Totalitarianism is bad. Freedom is good. You can’t argue with the message that FOX television personality Glenn Beck expertly delivers in “The Overton Window.” Modern industrialized democratic societies are capable of embracing dictatorships, as Germany and Italy did in the in 1930s. Can it happen in America? Never say “never.”
The central and most useful idea put forth in “The Overton Window” is one of political relativism. That is, when presented with a given set of choices, when one possible solution is extreme, a less extreme outcome will seem more acceptable. This idea is not Beck’s; according to Wikipedia, “The Overton window, in political theory, describes a ‘window’ in the range of public reactions to ideas in public discourse, in a spectrum of all possible options on a particular issue. It is named after its originator, Joseph P. Overton, former vice president of the Mackinac Center for Public Policy.”
For example, if the government threatens to ban all firearms in private hands, a less extreme ban on automatic weapons seems more reasonable. To a libertarian, which Beck sounds like, this type of compromise moves the Overton window along the sliding scale toward totalitarianism. A government ban on automatic weapons, which should be unthinkable, is accepted by the masses only because the other choice, a total ban on all weapons, is a possibility. This is how Big Brother conditions citizens to meekly accept government control over the lives of its citizens.
Unfortunately, you don’t need four hundred pages to figure this out. “The Overton Window” is not so much a thriller as a political science lesson. The characters, which are expertly drawn, deliver endless lectures to each other. The evil public relations genius Arthur Isaiah Gardner pontificates about how the United States is a failed experiment in democracy that needs totalitarianism. The good guys lecture each other about how the government plans to institute totalitarianism. As it turns out, the paranoia of the good guys is based on reality. Terrorists will detonate a nuclear bomb in Las Vegas, and the blame will be put on the Founders Keepers, a group that resembles the Tea Party. The scheme echoes the Reichstag fire of 1933, which Chancellor Hitler was quick to blame on communists and which he used as an excuse to suspend civil liberties.
The protagonist and bad-guy-who-becomes-good is Noah Gardner, son of the evil Arthur Gardner. Noah is paired with Molly Ross, an activist with the Founders Keepers. (Presumably other Founders Keepers gals might be named Betsy Madison or Dolly Washington. Beck makes it easy for the reader to get the point.) Beck takes pains to avoid bashing Democrats; in his world, no matter who is in charge the government literally does nothing good or moral. Nothing. At one point Noah, in a lengthy political discussion with Molly, asserts, “I care about the environment more than most, I want clean energy -and Saddam Hussein was a legitimate monster.” But after this tiny window of rational discussion is cracked open, it is slammed shut again and Beck takes us back to paranoia. The problem is that “they” (the promoters of totalitarianism) are undefined. Presumably it is everyone in government (although Beck expressly excuses local law enforcement and those engaged in “public safety” – no sense in making the local cops and firefighters mad) and every corporate type. And there are no solutions offered, only a bleak and horrifying future ushered in by a guy who evokes Lionel Barrymore?s portrayal of the evil Henry Potter in “It’s a Wonderful Life.” Even the GM bailout, which in retrospect seems like a fantastic deal for the U.S. taxpayer and for our standing in the increasingly competitive global marketplace, is seen as evidence of the nanny state meddling in our “freedom.”
The challenge for anyone who might be critical of this book is that people who love the book can retort, “So! You are in favor of dictatorship! You hate freedom!” Sorry -no. I’m not paranoid and I am not afraid of complexity. As communication and mobility improve, the trend towards increased federalism is inevitable. It’s something that we have to manage, not run away from.
