Author Larry Schweikart analyzes seven important events / historical trends in American history and shows how they affected the development of our culture and government and culture, as well as having international ramifications. .
Larry Schweikart, co author A Patriots History of the United States has taken 7 important events in American history and used them as a platform for illustration of how government and society have changed over the years since the founding and how in many ways this has been to America’s detriment, although, he seems to have little or no criticism of the influence of American popular music. This work is an excellent survey of the events covered, and provides a suburb amount of background information, footnoted in detail, and it thus, an excellent reference for those interested in deeper study.
The work is divided appropriately into seven chapters covering in order:
1. Martin Van Buren and the development of the political spoils system,
2. The Dred Scott decision and its connection with the Panic of 1857,
3. The Johnstown Flood and the successful response of private citizens,
4. President Eisenhower’s heart attack and its connection with the nanny state,
5. How Rock and Roll music helped bring down the Iron Curtain.
6. Ronald Reagan’s flawed attempts to bring about Middle East Peace, and
7. How the press evolved into a creature of government that is no longer objective.
Each of these chapters covers a point of origin, immediate results, and long-term consequences. President Van Buren’s desire to avoid the free vs. slave politics that dominated so much of American elections before the War Between the States led him to the creation of a system based on party loyalty, rather than ideological loyalty. This led to officials handing out favors to their supporters, and, in the end, to massive government growth, partly based on the need for appointments to fill. In the end it failed to prevent the War Between the States as Van Buren hoped.
The Dred Scott decision is generally not linked to the economic issues of the time and the Panic of 1857 is usually linked to other causes of a strictly business nature. Schweikart makes a compelling case backed by authoritative sources to link the two through effects on population movement and the railroad industry
Ike’s heart attack may be the most interesting of all the events in that the author links it first to massively increased government involvement in public health then to other venues including environmentalism and demonstrates how is serves as the foundation of the post-WWII nanny state mentality. Regardless, because the seven chapters cover a wide variety of subjects, there will be something to interest virtually anyone.
There is a concluding chapter that discusses, briefly, some aspects of how America’s founders might view certain aspects of the events and how they might be viewed in a constitutional context. He also takes a brief look at the Constitution’s elastic clause, Article 1, Section 8, Clause 18, which he connects with certain government excesses.
To be completely fair, it might not be proper to classify some of the “events” as such. While the Johnstown Flood and the Dred Scott Decision certainly qualify, rock and roll was a musical phenomenon that lasted several decades and in the minds of some might be continuing. Ike’s heart attack was an “event” but President Van Buren’s actions occurred over a period of years, and the evolution of big government it began has continued for over about two centuries. This, however, does not detract from the book’s value.
Schweikart has a powerful understanding of what might otherwise be overlooked aspects of history, and makes them relevant to the modern reader. He also links them to the current state of affairs in politics, none of which may be more important than the modern news media. In Chapter 7 the American Press is given a thorough analysis, showing its evolution from partisan to rabidly non-partisan and back again to our current situation where the role of a news-gathering and disseminating entity has been overthrown in favor of creating and passing along partisan propaganda. This description of the modern Press is mine, not his, but he doesn’t need to use it; the facts he provides make it pretty obvious. In so doing, in this and the other chapters he proves the contention in the subtitle to the book: … And Proved That The Founding Fathers Were Right All Along.
Seven Events that Made America America is easy to read, well structured, and backs up its positions admirably. At 216 pages, it is about the right length and while it isn’t a page-turner, it certainly is interesting enough to keep a reader involved. It is published by Sentinel division of Penguin Books may be obtained from Amazon.com.
Reminds me of the late ’70s PBS series “Connections” [ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Connections_%28TV_series%29 ]in which James Burke traces seemingly unconnected events from antiquity to the present, like how the use of the touchstone led to nuclear bombs.
A comment on Martin Van Buren: Van Buren could hardly have invented the ‘spoils system.’ This expression points to phenomena that occur wherever governments exist, or have ever existed. Whether we’re looking at ancient empires or constitutional republics, whatever interests are powerful in societies–and these interests can be economic, religious, etc.–will attempt to influence governments and get benefits from governments. This is one reason why libertarian anarchists love the idea of abolishing governments. Of course, this solution is a non-starter for a very simple reason: suppose we woke up one bright morning to find that the government of the United States had ceased to exist. By about noon that day, both individuals and organizations of all sorts would be clamoring for its restoration, for a multitude of reasons. And, if the Tea Party managed to downsize government, something very similar would follow. Organized interests of all sorts–some ideological, others primarily economic, and so on–will work as hard as they can to pump government back up to a size from which they can benefit. The basic rule of governing is this: support is exchanged for benefits. This little formula covers left and right, liberal/conservative, you name it. The only differences between liberals or conservatives running the show are differences in the groups that receive benefits.
Now back to Van Buren: His approach to governing is actually embodied more clearly in his work as a party politician. Many political scientists credit him with the idea that a presidential candidate should be someone whose appeals cuts across most, or preferably all, of the factions into which a major party may be divided. Van Buren’s politics is primarily a politics of moderation and organization. In this way he contributed to the relative lack of ideological specificity in American politics, a condition that has, of course, largely faded from the current scene.
Gestell:
Re: “Organized interests of all sorts–some ideological, others primarily economic, and so on–will work as hard as they can to pump government back up to a size from which they can benefit. The basic rule of governing is this: support is exchanged for benefits.”
If a group lobbied to have a constitutional amendment passed saying the government will provide no one or group with special treatment [Hayek's rent-seeking], would that be “pumping government back up to a size from which they can benefit”?
There would never arise sufficient serious support for such an amendment, and the amendment could never be crafted that would do the job. I’m aware of Hayek’s argument and others to the effect that government should not be the object of rent-seeking; however, these arguments are completely unrealistic. Consider: the oil spill has brought about the (to me, quite amusing) spectacle of conservative politicians, pundits, etc. demanding, absolutely demanding, that big government ‘do something,’ regulate better, etc. Bobby Jindal was practically in tears a few days ago when he gave a press conference at which he begged for federal help. A sorry sight indeed, for sturdy libertarians. So, government will provide ‘special treatment’ to the victims of this mess.
In other words, at some point, under some conditions, virtually anyone or any sector of society will want government help (special treatment) and be outraged if it isn’t forthcoming. Therefore there is little rational incentive for the libertarian fantasy of downsizing government so the exchange of support for benefits is no longer possible.
Gestell:
I didn’t ask if such an amendment was possible; I asked if it would be “pumping government back up to a size from which they can benefit”.
And if pigs had wings…
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Adam Baldwin, IC Politics. IC Politics said: 7 Events that made America America: Author Larry Schweikart analyzes seven important events / historical trends in… http://bit.ly/dyTo1G [...]