Tony's Review of What's the Matter with Kansas

What’s the Matter with Kansas? is a sharp and often biting look at how cultural identity reshaped American politics. Thomas Frank examines how a once progressive, populist state turned into a conservative stronghold, exploring why working-class voters often support policies that seem to go against their economic interests. His central question is not simply about Kansas, but about how ideology and identity override material concerns.

Frank writes with conviction and a kind of weary frustration. He paints Kansas as a symbol of the American heartland—people of deep faith, tradition, and pride—who have been persuaded to view culture as more important than class. Instead of fighting economic inequality, many turn their anger toward social issues. In Frank’s telling, this shift did not happen by accident. It was carefully nurtured by political strategists who understood that emotional appeal often beats data.

The book is strongest when it details this transformation through vivid local examples. Frank grew up in Kansas, and that familiarity gives his writing both affection and authority. He captures the contradictions well: communities struggling economically while fiercely defending the policies that contribute to their decline.

That said, What’s the Matter with Kansas? is not without its flaws. Frank’s analysis can sometimes oversimplify complex social and economic factors. His focus on conservative voters occasionally ignores the nuances of rural life or the diversity of political thought even within Kansas. The data, while persuasive, is often presented through anecdote rather than rigorous comparison. At times, it feels more like a thesis in search of evidence than an evidence-driven argument.

Still, Frank’s larger point remains powerful. He forces readers to consider how cultural narratives shape politics more deeply than facts alone. He argues that economic self-interest has been replaced by identity loyalty, and that this change has rewritten American democracy. Whether or not you agree with his conclusions, his work invites reflection on how easily public discourse can be steered away from substance toward symbolism.

This is a book that provokes, and that is its real value. Even when Frank’s data feels selective or his tone borders on exasperation, he never stops asking the essential question—why do people fight so hard for ideas that seem to harm them?

A well-written and compelling read, if not always balanced in its interpretation. Its heart is in the right place, even when the math is a little thin.