What do you think?
Rate this book
Hostile Takeover: Resisting Centralized Government's Stranglehold on America
“ Hostile Takeover is essential reading for anyone looking to understand how individual freedom can prevail in a world of decentralized information. Matt Kibbe and this book provide us all with a roadmap on how to take back our lives, liberties, and responsibilities. ” —Glenn Beck A rebellious challenge to the "upper management" of government, who are choking American prosperity and liberty. Matt Kibbe, the former leader of FreedomWorks and now president and chief community organizer of Free the People—who Geraldo Rivera calls “a warrior for the cause of limited government”—now offers an intelligent, aggressively argued attack on the American federal government machine in Washington, D.C. In Hostile Takeover , Kibbe, co-author of the #1 bestseller Give Us Liberty , provides a blueprint for “resisting centralized government’s stranglehold on America,” in order to return the nation to the more workable system our Founding Fathers originally intended.
416 pages, Hardcover
First published June 1, 2012
14 people are currently reading
152 people want to read
About the author
Matt Kibbe
6 books28 followersMatthew B. "Matt" Kibbe is the President and CEO of FreedomWorks, a position he has held since 2004. He originally joined the organization (previously known as Citizens for a Sound Economy) as a policy analyst in 1986. He previously worked as Chief of Staff to U.S. Representative Dan Miller (R-FL), Senior Economist at the Republican National Committee (where he resigned in protest when George H. W. Bush violated his no new taxes pledge), Director of Federal Budget Policy at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, and Managing Editor of Market Process, an academic economics journal published by the Center for the Study of Market Processes at George Mason University.
Kibbe has been published in publications including The Wall Street Journal, The Washington Times, USA Today, RedState.com, America Spectator and Reason Magazine. On television, Kibbe has appeared on MSNBC’s The Dylan Ratigan Show, MSNBC’s Hardball, FOX News’ Fox & Friends, FOX News’ Glenn Beck, NBC’s The Today Show, FOX News’ America's Newsroom, CSPAN, FOX News’ Neil Cavuto, and FOX Business Network’s Happy Hour.
Source: Wikipedia.
Kibbe has been published in publications including The Wall Street Journal, The Washington Times, USA Today, RedState.com, America Spectator and Reason Magazine. On television, Kibbe has appeared on MSNBC’s The Dylan Ratigan Show, MSNBC’s Hardball, FOX News’ Fox & Friends, FOX News’ Glenn Beck, NBC’s The Today Show, FOX News’ America's Newsroom, CSPAN, FOX News’ Neil Cavuto, and FOX Business Network’s Happy Hour.
Source: Wikipedia.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 12 of 12 reviews
July 7, 2012
If you want to know how the tea party works, and what its strategy is going forward, this is a must read book by FreedomWorks president Matt Kibbe. This book lays out the policy agenda that most tea partiers adhere to, and describes how freedom is our strategy, and our first principle. Get your dose of both Austrian economics and disintermediation politics in this excellent book by my boss and mentor, Matt Kibbe.
October 12, 2012
Well written, great commentary on our country today.
September 1, 2012
Tea Party supporters should truly enjoy this book. Others, who may think about the Tea Party with negative stereotypes such as being backwoods anti-government Libertarians, parading around with those "Keep your Government hands off my Medicare" protest signs picketing against the Obama Health Care proposal, or as typified by the likes of 2010 Delaware Senate candidate Christine O'Donnell, may be very surprised by this book. Rather than coming across as a fringe extremist, Matt Kibbe, known as one of the great minds behind the Tea Party, makes strong and convincing arguments in this book for smaller and more limited government.
Of course, we always have to be careful about what we ask for, given the recognition of unintended consequences. Some experiences of governments changing from excess government control of the state economy to a free market approach have made a few at the top insanely rich (picture Russian oligarchs after the demise of the USSR) and the common many very poor. And economic recovery in those countries (e.g., Russia, Chile, etc.) was extremely slow. So simply doing away with one option doesn't always necessarily mean the next option will be nirvana.
