The presidential election of 2020 has left observers puzzled. In an era where the stock market continues to climb, while the proportion of individuals owning stocks declines and pandemic continues to wreak havoc with the livelihoods of millions of Americans, support for conservative economic policies remains strong. There seems to be a disjunction between objective economic conditions and subjective perceptions. By objective standards, the size of the American middle class has shrunk, with the share of Americans living in middle‐income households (defined as those with household incomes two‐thirds to double the national median) falling from 61 percent in 1971 to 50 percent in 2015. Yet, the share of Americans who perceive themselves to be in the middle has increased slightly over this timeframe. How do we account for this disjunction? This is the question political scientists Condon and Wichowsky set out to answer.

Condon and Wichowsky argue that, for individuals, statistical facts are not the only way to learn about the world, and they are not the only path towards a more accurate perception of inequality and relative status. Quoting social psychologist Michael Krause they note, “the global rising tide of economic inequality is experienced at the interpersonal level,” and individuals’ self‐perception is based on their relative prosperity vis‐à‐vis others.

While the book assembles evidence from many mainly surveys, including NORC General Social Surveys (GSS), their supporting evidence comes from a series of experiments in which individuals were asked to rank themselves against an imaginary other. Their experimental evidence suggests that like Gulliver, people feel small when surrounded by giant Brobdingnagians and colossal in the land of the tiny Lilliputians. When comparing themselves against people lower down the economic ladder, more people rank themselves higher on the economic ladder than when they compare themselves against people higher up.

The book is divided into three parts. In the first part, the authors make a case for focusing on cross‐class comparisons in order to make sense of the politics of inequality and discuss methodological challenges involved in measuring relative social status. In the second part, they examine experimental evidence on how cross‐class comparisons shape Americans’ perception of their own status and their political attitudes about welfare and redistribution of wealth. In the third part, they examine trends in American society that insulate American politics from the effects of interpersonal cross‐class comparisons. For example, they argue that while contact with wealthy individuals may make the poor less satisfied with their own situation, a geographic separation between the rich and the poor ensures that most people have little contact with the super‐rich. Moreover, rising economic anxiety results in individuals refusing to think about economic matters other than in order to manage their anxiety.

While economic statistics tell us much about macro trends in inequality, this book tries to focus on the micro‐foundations of individual perceptions of inequality and how individuals respond. The link between experimental evidence, social psychology, and the politics of perception makes this book an interesting read as we try to make sense of the present political climate in the United States.

While, as the authors argue, to compare is human, a lot goes into which comparisons we make. Whether individuals engage in upward or downward comparison makes a huge difference in how they construct inequality in their minds and their political responses to this inequality. Congdon and Wichowsky argue that which comparisons individuals choose to engage in, and which ones they are encouraged to make by the media and the political machinery determines how they react. Their ability to connect the dots between economic trends, social psychology, and politics of identity construction create an engaging book with tremendous salience for the present political moment. —S.D.

2020年的总统大选让观察员感到困惑。在一个股市持续攀升，拥有股票的个人比例下降，大流行继续对数百万美国人的生计造成严重破坏的时代，对保守的经济政策的支持仍然很强。客观经济条件与主观认识之间似乎存在脱节。按照客观标准，美国中产阶级的人数减少了，居住在中等收入家庭（定义为家庭收入的三分之二，是全国中位数的两倍）中的美国人的比例从1971年的61％下降到了50％在2015年。然而，在这段时间内，自以为是的美国人所占比例略有增加。我们如何解释这种分离？这是政治学家康登和威豪斯基提出的问题。

Condon和Wichowsky认为，对于个人而言，统计事实不是了解世界的唯一途径，也不是通往更准确地理解不平等和相对地位的唯一途径。他们引用社会心理学家迈克尔·克劳斯（Michael Krause）的话说，“全球经济不平等的上升趋势是在人际层面上经历的，”而个人的自我感知是建立在他们相对于他人的相对繁荣之上的。

虽然该书从许多主要调查中收集了证据，包括NORC总体社会调查（GSS），但它们的支持证据却来自一系列实验，在这些实验中，人们被要求将自己与假想的其他人进行比较。他们的实验证据表明，像格列佛一样，当人们被巨型布罗丁纳哥人包围时，在小小的利利普蒂人的土地上硕大无比时，他们会感到渺小。将自己与经济低下阶层的人进行比较时，比将自己与经济高等阶层的人进行比较的人更多。

这本书分为三个部分。在第一部分中，作者提出了关注跨类比较的案例，以便理解不平等的政治意义，并讨论衡量相对社会地位所涉及的方法论挑战。在第二部分中，他们研究了关于跨阶级比较如何塑造美国人对其自身地位的看法以及他们对福利和财富再分配的政治态度的实验证据。在第三部分中，他们研究了使美国政治与人际跨阶层比较的影响相隔离的美国社会趋势。例如，他们认为与富人接触可能会使穷人对自己的处境不满意，富人与穷人之间的地理隔离确保了大多数人与超级富人的接触很少。而且，日益增加的经济焦虑症导致个人拒绝考虑经济问题，而不是为了管理自己的焦虑症。

尽管经济统计数据告诉我们许多有关不平等的宏观趋势，但本书还是着眼于个人对不平等的看法的微观基础以及个人的反应。实验证据，社会心理学和感知政治之间的联系使这本书成为有趣的读物，因为我们试图弄清美国当前的政治气候。

正如作者所言，进行比较是人类的事情，但我们进行的比较却很多。个人是进行向上还是向下比较，在他们如何构造不平等观念以及对不平等现象的政治反应方面，都具有巨大差异。Congdon和Wichowsky认为，个人选择进行哪种比较，媒体和政治机制鼓励他们进行哪种比较决定了他们的反应方式。他们将经济趋势，社会心理学和身份建构政治之间的点点滴滴联系起来的能力，造就了一本引人入胜的书，对当前的政治时刻极为重视。—SD