A History of the American People

Rating:
Summary: Great through 1875; Very disappointing 20th Century
Review: Bought this without reading reviews or knowing reputatin of author, becuase I wanted a general survey type of history. First half was very interesting. Gained many new insights on the founding, settling of America. The author very nicely traces the development of the slavery issues, even during the periods when it was not the foremost political issues.

However, when the author gets to the 20th century, his political orientations are so blatant and obvious, that the sense of major themes being developed is lost. The last 50 pages of book are disgustingly racist, sexist, et al. I will not read any more history by this author.

Rating:
Summary: Good conservative viewpoint of US history from an outsider
Review: Okay, so Paul Johnson has a viewpoint (which historian doesn't?). I knew I wouldn't agree with him when I started reading but I enjoyed the book, nevertheless. Even with the factual errors. I did learn some new things or was forced to see another perspective. Johnson's should not be the only book to be read on American history and neither should Howard Zinn's. American history is too big for one book and one perspective. That being said,my big criticism is Johnson's summary of the Eisenhower presidency. Quite frankly, Ike, if he really was in control like Johnson maintains, did one lousy job with civil rights. He did not lead this country with the moral persuasion of a leader in dealing with school desegregration and related issues. That is one reason why I believe many school systems in this country, like in Kansas City, Missouri (where I used to teach), never really have come to terms with race.In my view, Eisenhower failed the test in this regard and Johnson fails to write about this.

Rating:
Summary: The first half: Great. The last 300pgs: Opinionated Drivel
Review: I wish I had read the reviews before I undertook the task of reading this lengthy work. I thought Johnson's analysis of key and also minor players through many of the countries challenging growing pains to be well researched and interesting. Once he got to 20th century politicians though, he turned his book into a partisan attack on Democratic ideas, minority movements, and anything other than conservative thinking. In Johnson's mind, FDR was a bystander, while Nixon was an innocent victim. While there is always room for interpretation, to ignore the blemishes of Reagan and Nixon, and ignore the contributions of Kennedy and FDR is irresponsible.

Rating:
Summary: History Places Much Emphasis on Opinion, Little On Fact
Review: Paul Johnson's attempt to discern the history of the United bears the true mark of an amateur. The last 25 pages include some of the most rascist ideas I have seen in print for some time. Although Johnson attempts to be thorough, he skips over major parts of American history and virtually ignores much of social history. Not supporting the so-called revisionists, Johnson wishes to restore the Anglophile view of history that has been rightly extinguished. His criticisms of Latin America are rascist and nature and he has a sense of superioroity that is disarming. His comparison of the anti-abortion groups to abolitionists is truly scandoulous. I'm sure Mr. Johnson would not like to have his body controlled. America is a land of diversity and change, which Johnson accepts, as long as whites are the only ones involved. In sum, Johnson distorts American history in a way that is both inaccurate and demeaning. The constant errors, particularly in the last chapter only destroy more of Johnson's credibility. His is a book which should be left unread.

Rating:
Summary: A Striking Disappointment
Review: The problem with this book is that it isn't A History of the American People. It's a History of the American Government. The People appear in the book very sporadically, if at all. Unlike Mr. Johnson's excellent History of the Jews and History of Christianity, this volume is striking devoid of revelations. It reads like a college history text -- a decent one, but not one that makes history come to life. And that's what I miss -- that sense of life that's in Mr. Johnson's other books, and in the books written by Jan Morris. I do believe that Mr. Johnson can do better than this.

Rating:
Summary: A Realist's History of the United States
Review: The reader will find that Johnson avoids many errors of standard texts, such as the depiction of famous persons as saints or scoundrels. When Johnson discusses someone at length, he presents good and bad aspects, along with whimsical details that point to the person's humanity. Although optimistic, Johnson does not cast history as uninterrupted social progress. He (mostly) does not engage in the exaggerated language that textbooks use to hold uninterested students' attention. He does not concern himself about being consistent with the standard interpretations. He gives CITATIONS! Overall, this is a fine primer in U.S. history that breaks the mold.

I would like to address the comments from the folks in Pullman, WA. These reviewers obviously posted at some person's direction, unless you believe that so many of them mentioned the list of Washington's personal belongings by accident. It is alleged that Johnson (a) talks too much about politicians and the "elite" (b) ignores women before the 20th century (c) ignores black Americans and Native Americans (d) does not adequately treat slavery. A prospective reader should hear a second opinion:

(a) Hardly surprising, since (as any leftist will surely admit) these people dominated the lives of their contemporaries.

