Kagan starts with the dawn of the country and argues that the framers were liberal in their views about what kind of country they envisioned and traceKagan starts with the dawn of the country and argues that the framers were liberal in their views about what kind of country they envisioned and traced it throughout our history to the present. But he is very clear that even when the Constitution was written, there were anti-liberals in existence (the Anti-Federalists) whose strain also runs throughout our history. Both have been in the ascendency during different periods- the secessions in 1861, those opposed to Reconstruction, "redemption" at the end of Reconstruction, Jim Crow, the McCarthy era, those opposed to Civil Rights down to Trump in the present day. Liberal elements have been present during all this time but since the Civil War, we are perhaps in danger of losing the democracy at present.
The book really is a warning to Americans to fight against Trump and his minions to prevent their taking over the country....more
This is a most interesting, new approach to viewing Reconstruction. Downs emphasizes the importance of the military at the time and how without it, ReThis is a most interesting, new approach to viewing Reconstruction. Downs emphasizes the importance of the military at the time and how without it, Reconstruction could never have accomplished what it did. While acknowledging the disappointment of its aftermath, we are made fully aware of the challenges that reuniting the country after the Civil War brought. The argument has often been made that if Johnson had acted more aggressively when the South was laid low, that it would have acquiesced and peace attained much sooner. Downs rejects this idea, he believed that they would have played a waiting game and behaved as they did.
It is commonly held that Appomattox marked the end of the war but the author reminds the reader that it was not until 1871, with the readmission of all of the Confederate states that the war ended and that that was an accepted fact at the time. Further, it was the Republican Party that argued for military enforcement of the peace and the conditions of peace that played the most important role in achieving whatever peace was reached and without it, legislation without enforcement was not possible in the South.
This book explores this period of time in a manner not really viewed previously. It provides a deeper understanding of the challenges that the country faced and is an important addition to the understanding of our history. As such, I highly recommend this book. ...more
If I could give this book a rating of 10, I would do it. As the title suggests, it presents a whole new way of looking at American history. Rather thaIf I could give this book a rating of 10, I would do it. As the title suggests, it presents a whole new way of looking at American history. Rather than relying on the founding documents as our start, Roosevelt instructs us to discard that and look to Reconstruction.
The Declaration, we learn, was a document of separation. It was not about our concern for equality, it was about our gripes with Britain and why we must separate from it. Now that seems very obvious but clearly implied in it, if we care to look, is "us" calling out all the injustices we are suffering while at the same time, continuing to impose injustice on others- ie- blacks and Native Americans. The Reconstruction Amendments effectually destroyed the Founders Constitution and replaced it with a new one; one built on equality rather than slavery as the original Constitution had done. Moreover, the author argues that it was actually the Confederates who were fighting for the Constitution, not the United States (as Roosevelt prefers to refer to the North). It makes sense. Further, if, like me, you have always felt a bit uncomfortable with the Founders instilling inequality into the document, you can now get comfortable with a superior beginning for the country. That is not to say that everything is hunky dory and that we can relax, obviously it is not.
We still have the injustices and inequality in the country to acknowledge and deal with but it does give better focus to who our real heroes should be. (Not Jefferson and Washington). Roosevelt is not the first person to point out these things but from my reading, he had done it more thoroughly and satisfactorily than others I have read. There are so many quotes from the book that I could provide, but I will just give this book the strongest recommendation that I possibly can. It is especially timely at this time. One thing I must point out here is that even though the author is calling for setting aside the hero worship of the Framers, he does it in a way that does not offend and makes one want to follow his advice because it is so well grounded in research, scholarship generally, and expertise in writing. ...more
How do you erase war crimes on a huge scale in the Twentieth Century? One way is to be a Zionist whose organization is intent on taking the land of PaHow do you erase war crimes on a huge scale in the Twentieth Century? One way is to be a Zionist whose organization is intent on taking the land of Palestine from the people who had inhabited it for centuries. You destroy their villages, take their land, their businesses, and any possessions in their homes that you would like for yourself. If they object, you massacre them- sometimes you just killed people to put the fear of God into them all. David Ben Gurion and his troop of war criminals did this on a massive scale and have continued into the present and they have gotten away with it because first, the Brits allowed it to be joined by the U.S. later on- and the UN wasn't much use either. Illan Pappe has been called the most principled, most incisive historian in Israel. He is Jewish himself and has been fighting for the Palestinian people for decades.
