating Statesmen who have given their all for the common good and who are vulnerable because they stand out in the fierce Light that beats around the Throne.” (21). There is also an eerie anticipation of how much free campaign time American TV news gave (and continues to give) Trump in this detail of how contemporary journalists covered Windrip’s rise: “The few [people] who did fail [to admire Windrip], most of them newspapermen, disliked the smell of him more than before they had met him.... Even they, by the unusual spiritedness and color of their attacks upon him, kept his name alive in every column. (40; emphasis added).
In addition, the two presidents share a background as entertainers and con men, albeit in different ways. One aspect of Windrip’s background, for example, is classic snake oil and could easily remind us of Trump steaks, Trump University, or Trump’s TV career as a purportedly imposing businessman: “In that costume, he looked like a sawed-off museum model of a medicine-show “doctor,” and indeed it was rumored that during one law-school vacation Buzz Windrip had played the banjo and done card tricks and handed down medicine bottles and managed the shell game for no less scientific an expedition than Old Dr. Alagash’s Traveling Laboratory, which specialized in the Choctaw Cancer Cure, the Chinook Consumption Soother, and the Oriental Remedy for Piles and Rheumatism Prepared from a World-old Secret Formula by the Gipsy Princess, Queen Peshawara.” (38).
It Can’t Happen Here is very much a novel of the Great Depression, not only because it was written in the midst of it, chronologically speaking, but also because that economic crisis shapes the politics. Exploiting economic woe plays a significant role in Windrip’s rise, as he repeatedly emphasizes the message of simply giving cash to voters (again, we do not get a sense of how FDR failed in this regard, which weakens the novel). One key detail about economic gloom that may strike a chord with today’s readers concerns class mobility: “The Horatio Alger tradition, from rags to Rockefellers, was clean gone out of the America it had dominated. [Now it] seemed faintly silly…” (54).
However, the differences between the two are extensive. I do not mean to simply note that “gosh, it’s strange how Hupmobiles aren’t important in 2018” nor to criticize a work of fiction from nearly a century ago for failing to precisely forecast our time in minute detail. I believe the differences lie in the fact that fascism is not an apt descriptive tool for analyzing Trump.
Some of the differences are superficial. For instance, Windrip is a Democrat (!), rather than a Republican. This perhaps points more to the contemporary overlap between certain elements of the left and right, with some politicians learning tactics and policies from their opponents. There are also small but significant disparities in style between the two presidents, as seen in this magnificent passage: “The supreme actor, Buzz Windrip, was passionate yet never grotesquely wild. He did not gesture too extravagantly; only, like Gene Debs of old, he reached out a bony forefinger which seemed to jab into each of them and hook out each heart. It was his mad eyes, big staring tragic eyes, that startled them, and his voice, now thundering, now humbly pleading, that soothed them. He was so obviously an honest and merciful leader; a man of sorrows and acquaint with woe.” (51). Elsewhere, Doremus describes Windrip as “a dictator with something of the earthy American sense of humor of a Mark Twain, a George Ade, a Will Rogers, an Artemus Ward” (71). This sounds more like the villain in A Face in the Crowd (1957) and less like the abrasive, unsympathetic, and mostly one-note New Yorker Trump.
The first major difference between Lewis’ imagined fascist and our current president pertains to anticommunism. Lewis’ villains, like many conservatives of his era, were acutely focused on communism as their primary enemy. They repeatedly justify their actions in terms of safeguarding Americans from Moscow and Bolshevism. Not only do the fascists accuse people of being communists (and anarchists), but there are actually communists in the story, and they play a significant role in American politics and society. They organize and act publicly in ways that are appropriate for the 1930s and are sometimes heroic, as when a group defends against brutal Minute Men (49). Indeed, one communist criticizes our protagonist for being a weak liberal in ways that a 2018 audience might find highly accurate: ““But plenty things like this happened before Buzz Windrip ever came in, Doremus,” insisted John Pollikop… “You never thought about them, because they was just routine news, to stick in your paper. Things like the sharecroppers and the Scottsboro boys and the plots of the California wholesalers against the agricultural union and dictatorship in Cuba and the way phony deputies in Kentucky shot striking miners. And believe me, Doremus, the same reactionary crowd that put over those crimes are just the big boys that are chummy with Windrip.” (127).