Nonetheless, "Hostile Takeover" presents a strong case about the downside and dangers of excessive government intrusion into our lives. And many people recognize that things are so bad, with debt so high, that change is required, and the current Congress isn't working. Congress is a target rich environments if looking to criticize, and Kibbe has many criticisms of both Democrats and Republicans. However, and possibly due in part to the fact that the Democrats and Obama are in the White House, Kibbe's criticisms are predominately directed against the Democrats. If trying to reach as wide an audience as possible, taking unfair or too many partisan shots at the Democrats too early in the book may cost Kibbe some readers on the left before he can convince them of the merits of his views. Tea Party members, as well as most Conservatives, will likely already be supportive of his views. Democrats or Centrists, on the other hand, may need convincing. So Kibbe may have been better off if he had avoided the temptation of taking too many shots at Obama, and instead concentrated simply on the merits of his ideas. Otherwise, if giving an appearance of just being yet another partisan anti-Obama book, some may simply put the book down without hearing the true message.
One example concerns his chapter on Health Care. Kibbe points out how EVERY Democratic President from FDR to Obama has pushed for Universal Health Care, implying that only those big government, big spending Democrats have pushed universal Health Care initiatives. However, what he fails to mention is that Republican Administrations have also been complicit. For example, fifty-six years ago, in 1954, President Eisenhower proposed a kind of universal health care, asking Congress for funding for what he termed health reinsurance. Under this proposal, private insurance companies would extend benefits to uninsured Americans, and then be reimbursed by the federal government should they incur excessive loses. President Nixon also had made a proposal for expanding health care by proposing that ALL employers be forced to provide health insurance to their employees. However Democrats killed that proposal. And of course, President G.W. Bush, while not implementing universal health care, certainly expanded government's role by his Prescription Drug program.
Also, Kibbe was especially critical of that part of the Obama Health Care which mandates that all individuals obtain health care insurance or pay a fine. That "unconstitutional" intrusion into individual liberties, requiring universal participation, is singled out for criticism. And yet while he is critical of that infringement of our individual rights and liberties in that regard, he was fully supportive of the government of Chile requiring something very similar when they privatized their social security program. In Chile, ALL workers are required to divert a portion of the income into a retirement fund with private insurers. So, one might ask, are the recommendations for these similar sounding programs different simply because one is a Democratic / Obama initiative? It would be unfortunate, if that's the case, because that may tend to discourage the very readers Kibbe would be most interested in reaching, e.g., left leaning or Centrist voters.
Other minor issues involve several irrelevant discussions of topics not relevant to his main points. For example, pointing out deficiencies with the Occupy Wall Street (OWS) movement doesn't logically mean that an opposite movement, e.g., The Tea Party movement, is necessarily favorable. One doesn't relate to the other. Similarly, pointing out deficiencies in the British Health Care system was not particularly relevant to the Obama Health Care proposals. The description of long waits for care under the British health care program implies that is what is in store for us under the Obama program, but the equivalent sole government provider provision is not what was adopted.
There were other discussion points Kibbe made which required a stretch of ones imagination, were illogical, or seemed to be based on unfounded assumptions of what the Democrats, or Obama, "might" be thinking. All that is unfortunate, since Kibbe manages to make a strong case for his points of view. His own arguments are strong enough to stand on their own, and any argument to the contrary which isn't based on solid facts only tends to be a distraction and has the effect of weakening his arguments.
In summary, I think Conservative readers will really enjoy this book, as it reinforces most conservative points of view. Readers on the left may take issue with some of the complaints about Obama and the Democrats, but they're relatively minor, and if they can get past that and read further, they may well be surprised to find a rational and convincing explanation of Tea Party views. And Independent readers, swing voters, or fence-sitters reading this book may well find Kibbe's points convincing enough to bring them into the Conservative camp during the upcoming 2012 election cycle.
Of course, we always have to be careful about what we ask for, given the recognition of unintended consequences. Some experiences of governments changing from excess government control of the state economy to a free market approach have made a few at the top insanely rich (picture Russian oligarchs after the demise of the USSR) and the common many very poor. And economic recovery in those countries (e.g., Russia, Chile, etc.) was extremely slow. So simply doing away with one option doesn't always necessarily mean the next option will be nirvana.
Nonetheless, "Hostile Takeover" presents a strong case about the downside and dangers of excessive government intrusion into our lives. And many people recognize that things are so bad, with debt so high, that change is required, and the current Congress isn't working. Congress is a target rich environments if looking to criticize, and Kibbe has many criticisms of both Democrats and Republicans. However, and possibly due in part to the fact that the Democrats and Obama are in the White House, Kibbe's criticisms are predominately directed against the Democrats. If trying to reach as wide an audience as possible, taking unfair or too many partisan shots at the Democrats too early in the book may cost Kibbe some readers on the left before he can convince them of the merits of his views. Tea Party members, as well as most Conservatives, will likely already be supportive of his views. Democrats or Centrists, on the other hand, may need convincing. So Kibbe may have been better off if he had avoided the temptation of taking too many shots at Obama, and instead concentrated simply on the merits of his ideas. Otherwise, if giving an appearance of just being yet another partisan anti-Obama book, some may simply put the book down without hearing the true message.