Anyone who reads reviews by me knows that I do not like writing long ones so I won't be providing a lot of detail about the atrocities committed by the Israeli army but that does not mean that there are not plenty of them. And the victims of their crimes are still living in refugee camps, 76 years later. Moreover, any negotiations are prevented by the Israelis from mentioning the "Nakba" (the process of genetic cleansing carried out by them under Ben Grunion) and as long as that is the case, there will never be a solution to the issues in that country. Before 1948, Palestine was well over 90% Arab- In 1948, that was all turned on its head with the overwhelming majority now being Jewish.
When I first began reading this book, I was appalled that just 3 years after the Holocaust, its victims could do that- But- those who carried it out were not people from the death camps- most of those survivors immigrated to the U.S. and other Western countries. This is a very important story and one that should be read by anyone interested in humanity. ...more
I rated this book 4 for a few reasons. The early part of the book had some inaccuracies inexcusable for a professional historian, in my opinion. The tI rated this book 4 for a few reasons. The early part of the book had some inaccuracies inexcusable for a professional historian, in my opinion. The two that come to mind is a reference to Truman's Second Inaugural. Truman was elected only once. He took over upon the death of FDR, finished the term and then ran in 1948. He did not run again. Adlai Stevenson was the Democratic candidate in 1952 so Truman had just one inauguration. The second rather blatant mistake, I think, was her reference to Eisenhower as a great civil rights president. He basis for it was the appointment of Earl Warren as Chief Justice, sending the troops to Little Rock, and signing the 1957 Civil Rights Act. Ike appointed Warren, the Republican governor of CA expecting a conservative judge. He said many times after that he regretted appointing him. He sent troops to Little Rock but did it kicking and screaming. Finally the civil rights law was a very weak law that Congress passed and he signed but was not crazy about it.
The book does a great job of drawing a line from Nixon (through the people who worked for him who then served other Republican presidents later), through Reagan, to the jr Bush to Trump. She takes all the things that happened during these administrations and explains how while they all wanted to destroy the democratic consensus until Trump has done it very openly. It is generally a very good book but I could not figure out why she started in the present then about half way through the book, went back to the Framers and moved forward.
I still recommend the book because she puts everything that has happened with regard to the democratic consensus in perspective. ...more
This is one of the most heavily researched and analyzed works of history that has been published on its subject. It tells the life story of Mary QueenThis is one of the most heavily researched and analyzed works of history that has been published on its subject. It tells the life story of Mary Queen of Scots a woman unfortunate enough to come to the throne at a time when Protestantism was in the ascendency in the country and Catholicism on the decline. it was also a time when the judgement of women was not trusted. Unfortunately, Mary was naive and trusting and made some badly informed decisions as monarch beginning with her marriage to Lord Darnley, a mistake whose consequences would haunt her unto her grave.
Having been crowned Queen of Scotland when she was only six days old, Mary's hand in marriage was sought by sovereigns throughout Europe including Henry VIII who was exceedingly unhappy not to have his way and invaded Scotland to demonstrate his unhappiness. It became known as "the rough wooing". Mary's early life was chaotic and would continue to be throughout its entirety. She was married to the French Dauphin, Frances, whose father, died soon after elevating Frances to the crown. But this marriage would be cut short with the early death of Frances, Mary returned to Scotland to take up her role as queen. But Mary had spent most of her life in France, spoke mostly French, dressed in the French manner, and carried the habits of the French. She was also a Catholic which did not sit well with many of her lords who belonged to the "reformed" religion. Surrounded by austere and intolerant Calvinists, Mary had her work cut out for her.