In contrast, Trump pays scant attention to the left in our post-Soviet world, and communism is at best a rarely invoked specter. When Trump supporters attack “the left,” they usually mean MSNBC, not any Communist Party organ. Occasionally, they work themselves into a frenzy over a supposed antifa movement, which may now number several hundred people in a nation of 320 million. Indeed, during the presidential campaign, Trump spent more time railing against ISIS, Hispanic immigrants, and Chinese trade policies than against communists. Bernie Sanders, the most well-known leftist of our time, is not a communist but a democratic socialist who actually sounded more like an FDR Democrat. The Democratic Socialists of America may be experiencing a growth spurt at present, but they remain a minuscule blip on the political landscape and have not yet become public enemy #1.
(The Resistance to Trump movement is by no means communist.)
A second difference builds on the theme of anticommunism and concerns mass movements. Windrip ascends to power on the back of a popular paramilitary movement. Beginning as The League of Forgotten Men, a political club similar to Huey Long’s Share the Wealth Club, it is then transformed into the Minute Men (47), who subsequently become the stormtroopers of his regime and the novel’s main source of villains. The MMs organize support for Windrip’s campaign, intimidate opponents, carry out mass murders of civilians under his orders (69ff), and then staff concentration camps (in this case, places of torture and incarceration, rather than extermination; Auschwitz still lay in the future when Lewis wrote). MMs who lack enthusiasm are terrorized and/or shot (69). Other agents sabotage would-be opponents and even have one figure forcibly committed to an asylum. In response, there are “strikes and riots all over the country, bloodily put down by the Minute Men” (71), giving Lewis’ America the appearance of a low-grade (but escalating) civil war.
The United States has nothing comparable to this at present. If we are seeking paramilitaries, they are difficult to find in the wild and are not state-sponsored. The 1990s militia movement scarcely exists, never received federal support under President Bush(2), and lacks such support now. There is not a trace of Minute Men nor any Trumpist political clubs. Indeed, the Republican party is the only organization behind Trump, and its membership rolls are not expanding. Nobody has to join the GOP to obtain a better job or impress their friends.
Moreover, America is currently engaged in a war that has endured for seventeen years. In contrast, It Can’t Happen Here takes place during a time of peace, with World War One a fading memory. As one passage states, “It was just long enough after the Great War of 1914-18 for the young people who had been born in 1917 to be ready to go to college....or to another war, almost any old war that might be handy.” (6-7). President Windrip has to rouse the nation from its peacetime slumber by whipping up martial spirit and warlike hysteria. The novel’s military exercises and habits eventually become central to the culture and the subject of widespread enthusiasm. In contrast, in our present reality, the War on Terror persists with barely any media attention, despite its global scope, the large numbers of people involved both at home and abroad, and Trump’s desire for a grand parade.
A third difference concerns another enemy of the state. Among all ethnic and religious prejudices, antisemitism looms largest in both the Corpos’ policies and in the minds of many supporters, far larger than bigotry against blacks, Hispanics, Asians, or Native Americans. Accusations of being Jewish or of being friendly to Jews pervade the novel, emanating from both fascist leaders and ordinary people. One particularly brutal scene depicts two Windrip officials brutally assaulting and murdering two Jewish scholars, later justifying the act by claiming to have caught the deceased performing “ritual murders” out of nineteenth-century antisemitic

