Michelle Wilde Anderson’s The Fight to Save the Town: Reimagining Discarded America is worth reading for its optimistic approach to the challenges facing poor communities. Governments in such communities are often beset by significant legal and structural limitations that make it hard for them to provide even basic services to poor residents. With government programs related to poverty largely forced into retreat since the War on Poverty, the Affordable Care Act being the notable exception, it is easy for those who care about how the government responds to poverty to fall into despair. Poverty law offers little solace. The promise of Goldberg v. Kelly having long since faded, poverty law scholars are left searching for reasons for hope. The Fight to Save the Town provides glimmers of hope despite the legal and structural limitations facing struggling communities.
Anderson explains in the introduction that she aligns herself with the “‘call in,’ rather than ‘call out,’ tradition of social change,” (P. 31) which captures the book’s tone and approach. Portraits of community leaders and community organizations fighting back against urban decay and government decline form the heart of the book. But for all the heroism depicted in The Fight to Save the Town, readers are left—as they arguably should be—simultaneously inspired by the many examples of communities coming together and horrified by the fact that anti-government and anti-poor sentiment has been so effective in gutting these same communities for so long.
While some readers of the book will likely accuse it of being too optimistic—being so celebratory of minor wins that can only do so much in the face of major structural barriers—Anderson begins each community profile by explaining the roots of today’s citywide poverty in the four towns profiled. Anderson is not the first author working on local communities to structure a book in this way. William Julius Wilson and Richard P. Taub’s excellent work, There Goes the Neighborhood: Racial, Ethnic, and Class Tensions in Four Chicago Neighborhoods and Their Meaning for America (2006), for example, has a similar structure. What makes Anderson’s book stand out is her ability to show the commonalities across four cities and areas that initially seem so distinct. On the surface, Stockton, California; Josephine County, Oregon; Lawrence, Massachusetts; and Detroit, Michigan are quite different in terms of scale, economics, racial composition, and politics. Such differences, Anderson shows, matter–and shape everything from what the community values to what sort of work is needed to make improvements. But The Fight to Save the Town is as much about the people working to help others find jobs, ensure the public library stays open, or make an area safe again, as it is about the distinct places. Anderson’s book is both a portrait of ground-up activism and a portrait of communities hoping for a better future.
The themes tackled by The Fight to Save the Town are not easy ones and, Anderson is careful to note, are not the issues that impact all communities. Because each town has its own history and own struggles, the book is not a how-to manual for community activists. But Stockton, Josephine County, Lawrence, and Detroit are going through things that many struggling places are going through. Hit hard by deindustrialization and tax rebellions that leave local governments unable to collect enough revenue to fund basic services, residents see their livelihoods collapse—even as they find themselves unable to rely upon government services that, in earlier periods, were taken for granted. Mistrust of government is a common feeling in such places, whether the politics in the area lean blue or red. Community activists are forced to do the best that they can to improve things, whether that means building up networks outside of government or finding ways to convince taxpayers to agree to be taxed in order for the government to rebuild.
Before tackling the most challenging part of the book, it is worth pausing to give Anderson credit for being a very talented writer. The Fight to Save the Town flows beautifully. The town histories and the portraits of community activists and politicians are written in such a way that they draw the reader in, making one care about these places and people. Like most breakout books on poverty, Anderson’s choice to write a people-centered book allows her to connect with readers in a way that cannot be achieved through wonky policy-centered approaches.
It is also worth acknowledging that, for many readers, the hardest part of The Fight to Save the Town to deal with is likely Anderson’s relentless optimism. I suspect that all law faculties have colleagues whose modus operandi is to be positive. You see them in the hall, where every day is the best day ever, and in faculty meetings, where they think every idea is a great one, even if the issue really demands they take a stance. I cannot say that I hate such people, that is way too strong a claim. But, admittedly, they do annoy me. Let’s be realistic—some days suck and some choices are bad ones. Anderson can come off as too positive. Fortunately, she knows it and spends time in the introduction defending her choice to “celebrate and support a new generation of people-centered leadership.” (P. 32.) As Anderson observes, “eulogistic writing records memories of a place, as though it is already lost,” (P. 25) even though places that Anderson calls “discarded America” still are home to large numbers of poor people. And those poor people have agency, attachment to place, and hopes and dreams that should not be written off.
My view is that there is value in both the “call in” and the “call out” traditions of social change. There must be works such as Matthew Desmond’s Evicted: Poverty and Profit in the American City (2016) and Barbara Ehrenreich’s Nickel and Dimed: On (Not) Getting By in America (2001) that call out the gross inequalities that the country tolerates and the hardships that the poor endure. Such works speak to some readers and can force the upper and middle classes to recognize the humanity (and the suffering) of the poor. But, there is also a need for more optimistic takes. Works like this show readers that people living in poor places should be not only listened to, but that through their leadership and example are already providing a path forward for these struggling communities.