She was charmed by Lord Darnley, the son of the Earl of Lennox a powerful man. Darnley was very handsome and probably sought out Mary with the belief that he would assume the power of the throne as her husband. For the entirety of the marriage, he pressured her to crown him king but she never did. Mary bore Darnley a son, James who would be James VI of Scotland, later James I of England, uniting the throne and essentially creating Great Britain. It became clear to Mary (and to many others) that Darnley was plotting against her to become the sovereign, dethrone Mary and rule Scotland through his son. He was also cruel towards Mary, not faithful, and hated by just about everyone in Scotland. Therefore, when he was murdered, a result of a conspiracy of a group of Mary's lords, they attempted to sully Mary's reputation in order to remove her from power and gain it for themselves. With the number of people involved in these conspiracies and the involvement of Cecil, Elizabeth's agent, and Mary's own naiveté, it becomes easy to see how they were able to do what they did. Moreover, Bothwell, a lord who abducted Mary, raped her and forced her to marry him was involved as well. His goal was to usurp power and rule Scotland. After years of imprisonment in England, Mary was beheaded under Elizabeths order after it was discovered that she herself (Mary) was plotting the death of Elizabeth. But who could blame her?
The author concludes that Mary was really not up to the job of being the sovereign at that time and was taken advantage of, set up, and then accused of Darnleys murder- all to get her out of the way. Further, throughout most of this time Mary was unwell both physically and mentally. The reader can only conclude that Mary was probably the most unfairly maligned sovereign during this period of time and deserves better treatments by historians generally.
Anyone with an interest in this era will find this book very interesting. The books and information that I have previously read skimmed over most of the events leading up to Mary's beheading, many even concluding that it was warranted. Weir does the "wet work" and concludes that Mary was almost certainly innocent.
This is the biography of one of the most important and dedicated Justices of the Supreme Court who consistently stood up for African Americans when noThis is the biography of one of the most important and dedicated Justices of the Supreme Court who consistently stood up for African Americans when no one else would. He was the only dissenting voice in the Civil Rights cases in the 1880's and the beliefs that led him to take his position then would lead him in the same direction throughout his life on the Court. He was alone in his dissent on Plessy, on Lochner, and on a myriad of other cases. He also stood against the titans of big business that dominated the Republican Party during the Gilded Age but he is best known as a justice whose dedication to the constitutional ideas about equality, particularly in the Civil War Amendments shine. While the rest of the court was busy denying the purpose of the Amendments, Harlan was fighting for what he knew was right.
Canellos does an admirable job of tracing Harlan's life on the bench and the events that dominated the United States during his lifetime and his research is impeccable. Even several right wing justices, including Scalia, Roberts, and Gorsuch claiming him as an originalist but their reasons for aligning themselves with him in that respect are seriously suspect.
A man, born into slavery in Harlan's house, Robert is also highlighted because the two were so close and because there was a belief among many that they were half brothers. Although that now appears unlikely, the two could have been. Robert was a highly successful man who advocated for John as John advocated for him.
In my opinion, Harlan has not been given proper credit for his courage and for the intelligence he demonstrated in his dissents. Those dissents, particularly the one from Plessy v Ferguson are still frequently quoted by advocates for equal rights, but unfortunately, the public at large seems to have little knowledge of him. This book, in my opinion, is an excellent biography of Harlon and and excellent source of information about his times. ...more
I read about this book in an article in Atlantic Monthly and as it sounded interesting, decided to read it myself. I am from a town that used to be caI read about this book in an article in Atlantic Monthly and as it sounded interesting, decided to read it myself. I am from a town that used to be called the Gibraltar of Unionism and am well versed in the labor history of Butte, Montana and I also know about some of the more well known labor battles when the National Guard was called in and took the side of the employer against the workers but I am amazed how much I didn't know. When I first started teaching in Seattle, I taught Washington State history and learned what a vibrant history labor had here and now I have learned much more from this well written and researched book. From the UAW sit ins in Flint to Walter Reuther who was such an amazing labor leader. I had heard of him but never knew how dedicated he was in fighting for working people.
