After Liberalism is largely a genealogy of how liberalism as anideology has been constructed over time and through changingcircumstances. Gottfried argues that there is no fixed "essence" of liberalism. He points out the necessity of contextualization when tracing liberalism through history (p. 36). Gottfried states that two mistakes are usually made by analysts-either the assumption that liberalism has remained the same throughout the past, or the assumption that the past was a progressive, linear, inevitable prelude to the current definition of liberalism (p. 36). Gottfried contends that such global theories ignore the distinctiveness of specific phases of history (p. 38). This is an important point for Gottfried since he will use it throughout his book to argue that a "semantic theft" (p. 29) has taken place, in which the terms "liberal democratic" have been appropriated as a figleaf to cover up illiberal uses of power by those who administer the modern mangerial state.
Gottfried presents the reader a tale of two liberalisms-the classical and the managerial. He argues that there is a historical discontinuity between classical liberalism, with its emphasis on minimal government interference in the private lives of citizens, as imagined in the nineteenth century, versus the managerial liberalism of the twentieth. Gottfried states that the difference is that managerial liberals believe "letting people go their own way will not suffice to make them open-minded or civic spirited" (p. 17). Liberal democracy" has come to mean not a form of government, but a process akin to evangelism where the government impresses it on its own people and then on the world (p. 68). Liberals are attempting to self-fulfill their own prophecy. Gottfried points out liberalism must expand itself, otherwise it will not be able to claim that its principles are universally applicable. The United States has been hijacked as well as liberalism by the managerial elite. It now is a tool for their agenda-it is billed as a "universal nation," hence the open borders policy that has been pursued in recent years (p. 76). Besides this internal policy of "universalization," the managers have also embarked upon an external policy as well, with the United States again serving as the preferred instrument.
A major aspect of Gottfried's analysis is the role psychological intimidation and exclusion plays in the managerial state. Managerial liberalism needs an Other to marginalize, in order to realize its claims of "making the world safe for democracy." That Other is "fascism" (p. 18). Those who are critical of the current regime are labeled as extremists or fascists and are summarily condemned (p. 139). In an attempt to make citizens free, the managerial state has created a type of prison. Gottfried identifies the source of this carceral logic as the medicalization of politics (p. 80). The state has a therapeutic function, ensuring mental health by fighting pathologies like insensitivity, fascism, and so on. There is great irony in managerial liberalism as an ideology that uses totalitarian methods for antitotalitarian ends. Citizens have become patients. Dissenters have become dehumanized (p. 91). Gottfried points out that people are afraid to oppose the official values of the regime (p. 95). Unlike past totalitarian regimes, this one acts by "concealing its operation in the language of caring" (p. 141). It hides its power. Its real agenda is to "shape and reshape people's lives" (p. 141). The state engages in behavioral modification (p. 107). It is important to note that the term "totalitarian" is being used here differently than would usually be expected. "Totalitarian" describes the universal, totalizing ambitions of managerial liberalism, in terms of its desire to reach into every aspect of the lives of the citizenry, including private thoughts and lifestyle preferences. It does not necessarily mean physical, violent, secret-police style repression.
After Liberalism serves the function of unmasking and revealing the dynamics of power at work in contemporary Western society. Gottfried is wise to avoid prophecy or prescriptiveness, stating "no attempt has been made to chart any supposedly inevitable future for the managerial state" (p. 135). He makes it clear that his sympathies lie with populist resistance to the managerial state, and his text is replete with defenses of and appeals to human particularity and local rather than global conceptions of rights and community. His mode of argumentation exposes the inherent inconsistency, and thus irrationality, in the supposedly rational managerial ethic. The managerial state presumes to protect plurality and diversity by criminalizing "insensitivity" toward racial, sexual, and other "disadvantaged" groups, yet its methods yield conformity and stamp out true human particularity and diversity. By denying the managerial state its rational foundation, Gottfried exposes the fact that the regime maintains its legitimacy only because of its provision of benefits and services, much like ancient Roman "bread and circuses" (p. x), to an increasingly fearful and skeptical population.
Ultimately, Gottfried's text deserves praise for contributing yet another nail into the coffin of liberal democratic rationalism. It arrives in print in the midst of exciting times, where the political climate, like other arenas of human thought and action, are quite simply a mess. Events have transcended terms such as "left" and "right," as can be seen in the recent endorsement of Patrick Buchanan (who is well in line with Gottfried's sympathies) by the African-American ultraleftist Lenora Fulani. After Liberalism therefore performs an important stocktaking function for those interested in an account of contemporary Western politics, especially in light of its unusual and promising ideological and epistemological debts.