One example concerns his chapter on Health Care. Kibbe points out how EVERY Democratic President from FDR to Obama has pushed for Universal Health Care, implying that only those big government, big spending Democrats have pushed universal Health Care initiatives. However, what he fails to mention is that Republican Administrations have also been complicit. For example, fifty-six years ago, in 1954, President Eisenhower proposed a kind of universal health care, asking Congress for funding for what he termed health reinsurance. Under this proposal, private insurance companies would extend benefits to uninsured Americans, and then be reimbursed by the federal government should they incur excessive loses. President Nixon also had made a proposal for expanding health care by proposing that ALL employers be forced to provide health insurance to their employees. However Democrats killed that proposal. And of course, President G.W. Bush, while not implementing universal health care, certainly expanded government's role by his Prescription Drug program.
Also, Kibbe was especially critical of that part of the Obama Health Care which mandates that all individuals obtain health care insurance or pay a fine. That "unconstitutional" intrusion into individual liberties, requiring universal participation, is singled out for criticism. And yet while he is critical of that infringement of our individual rights and liberties in that regard, he was fully supportive of the government of Chile requiring something very similar when they privatized their social security program. In Chile, ALL workers are required to divert a portion of the income into a retirement fund with private insurers. So, one might ask, are the recommendations for these similar sounding programs different simply because one is a Democratic / Obama initiative? It would be unfortunate, if that's the case, because that may tend to discourage the very readers Kibbe would be most interested in reaching, e.g., left leaning or Centrist voters.
Other minor issues involve several irrelevant discussions of topics not relevant to his main points. For example, pointing out deficiencies with the Occupy Wall Street (OWS) movement doesn't logically mean that an opposite movement, e.g., The Tea Party movement, is necessarily favorable. One doesn't relate to the other. Similarly, pointing out deficiencies in the British Health Care system was not particularly relevant to the Obama Health Care proposals. The description of long waits for care under the British health care program implies that is what is in store for us under the Obama program, but the equivalent sole government provider provision is not what was adopted.
There were other discussion points Kibbe made which required a stretch of ones imagination, were illogical, or seemed to be based on unfounded assumptions of what the Democrats, or Obama, "might" be thinking. All that is unfortunate, since Kibbe manages to make a strong case for his points of view. His own arguments are strong enough to stand on their own, and any argument to the contrary which isn't based on solid facts only tends to be a distraction and has the effect of weakening his arguments.
In summary, I think Conservative readers will really enjoy this book, as it reinforces most conservative points of view. Readers on the left may take issue with some of the complaints about Obama and the Democrats, but they're relatively minor, and if they can get past that and read further, they may well be surprised to find a rational and convincing explanation of Tea Party views. And Independent readers, swing voters, or fence-sitters reading this book may well find Kibbe's points convincing enough to bring them into the Conservative camp during the upcoming 2012 election cycle.
December 27, 2020
This book covers a lot of ground on how the federal government has become corrupt and ways the American people can push back and regain some control over their representatives.
Some sections of the book did not stand the test of time. Kibbe has also admitted later on that his hope for the democratization of the internet and social media was too optimistic.
Some sections of the book did not stand the test of time. Kibbe has also admitted later on that his hope for the democratization of the internet and social media was too optimistic.
January 8, 2018
An interesting look at how both sides of the political aisle aren't really interested in anything but holding on to their version of power.
July 24, 2022
Fascinating read. Cannot believe it was written in 2012. Lots of good research in here - well presented and easy to digest.
February 22, 2016
I enjoyed this a whole lot more than I thought I would. Usually, books with these sensationalist titles tend to disappoint, but "Hostile Takeover" is the exception to the rule. This was the first book I had read by Kibbe, but I was pleasantly surprised. Specifically, I was surprised by the number of references he makes to Austrian economists. Though known for its anti-big government stance, the Tea Party is not typically characterized as in-tune with Austrian economics. However, Kibbe certainly knows his stuff on that topic.