The book is clearly pro labor but Greenhouse pulls no punches when dealing with ineffective labor leaders like George Meany or of corruption that has occasionally occurred within the movement- an example would be the Longshoreman's union in New York where they worked with the Mafia.
A significant section of the book deals with more recent organizing at a time when unions have become less popular. He writes about the hotel workers in Las Vegas who have fought endlessly for fair pay and conditions resulting in most of the hotels along the strip being unionized. He also devoted a chapter to the tomato pickers in Florida who fought against amazing odds and managed to create a union where the members have vastly improved their working conditions as well as their wages.
The book was published in 2019 and so does not speak of the recent success and organizing that have been occurring in the country. I have hardly touched on the events featured in the book but if you have any interest in the topic, I recommend it highly....more
This short book was originally an essay that Lepore was encouraged to turn into a book. It may be a small book but it contains within its pages a greaThis short book was originally an essay that Lepore was encouraged to turn into a book. It may be a small book but it contains within its pages a great deal of thought and information. Pointing to historians collective decision in the latter half of the Twentieth Century to refrain from writing national history, Lepore looks at the negative effects that ultra nationalism has had- from Hitler to Trump.
The book concludes with the realization that since nationalism is not going away, we need to be sure that it is all inclusive; not based on narrow ideas that exclude others and that recognizes the rights of all.
This is a small book that was originally an essay that Lepore was encouraged to turn into a book. It may be small but it contains a great deal of thought and information about how we have defined ourselves over the years. She asserts that historians abandoned nationalism during the latter half of the Twentieth Century, turning instead to writing about anything but our national history.
She speaks of the nationalist groups that have grown up world wide, spouting nationalism as an excuse to discriminate and exclude. Finally, she comes around to the realization that nationalism is here to stay but needs to be inclusive: It needs to embrace the rights and differences among all people. It is worthwhile reading and does not take long, given its length....more
The two men who authored this book also wrote the book 'How Democracies Die" and are speaking to the same issue here. One route away from democracy isThe two men who authored this book also wrote the book 'How Democracies Die" and are speaking to the same issue here. One route away from democracy is when the minority hold sway over the majority. Although there were those who opposed the areas where the minority was given the power to overwhelm the majority, they were overruled so our constitution ended up adopted a senate that included two senators from each state, regardless of the population and the result is that a state like California with a huge population has the same representation as Wyoming which has a very small population. It is a case where the majority can be overruled by the majority. Further, the invention of the filibuster made it worse preventing legislation favored by the majority in the country from becoming law. Perhaps the most well known example of this was when civil rights legislation failed to make it to the floor of the senate.
The electoral college is another example where the minority can and have prevented the will of the majority. Even though Hillary Clinton won the popular vote, Trump won the electoral vote and the presidency. The reason for this is the winner take all process which is followed in all but two or three states. So if a candidate wins 50.1% of the vote in a particular state, that person wins 100% of the vote and his/her opponent gets no electoral votes. In recent years the loser in the popular vote has become president.
The authors point out how Founders from Washington to Hamilton to Madison and Jefferson decried minority rule but in 1787, they were forced to accept it. That SCOTUS members have lifetime appointments is discussed as well. In the early Republic, people lived shorter lives and stayed on the bench for a much shorter time. People live much longer now and so we have judges who are on the bench, sometimes nearly 40 years holding on to the ideas that do not comport to todays society.
Levitsky compares the U.S. to other modern democracies that have modernized their constitutions to make them more acceptable to today's world. Unfortunately, the process of amending our constitution is so onerous that it rarely gets done.