In 1935, the fascist troops of Mussolini invaded Ethiopia, Nazi Germany violated the Treaty of Versailles, in Greece the monarchist movement of Kondylis seized power, Spain was on the verge of civil war, and in America, Lewis Sinclair, already awarded the first Nobel Prize, published his work "It Can't Happen Here".

The reader follows the journey of the seasoned journalist Dorsemus Jessup, who is called upon to reexamine his previously suppressed views. Determined about the stance he will take in the upcoming elections, he is at the center of the events and analyzes each situation, going from the initial stage of internal struggle and then sometimes seeking the consent and sometimes the different approach of the people around him.

The pretext for this situation is provided by the candidacy of Senator Buzz Windrip in the upcoming presidential elections. The program of the demagogic senator is constantly doubled through the headlines of the capital's newspapers, radio broadcasts and discussions of third parties. The distant acquaintance with the senator and the dissemination of the program through indirect sources contribute to the creation of a hazy atmosphere that reaches the point of causing dizziness to the protagonist when he listens to a speech of the senator during his pre-election campaign. Influenced by the stormy speech and dragged by the dynamics that the mass psychology of the people exerts on him, he returns almost ill and frightened to reality, however, charmed by the experience.

When finally the power passes into the hands of Buzz Windrip, the extreme events undermine Dorsemus Jessup's decision to act in resistance and to discover step by step his true personal values. Realizing now the reality, he does not hesitate for a moment to question his former beliefs and, risking himself and his family, he opposes the power.

With his clairvoyance, although he lives on the other side of the Atlantic, the author follows the events that unfold on the European side and understands them almost in their entirety. He predicts the social isolation and the violence that the fascist regimes will impose, the rise of the authorities and the subjection of the subjugated. Through the creation of multi-faceted characters, he manages to include almost all the social, political, religious and economic groups that are affected by the political climate, psychographically developing their reactions.

The simple narrative line serves subsidiarily in the understanding of such a complex mechanism. A book that unfortunately remains topical in our days, reveals in a simple way the hidden aspects of totalitarian regimes, narrates their evolution and leads the reader to the simple question... could it really happen here?

http://www.alterthess.gr/content/vivl...

I don't know how to rate this book.

Perhaps it deserves a 3.5 stars.

This book was truly fascinating. It had the power to draw me in and keep me engaged from start to finish.

However, it was also really scary. The vivid descriptions and the intense atmosphere it created sent shivers down my spine.

Despite its scariness, I firmly believe that this is an important book.

It explores themes that are relevant and thought-provoking.

It makes you question certain aspects of life and society.

Overall, it was a unique reading experience that left a lasting impression on me.

I would recommend it to those who are looking for something different and challenging to read.

Eigentlich 2,9

It was written in 1935. Sinclair Lewis' wife Dorothy Thompson was a foreign correspondent in Berlin and reported to him about the rise of the Nazis. Lewis now plays out a possible scenario in the USA.

The book was published by Aufbau-Verlag in 2020 in the translation by Hans Meisel from the 1930s.

The old-fashioned language indeed transports one to those times, but it also often seemed too pompous to me. Through the first half, I really had to push myself and motivate myself again and again.

Although I initially had fun with his ironic style, but at some point that wasn't enough for me anymore. Lewis writes in a verbose manner and explains (too) much.

In the second half, the book then picks up speed and I found it exciting.

It is not so much a psychological book but rather a sociological one, and his observations of the behavior of various groups or even "prototypes" I found to be spot-on.

A relevant book at that time and it was interesting to read it in the present day.

I've bumped this to five stars.

I read it nearly 18 months ago and it has really stayed with me. Surely a sign of a five star worthy read.

#####################

I mentioned this while I was reading it but I’ll say it again: this book scared me. It was so easy to believe how a country can go from democracy to a dictatorship just a few short days after an inauguration.

This novel is about the rise of a racist, sexist demagogue… well that is how it starts. This novel covers the consequences of having such a President in America, for everyday working citizens, the previously untouchable citizens in power and the people who are newly in power and are as such “untouchable”. It’s that last category that is probably the most laughable. I think what this book teaches is that no-one is safe in such a regime. No-one.

This is probably not the kind of book that I would have been interested in reading before the current political situation in America happened. But as soon as I saw this book I knew I had to read it and started it the same day I bought it which rarely happens with me as I have a book buying obsession.

I highly recommend this book and can honestly say that although this book does cover a scary concept especially when you consider that this was actually written in 1935, it also gives the reader hope that there will always be people that are strong and courageous enough to fight a dictatorial regime no matter what the person risks to themselves.

I enjoyed this enough that I purchased All the King's Men by Robert Penn Warren which seems to cover the same sort of idea but starts with a Presidential candidate that has better intentions and I hope to read it very soon.

The book I'm referring to is a powerful and thought-provoking piece of literature. It delves deep into the dark side of politics and the potential for a democratic nation to quickly descend into dictatorship. The vivid descriptions and well-developed characters make it easy for the reader to immerse themselves in the story and understand the complex emotions and situations faced by the characters.

Despite the scary concept it presents, the book also offers a glimmer of hope. It shows that there are always those who are willing to stand up and fight against injustice, even in the face of great danger. This message is especially relevant in today's political climate, where the world seems to be facing many challenges and uncertainties.

Overall, I would highly recommend this book to anyone who is interested in politics, history, or just a good story. It is a must-read for anyone who wants to understand the importance of democracy and the need to protect it at all costs.

It Can't Happen Here is a far more practical and realistic precursor to Orwell's highly popular work, 1984. It serves as a solemn monition rather than a mere satire.