Kibbe presents a unified thesis: as virtually everything in our lives becomes more individualized and decentralized with the advent of internet shopping and social media, government has gone in the opposite direction to become more bureaucratic, centralized, and top-down as ever. He believes that this contradiction will inevitably fail as more and more people wake up to the damage that big, one-size-fits-all government has perpetrated. Also, he believes that embracing a decentralized approach is absolutely necessary to take on the entrenched interests in expansive government. This is the mindset that the Tea Party has taken in its protests and organization. There is not one charismatic leader or one oligarchical group behind the movement. It has all happened at the grassroots level, which is why it is immune from many of the factors that have taken down past movements like it. He continually references back to his main thesis in his discussions on taxation, health care, entitlements, and the federal debt. This presents a consistent, easy to understand final product that even Kibbe's biggest critics would not be able to attack for hypocrisy or inconsistency.
I would recommend this book to anyone that believes that big government and one-size-fits-all approaches generally lead to poor outcomes for a society. If you are critical of any or all of Social Security, Medicare, Obamacare, the tax code, or bailouts, this book is for you. If adherents of big government want to read a generally representative take on the opposing viewpoint, this would be a good place to start. Kibbe hits all of the important points and makes it clear how all of these programs at their cores are extremely similar, which means that they all have comparable weaknesses. Big government continues to invade more aspects of our lives, yet a huge portion of our population continues to call for more intervention to "solve" the issues that past intervention caused. This cycle will eventually lead to ruin as service on the federal debt and entitlement spending takes up an increasingly greater chunk of tax revenues. I hope we can wake up before it is too late. This book gives me some optimism, but I still remain generally pessimistic.
Kibbe presents a unified thesis: as virtually everything in our lives becomes more individualized and decentralized with the advent of internet shopping and social media, government has gone in the opposite direction to become more bureaucratic, centralized, and top-down as ever. He believes that this contradiction will inevitably fail as more and more people wake up to the damage that big, one-size-fits-all government has perpetrated. Also, he believes that embracing a decentralized approach is absolutely necessary to take on the entrenched interests in expansive government. This is the mindset that the Tea Party has taken in its protests and organization. There is not one charismatic leader or one oligarchical group behind the movement. It has all happened at the grassroots level, which is why it is immune from many of the factors that have taken down past movements like it. He continually references back to his main thesis in his discussions on taxation, health care, entitlements, and the federal debt. This presents a consistent, easy to understand final product that even Kibbe's biggest critics would not be able to attack for hypocrisy or inconsistency.
I would recommend this book to anyone that believes that big government and one-size-fits-all approaches generally lead to poor outcomes for a society. If you are critical of any or all of Social Security, Medicare, Obamacare, the tax code, or bailouts, this book is for you. If adherents of big government want to read a generally representative take on the opposing viewpoint, this would be a good place to start. Kibbe hits all of the important points and makes it clear how all of these programs at their cores are extremely similar, which means that they all have comparable weaknesses. Big government continues to invade more aspects of our lives, yet a huge portion of our population continues to call for more intervention to "solve" the issues that past intervention caused. This cycle will eventually lead to ruin as service on the federal debt and entitlement spending takes up an increasingly greater chunk of tax revenues. I hope we can wake up before it is too late. This book gives me some optimism, but I still remain generally pessimistic.
June 15, 2014
I started reading this book because I respected the commitment and the perspective that led Matt Kibbe to press forward in his grassroots quest to return the government to its rightful role. Now, I respect both his determination AND his depth of thought. He is the first to step aside from the limelight and focus on the many individuals who have (and who must) act independently and cooperatively. He's not out there blowing his own horn or drawing attention to himself. He's thoughtfully persuading others with Austrian economics, common sense, present day examples, and a healthy dose of history. I'm more motivated having read this book and I'm ready to act. I also want to hear more from Kibbe.
October 27, 2013
This was an excellent commentary on the state of our union. Matt Kibbe is both passionate and thorough in his treatment of centralized government and the dangerous lean of our present state. I was not previously aware of Matt Kibbe or Freedomworks, but I hope to see more of this author and his work. It made me think, and (more importantly) it made me want to get involved.
October 1, 2012
Read this if you want to turn this country around on a political basis. I do not believe this will turn it around unless the USA has a change of heart.
June 6, 2015
Not as good as "Don't Take People's Stuff", but still a good read.
May 20, 2016
This book is a little dated and a little wordy, but it hits a lot of different political topics and can serve as a refresher course in government.
Displaying 1 - 12 of 12 reviews