The points made above represent only a few of the well reasoned arguments made in the book. They see that our democracy is threatened by the minority imposing their rules on a population whose majority does not agree with. I highly recommend this well researched book. January 6 was a warning. Control by the few whose party has radicalized is not giving up but if we want to preserve the democracy, according to the authors, we must work relentlessly to make changes. ...more
I was conflicted on what rating to give this book. I settled on 4 but would really give it a 3.5. while it is well written, it is a survey "course". II was conflicted on what rating to give this book. I settled on 4 but would really give it a 3.5. while it is well written, it is a survey "course". It basically summarizes Irish history and in roughly 540 pages, that is about all it could do. It would be a good read for someone who knows nothing about the country's history. Even so, I fault the authors when writing of some of the topics that they did not include details and people that were very important. For example, when talking about the failed rising of 1848 there was no mention made of Thomas Francis Meagher who played an important role. Further, when writing about the troubles in the north, they mentioned several of the bombings carried out by the IRA but seemed to overlook the atrocities committed by Unionists. The Dublin and Monahan bombings, the Shankill butchers, and the massacre of the Miami Show Band who had no involvement in the troubles in any form but were killed by Unionists and there is substantial evidence that the British Army was involved.
Overall, if you don't know anything about Irish history but would like to, I recommend the book....more
I campaigned for Church in his 1976 campaign for the presidency and was anxious to read this book to see if my opinion had changed. With this well resI campaigned for Church in his 1976 campaign for the presidency and was anxious to read this book to see if my opinion had changed. With this well researched and well written book, I am glad to say that not alone has my opinion not changed but that it has been strengthened. Risen covers the story of Church's Intelligence Committee hearings through the lens of all the players and from outsiders and journalists of the times.
Risen never claims that Church was perfect- but he was exceptional and he was honest. It was this very quality that led many people to dislike him. It was his investigation into the wrongdoings of the CIA that led them and their defenders to attack him. He also investigated wrong doing by the FBI and other heretofore unregulated government agencies. They had gotten away with a multitude of "sins" and Church sought to stop them- for the first time. He also held the politicians who let them away with it. From Eisenhower to Kennedy to Nixon, they were held to account. The regulations put into place at the time remain in place and have proven to be very important in holding these agencies to account. For example, following 9-11, those who violated the law were brought to task.
This is a well written and researched account of a shipwreck/mutiny that occurred during the 18th Century. Sailing for the British navy as part of theThis is a well written and researched account of a shipwreck/mutiny that occurred during the 18th Century. Sailing for the British navy as part of the war against Spain, these ships, including the Wager, ran into trouble off the coast of Chilean Patagonia, endured horrible hardships, and took years getting back to England. Not since reading about the effects of scurvy on the POW's at Andersonville during the Civil War, have I read such detailed accounts. Such a horrible disease and yet so easily cured when you have the knowledge to do it.
David Grann is also the author of "Killers of the Flower Moon" which I found very informative. This topic is not one I would normally have chosen but it taught me so much that I am glad to have read it. ...more
Written by the same author who wrote an excellent biography of Thomas Frances Meagher, this book has been extensively researched what happened in the Written by the same author who wrote an excellent biography of Thomas Frances Meagher, this book has been extensively researched what happened in the 1920's in Indiana where the Ku Klux Klan gained a foothold on power, controlling the governors office, the legislature, sheriff and police departments throughout much of the state, and began to impose their will over the people- with the support of the people. One man was instrumental in bringing much of this about. He was a brute who married and abused women and raped women when the notion struck him. He was a sick, sadistic brute whose role only became clear when the dying statement of a woman led to his arrest and conviction.