Berzelius Windrip, the central character, is a shrewd and intelligent yet countrified authoritarian. His actions and ideology pose a significant threat to the democratic values of the society.

The book offers a powerful warning against our fellow citizens. It describes those who are like the "hoopleheads" - with their breathing mouths, conforming bodies, and boot licking tongues. These are the people who glare back at our more thoughtful gazes, yet remain oblivious to the larger picture.

Beware of the herd mentality, as it is all too willing to turn a blind eye to atrocities that do not directly impact them. The general populace often exhibits traits such as obsequiousness, ignorance, weakness, and fear. We must not follow their lead. Instead, we should strive to think independently, question authority, and stand up for what is right. Only by doing so can we prevent the kind of tyranny and oppression that the book warns us about.

I do need to read more books by Sinclair Lewis. I read Main Street years ago and truly enjoyed it. However, for some unknown reason, I failed to read anything else by this remarkable author. Recently, I got this audio as one of Audible's daily deals. It was an excellent choice indeed!

This book, published in 1935, yes, as far back as 1935, predicts a great deal of what later happens under Hitler, although the events in the story don't take place in Germany (even though Hitler is often mentioned). Instead, the story is set in the United States. The main character and narrator is Doremus Jessup, the editor of a small Vermont town newspaper. The book begins with the leadup to the Democrat National Convention where the Democrat presidential candidate for 1936 is to be picked. Franklin Roosevelt is a candidate, as is the Secretary of Labor Frances Perkins (the first woman ever appointed to the President's Cabinet), and others. But there is also Berzelius Windrip, better known as "Buzz." His right-hand man is Lee Sarason. And, as it turns out, the winner is Buzz. Roosevelt then forms an independent third party - the Jeffersonians.

After that, the presidential campaign gets underway. Buzz is running against the Republican candidate Walt Trowbridge. Buzz has a 10-point campaign platform that seems to have something for everyone. He promises the depression-weary citizens $5000, requires anyone of Jewish origin to follow him or lose their positions, restricts the jobs available to African-Americans, and urges women to give up their jobs, return to the kitchen, have babies, and support their men. During the campaign, Buzz and Sarason create a volunteer corps of young men - the Minutemen - who dress up in uniform, learn to march, and brutally attack anyone who doesn't like Buzz, especially the communists and the Jeffersonians. Buzz easily wins the election and immediately sets out to be a dictator. Trowbridge escapes to Canada, from where he leads an opposition group against Buzz.

There is so much more that happens in the story, and it is truly chilling. There are the personal stories of Doremus's family and friends. There are also the power struggles within the new government. One phrase that has really stuck with me is the description of the crowd that was cheering Buzz on the night before he won the election as "tipsy with the hashish of hope."

**The Rise of an American Dictatorship**

The Significance of the Book
In 1935, during the Great Depression, Sinclair Lewis wrote "It Can't Happen Here." This was a time when the western world was in turmoil, with millions unemployed. The book was a warning about the potential for the United States to become a fascist dictatorship. It was reprinted in 2005, a time of political polarisation in the US. The book uses a prose story to make a political commentary, similar to Upton Sinclair's "The Jungle."

The Plot and Comparison with Hitler
The book shows how easily the US could become a dictatorship. It creates a new politician, Buzz Windthrip, who models himself on Hitler. Windthrip promises $5000 a year for everyone and to return the US to its former glory. He uses methods like establishing his own secret police, the Minute-Men, to seize control. He shuts down congress and the supreme court, arrests and shoots those hostile to his regime, and puts the ambivalent in protective custody.

Perspectives and Themes
The book shifts perspectives between the federal level and the experiences of a small town newspaper editor, Doremus Jessup. It shows how the regime tries to control information and how the people react to the changes. Another theme is how extreme left and right are similar in practice, as seen in Nazi Germany and Communist Russia. Both were dictatorships that maintained order through secret police and oppressed the population.

Comparisons with Ancient Empires
To understand the historical forces at play, we can compare these events with past empires like Athens and Rome. The Athenian democracy lasted about 200-250 years before collapsing, while the Roman Republic lasted about 450 years before becoming a dictatorship. The US, compared with Athens, may have already entered the end game, but compared with Rome, it still has a way to go. However, like in Germany in the 1930s, a totalitarian government could rise to power on the backs of the people in the US. We should be wary of those who claim to support the people's interests but may actually lead to a dictatorship.