By the end of the eighteenth century the Federalists who represented the aristocracy had lost most of their power. Commoners were not allowed to occupy any important office since it would denigrate gentlemen to deal on important matters with a commoner.
And the author does a fantastic job of revealing just how revolutionary the Revolution was. It's an easy read without too many names and dates to make your eyes glaze over.
After Shays' rebellion and the period of time when state governments became corrupt in ways, the general consensus of lawmakers was to drastically change the Articles of Confederation, scrapping it, and outline their plan of republican government.
There was no privacy. Patronage was administered through this structure. Americans were more independent and less accepting of authority. Tradesmen relied on patronage rather than customers. It was difficult to run away because you had no place to go.
This meant people were on the move establishing new homesteads and new communities, breaking established ties and lines of authority. The founding fathers were well educated in the classics and classical ideals. Not even of any use for reference.
Should a traveler, returning from a far country, bring us an account of men, wholly different from any with whom we were ever acquainted; men, who were entirely divested of avarice, ambition, or revenge; who knew no pleasure but friendship, generosity, and public spirit; we should immediately, from these circumstances, detect the falsehood, and prove him a liar, with the same certainty as if he had stuffed his narration with stories of centaurs and dragons, miracles and prodigies.
Liberty was realized when the citizens were virtuous--that is, willing to sacrifice their private interests for the sake of the community, including service in public office without pecuniary rewards.
Local assemblies did not answer to the king. Liberty was realized when the citizens were virtuous--that is, willing to sacrifice their private interests for the sake of the community, including service in public office without pecuniary rewards. Plus the bibliography is probably the most badass bibliography I have ever read, essentially a roadmap to what you should read if you're interested in any specific facet of the subject.
And yet nary a word from professor Wood on this subject. Power was vested with the male heads of elite families who controlled everyone connected to that family. Jefferson was frightened by the popularity of Andrew Jackson, regarding him as a man of violent passions and unfit for the presidency.
As Wood easily explains, a series of disputes over trade acts and taxes hardly seems like the justification to start the world anew, especially considering that the Revolution saw a huge proportion of military and civilian deaths, leading to economic destruction and civil war in many of the colonies.
The top families lent out significant portions of their estates for income but just as important to exercise control over their communities. After the dust settled they were stunned to find their philosophies cast aside as a proletarian democracy dominated by commercial interests took over.
In the last decade or so, some early American historians have attempted to focus on elites as a way of drawing out broader social and cultural themes in early America such as Jefferson scholars Annette Gordon-Reed and Jan Lewis among others who have used him as an entry point to explore aspects of gender and race in early America.
According to the classical republican tradition, man was by nature a political being, a citizen who achieved his greatest moral fulfillment by participating in a self-governing republic.
Economic opportunity grew and American commoners were far better off than their English counterparts.
Woods could have used a good edit - he tended to wander off topic, and organization isn't his strongest skill. No doubt the cost that America paid for this democracy was high--with its vulgarity, its materialism, its rootlesness, its anti-intellectualism.
Patronage was conducted through local institutions and assemblies not answerable to the monarch.Nov 29, · By Gordon Wood. Oxford Univ. pp. $35 In an English radical named Richard Price published an page pamphlet called "Observations on the.
View Notes - radicalism of american rev review bauermeister_c from HIST at Diablo Valley College. The Revolution in Context: A review of Gordon S.
Wood's Radicalism of the American Revolution By. The Radicalism of the American Revolution by Gordon Wood is simply a magnificent thesis on the evolution of political thought, society and commerce all of which was radically altered just before, during and after the Revolutionary War.5/5(5). The Radicalism of The American Revolution by: Gordon S.
Woods Published by: Vintage Books In Woods Pulitzer Prize winning account of U.S. society during the time of the American Revolution, he shows how the Revolution was not merely a coup de taut but a complete remodeling of social structure and organization.
patriarchal social and economic gordon wood radicalism of the american revolution review of pre-Revolutionary America and how these, in many ways, were actually more pronounced and deeply entrenched than those of England at the same time.
Gordon S. Wood's "The Radicalism of the American Revolution" is a masterwork. Numerous authors have chronicled, with varying degrees of success, the trials and tribulations of the early days of the American empire, but very few have illuminated the spirit of the American body politic and its cultural paternalism as poetically as Wood.Download