It chronicles how easily Americans were taken in by these people and how racist they needed to be in order to support them. It is yet another forgotten page of American history that needs to be read. ...more
This book turns much of what has been taught and understood about American history and specifically the role of Native Americans in that history on itThis book turns much of what has been taught and understood about American history and specifically the role of Native Americans in that history on its head. Instead of the usual fare served up of the discovery of a new world open for exploration and claiming as one's own, it presents a picture of the "new world" as new only to the Europeans who came to colonize it. That is not particularly new but what is new is the argument (exhaustingly researched and extremely well detailed) that the Indigenous people people fought back, blow for blow, gave as good as they got and until the post Civil War when the railroads covered the country, brought bison to near extinction, and the government acquired the resources, they controlled vast quantities of the country. From the Iroquois to the Cherokee to the Comanches to the Lakota, Native Americans fought to preserve their culture and country unlike the oft presented picture of a civilization in defeat who faded away. First, the author makes clear how different each nation was and how in their own distinct ways they fought to maintain the life they had before the arrival of the Europeans. There is no attempt to sugar coat the behavior on either side but obviously, begins with the notion that it was the Europeans who were the colonizers and genociders.
This book is a very important contribution to our understanding of the people who inhabited this country before us, how they fought to maintain their culture and also how they were open to compromise through treaties and land cessions but how the treaties were almost always scrapped or simply ignored. It is the story of the racist and genocidal policies and behaviors of the people who came to claim the country. ...more
If I could award this book a 10, I would do it. Margaret Burnham is the founding director of the Civil Rights and Restorative Justice Project at NorthIf I could award this book a 10, I would do it. Margaret Burnham is the founding director of the Civil Rights and Restorative Justice Project at Northeastern University and this book represents research and ideas that have advanced the project.
I will not attempt to do this book justice because it would be far longer than I have ever written on Goodreads but I strongly recommend it to everyone. First, the introduction is one of the strongest and best written I have read. Burnham focuses on the Jim Crow Era and exposes how the rights recognized in the Civil War Amendments were abandoned and the impact this had on African Americans. In the last several years, books have been written about incidents like the Colfax Massacre, among others but we are only now beginning to learn of the violence and terrorism that were part of everyday life for blacks in the South at the time.
The book is exhaustively researched: from judicial research to newspapers, to interviewing survivors. It is brilliantly written and highly appealing to the historian or anyone interested in obtained a more complete picture of the Jim Crow Era. ...more
Every book of Hochschild's that I have read has impressed me. Not alone is his research impeccable but the topics he chooses indicate that his interesEvery book of Hochschild's that I have read has impressed me. Not alone is his research impeccable but the topics he chooses indicate that his interests are diverse and reflect a humanitarian heart. This book is no exception. He tells the whole story of the country during and following the First World War. Before the war, there was a great amount of turbulence in the country. The Gilded Age had produced vast inequality and the working classes had begun to demand more: better working conditions and hours, and fair wages. Strikes were prevalent throughout the country. Groups like the Wobblies, the various socialist organizations, and even anarchists clambered for change. Added to this, there were huge numbers of immigrants who came seeking a better life but those already here resisted them. Racism, as always, was highly visible. The Progressive Era brought about many changes but very little for African Americans. Plessey v Ferguson was met with approval by most segments of society, including Progressives.
Along comes Woodrow Wilson, a man of principle who is elected president. Those who voted for him hoped for an advocate in the White House but in many very important ways, that was not to be. Aside from the racism which is quite widely known about, he also presided over the Red Scare, although his rhetoric rarely reflected the approval he felt for the men who ran around the country, violating the constitution without a second thought, attempting to purge the country of the elements that the White Anglo Saxon Protestants considered below them. White supremacy was the order of the day and it came from the President on down. Hochschild pulls no punches, assigning blame for the nativism and hatred that was unleashed during this time. Along with Wilson and many of the Democrats, he faults Theodore Roosevelt and the Republicans. Just about the only politician left unscathed was Robert La Follete, the progressive Republican Senator from Wisconsin and Eugene Debbs, the socialist leader.
The author details the unrest throughout the country and the people caught up in it. From Butte, Montana, to Seattle Washington, to Pennsylvania and Ohio, and many, many more.
