Book list
From Booklist, Copyright © American Library Association. Used with permission.

Today's business elite are more involved than ever in solving social problems. From poverty and disease to working conditions in the gig economy, capitalism's winners use philanthropy and win-win business ventures to achieve what government programs used to address. But what if, Giridharadas (The True American, 2014) asks, these very elites have been and continue to be the sources of many of these problems? MarketWorld is the term used for the network of wealthy, educated, cosmopolitan elites who eschew politics for private, largely unaccountable efforts to change the world. This is a very difficult subject to tackle, but Giridharadas executes it brilliantly. Through extensive interviews and research from inside this network, he lays bare the problems with its approach. This must-have title will be of great interest to readers, from students to professionals and everyone in-between, interested in solutions to today's complex problems. An exciting book club pick, Winners Take All will be the starting point of conversations private and in groups on alternatives to the status quo and calls to action. An excellent book for troubled times.--James Pekoll Copyright 2018 Booklist

Choice
Copyright American Library Association, used with permission.

The subtitle of this book succinctly states its argument. According to Giridharadas (journalism, NYU, and a well-known speaker and author) today's ultra-rich elites present themselves as change makers, devising market solutions to pressing social and economic problems. They gather at places like the Aspen Institute and Davos to talk about social entrepreneurship and philanthropy. The effect, though, is to reinforce and solidify their own positions in a world of growing inequality. Giridaradas writes from the inside—he is himself an Aspen Institute fellow—drawing on extensive interviews with this elite business class. He is able to sympathize with the individuals he describes while remaining critical of the consequences of their strategies. This is a strength of the book but also its chief problem. For the most part, the wealthy, would-be do-gooders do not come across as scheming hypocrites, but as human beings who are at once well-meaning and self-serving. Giridharadas's core argument is that the world economy requires a fundamental structural change, but he does not lay out how this would happen. Though he has some ideas about changes he considers desirable—e.g., raising minimum wages—he offers no real program, only proclamations that the world power structure needs to be transformed in some way that will make it more egalitarian. Scholarly apparatus is sparse. Summing Up: Optional. Most appropriate for general readers, but also of interest to scholars and professionals. --Carl Leon Bankston, Tulane University

Publishers Weekly
(c) Copyright PWxyz, LLC. All rights reserved

In this provocative and passionate look at philanthropy, capitalism, and inequality, Giridharadas (The True American: Murder and Mercy in Texas) criticizes market-based solutions to inequality devised by rich American do-gooders as ultimately counterproductive and self-serving. Giridharadas insists that "the idea that after-the-fact benevolence justifies anything-goes capitalism" is no excuse for "avoiding the necessity of a more just and equitable system and a fairer distribution of power." He turns a gimlet eye on philanthropists who make the money they donate by underpaying employees; luxurious philanthropy getaways that focus more on making attendees feel good about themselves than on creating profound change; and tech companies such as Uber, which promises to empower the poor with earning opportunities, but has been accused of exploiting its workers. Giridharadas calls out billionaire venture capitalist Shervin Pishevar, who opines that "sharing is caring" but refers to labor unions as "cartels," and profiles Darren Walker, who came from modest beginnings to end up president of the Ford Foundation, where his entreaties to philanthropists to acknowledge structural inequality fall mostly on deaf ears. In the end, Giridharadas believes only democratic solutions can address problems of inequality. This damning portrait of contemporary American philanthropy is a must-read for anyone interested in "changing the world." (Aug.) © Copyright PWxyz, LLC. All rights reserved.

Kirkus
Copyright © Kirkus Reviews, used with permission.

Give a hungry man a fish, and you get to pat yourself on the backand take a tax deduction.It's a matter of some irony, John Steinbeck once observed of the robber barons of the Gilded Age, that they spent the first two-thirds of their lives looting the public only to spend the last third giving the money away. Now, writes political analyst and journalist Giridharadas (The True American: Murder and Mercy in Texas, 2014, etc.), the global financial elite has reinterpreted Andrew Carnegie's view that it's good for society for capitalists to give something back to a new formula: It's good for business to do so when the time is right, but not otherwise. Moreover, business has co-opted philanthropy, such that any "world-changing" efforts come with a proviso: "if you really want to change the world, you must rely on the techniques, resources, and personnel of capitalism." Philanthropic initiatives to effect social change are no longer the province of public life but instead are private and voluntary, in keeping with free market individualism. Naturally, there's a layer of consultants and in-house vice presidents to manage all this largess, which hinges on the premise that things aren't so bad and just need to be nudged along. The author memorably calls this process "Pinkering," after the ameliorist-minded psychologist Steven Pinker. "It beamed out so many thoughts about why the world was getting better in recent years," Giridharadas writes of one initiative, "that its antennae failed to detect all the incoming transmissions about all the people whose lives were not improving, who didn't care to be Pinkered because they knew what they were seeing." So what's so bad about private giving? Answers the author, when a society elects to help, it expresses democratic values with an eye to equality, while private giving is inherently unequal, a power relation between "the giver and the taker, the helper and the helped, the donor and the recipient."A provocative critique of the kind of modern, feel-good giving that addresses symptoms and not causes. Copyright Kirkus Reviews, used with permission.