(b) I made a list of influential American women and looked them up. I found: Susan B. Anthony, Lucretia Mott, Anne Hutchinson (very untraditional acccount), Emily Dickinson, Betsy Ross. I did not find: Willa Cather, Sojourner Truth, Hetty Green, Helen Keller. Harriet Tubman and Helen Jackson are mentioned, and much is made of Harriet Stowe's role in the abolition movement. The sections on religious awakenings have several mentions of women.

(c) I found: WEB DuBois, Booker T. Washington, Harriet Tubman, Nat Turner, Benjamin Banneker, Scott Joplin, Martin Luther King, Malcolm X, Sacajawea, Sitting Bull. I did not find Sojourner Truth, Frederick Douglass, G.W. Carver, Richard Wright, Ralph Ellison, Hiawatha. Johnson discusses at length the black influence on 20th century music. He devotes 11 pages to the conflict between Jackson and the Indians, and 4.5 to the wars of the homestead era (whites and Indians were, mostly, in conflict).

(d) How many ways does Johnson need to say "abomination"? He discusses the development of black slavery in the colonies. He chronicles the early 19th century legal battles ("compromises") leading to the war. He describes the North's awakening to the harshness of southern slavery. If he does not discuss slavery to some people's satisfaction, it should be noted that the antebellum North generally gets more space than the less prosperous South.

Far from being an "opposite" of Howard Zinn's "People's History," Johnson's "History" is a is a middle ground between Zinn and the standard texts -- by an author whose disdain for leftist intellectuals like Zinn is well-known.

Rating:
Summary: The greatness of America shines, despite revisionist attack!
Review: Apparently, some pencil-necked, postmodern revisionist history prof at Washington State has incited a "trash Paul Johnson" campaign on Amazon.com. To capture the true flavor of Johnson's magnum opus, read the review just below mine.

Of course no historian is truly objective, but history does consist of objective historical facts. Johnson demonstrates conclusively, through his assimilation of both the great events and historical minutiae, that America, guided by a moral vision superior to any yet seen (especially socialist utopianism), is the greatest nation the world has yet seen.

As for the revisionists, to paraphrase Jack Nicholson: Go sell historical relativism somewhere else; we're all stocked up here!

Rating:
Summary: American Intellectual History by a truly brilliant thinker.
Review: I was taught American History by left-wing teachers who were much more captivated by that glowing city on the hill: Moscow -- than my hometown of Manhattan.

As a first generation American, I had a fierce love of and pride in this country founded by genius intellectuals who devised a brilliant system of laws to keep men free from other men. Just separating church and state was an act of intellectual brilliance. To better understand the European context the founding fathers were rebelling against, read Paul Johnson's biography of Queen Elizabeth, a tale of horror in which thousands of innocent people might die simply bbecause they were Protestant and the monarch Catholic or vice versa.

At long last, I feel I have found the intellectual historian I've been searching for all my life. Prior to discovering Johnson, I ignored history and focused on philosophy.

Paul Johnson is one of the most brilliant thinkers it has ever been my pleasure to discover.

To give an example of his powers of persuasion, I had been convinced that Thomas Jefferson was THE genius among the founding fathers. Johnson persuaded me that Alexander Hamilton's contributions in the field of fiscal policy were not to be ignored and illuminated the reasons for Jefferson's personal financial downfall (he got lost in the details and never had an accurate overall view of his financial position), and spent way beyond his means: there never seems to have been a luxury he didn't love and indulge in. On a moral level, it made it impossible for him to do what he knew was right: free his slaves.

Johnson's criticisms of Monticello, an eccentric architectural project (1768-1824) which was not only unfinished for many years but uncomfortable and impractical also impressed me.

Paul Johnson has captured the ESSENCE of almost every historical event and the ideas which precipitated the events (the section on The Great Depression will be heavily underlined and postit-taped) on which I had prided myself that I had inside knowledge. He thoroughly understands politics and economics and is NOT part of what Arnaud DeBorchgrave has called the *dominant media culture*, which is leftist but considers itself centrist.

This is a prime example of what a great teacher of mine once called intellectual ammunition. The left is shameless in its rewriting of even recent history. This book will enable to rebut their fallacious arguments and factual inaccuracies.

If you read and love this book or Paul Johnson's writings in general , I'd love to hear from you via email [e-mail].

Rating:
Summary: What do people in WA have against this book?
Review: To think that anyone is capable of giving a completly unbiased summary of American history is impossible in my opinion. People should take this book for what it is and quit focusing on what was left out. Anyone who wants a general introduction to the history of the United States from a conservitive point of view should check this book out.

Rating:
Summary: The best one volume history of the American people
Review: This is the best one volume history of the American people that is available. It deals with all aspects of our history, from the high points to the low points of our past. It is both opinionated and intellectually honest. Mr. Johnson admits that he opinionated at the very beginning. His views are not fashionable but he does not try to make it fashionable.