I had read a fair amount about this time period and considered myself quite well versed in it but this book brings to light many people and events that I was unaware of. I recommend this book highly. This is history, real, honest, history....more
This is a well-written and lucid account of Lincoln and the Supreme Court he dealt with as president. Providing a fairly well defined picture of RogerThis is a well-written and lucid account of Lincoln and the Supreme Court he dealt with as president. Providing a fairly well defined picture of Roger Taney, the Chief Justice of the Court appointed by Andrew Jackson until his death in 1864, Taney is portrayed as a Marylander who is most emphatically a Confederate sympathizer. Best known for his historically inaccurate and Constitutionally incorrect decision of the Dredd Scott case, he appears to have opposed Lincoln at every juncture.
Salmon Chase, whom Lincoln appointed Chief Justice upon the death of Taney comes across as a learned man but one who is willing to compromise any principals he might have in order to achieve his life-long dream of being president. One can be grateful that he never achieved that goal.
McGinty provides short biographies of all the high court judges who served under Lincoln painting a compelling picture of the Court with which he had to contend. From the most contentious issue of Lincoln's suspension of habeas corpus to issues of less constitutional importance, the reader is left with a fairly comprehensive understanding of the issues discussed.
I would urge anyone with an interest in Lincoln and the Supreme Court to read this book....more
I have read several of Meacham's books and this is by far, the best. He oftentimes examines spirituality in America; has argued that for most presidenI have read several of Meacham's books and this is by far, the best. He oftentimes examines spirituality in America; has argued that for most presidents, what they "preach" is more a civic religion than one based in any particular sect. Lincoln would be the best example of this and the best example is his Second Inaugural Address- probably the best speech in American history- in my humble opinion. But I digress.
I have read many books on Lincoln and I was not sure if I would gain much by reading another. I found out fairly quickly that I gained a great deal by reading this book. Meacham delves more deeply in the decisions Lincoln took and made the case, very convincingly, that they tended to be based on morality. At the same time, Lincoln's political decisions were called out- he is not made out to be a saint. That being said on the issue of race, although he was racist, sometimes he made comments for political reasons- not necessarily because he believed them. Specifically, during the Lincoln-Douglas debates, he said things knowing that he was ahead of many people in terms of his views on slavery and understood that people needed to be educated or led along until they did understand. He was also able to alter his opinions when he learned more.
This is a well-written, well-researched book which calls to mind one year in the history of the country- when the North decided to abandon African AmeThis is a well-written, well-researched book which calls to mind one year in the history of the country- when the North decided to abandon African Americans and just get on with their business. It was also in the midst of the greatest depression the country has experienced previous to the Great Depression. Moreover, the election of 1876 saw the North abandon Reconstruction, leaving African Americans at the hands of the people who had started a war to protect the institution of slavery. The white middle class decided that blacks had been given all the help that they needed and that they should now made it on their own. Of course, that ignores the reality of life in the Southern states. Even people like Harriet Beecher Stowe, and her brother, the preacher, Henry Ward Beecher, who had once been very strong abolitionists, abandoned blacks, arguing that enough had been done and that they should be able to make it on their own. Moreover, those who had lost their jobs were deemed tramps, called criminals and communists. They were said to be too lazy to work and deserved no help.
Salaries were slashed by companies, particularly mining and railroad companies and when worked organized and went out on strike, they were met by thugs who beat and sometimes shot them. The police, who were not trained, and not professionals were often times in the pay of the companies and carried out their will. The press too was on the side of the capitalists, and printed stories that often times lacked any truth and simply stirred the pot. The working classes and blacks, and any minorities, as well as women, had no rights and found themselves at the mercy of those with money.
It was an embarrassing chapter in American history but one that is oftentimes glossed over or ignored altogether. This book exposes a part of our history that we need to recognize and learn about. Although the grievances of whites were somewhat dealt with in the coming generations, there are still issues regarding the way that certain groups have been treated that have not been fully aired- African Americans, Chinese, Indians, Hispanics- all have had parts of their history in this country that have been left out of history books but that need to be included.
Loading...
