America Forgotten History Part 1 Foundations eBook Mark David Ledbetter
Download As PDF : America Forgotten History Part 1 Foundations eBook Mark David Ledbetter 
History is written by the victors. But do the victors in America’s forgotten debate really have it right? Do they even think about whether it is America’s destiny to be both a nanny state and garrison state? American’s Forgotten History questions standard understanding from a constitutionalist point of view.
This, the first of five volumes, looks at the English Civil War, fought between Puritans and Cavaliers. It then follows Puritans as they flee Cavalier power to Massachusetts and later Cavaliers as they flee Puritan power to Virginia. Puritans and Cavaliers allied against the mercantilism of England to form a new system based on the Magna Carta, the Glorious Revolution of 1688, the English Bill of Rights, and the Enlightenment philosophy of Locke and Montesquieu. They would maintain their uneasy alliance until they fought another civil war on a new continent.
After the American Revolution, parties formed around Jefferson and Hamilton that would frame American’s philosophical debate until the collapse of Jeffersonianism at the Democratic convention of 1896. The debate, so important in the 19th century and so important if America is to rediscover itself, is ignored by the victors of the debate, those who give us standard American history. Modern historians extol activist war-like presidents, high taxes, super government, and aggressive international militarism. The Constitution, as it was written and intended, makes all that impossible.
This volume, Part One of American’s Forgotten History, covers English roots, the colonial period, the Revolution, the Constitution, and the first four presidential administrations, those of Washington, Adams, Jefferson, and Madison.
America Forgotten History Part 1 Foundations eBook Mark David Ledbetter
Mark David Ledbetter's America's Forgotten History is less of a history book than it is an extended essay on the virtues of Libertarianism, and because he ultimately uses history to push a personal political agenda, I struggled with this book. Mr. Ledbetter begins his book with a criticism of Alexander Hamilton in favor of Thomas Jefferson, which is a position I fully agree with and support. He also openly criticizes Howard Zinn's A People's History of the United States, which was a book I started to read but eventually gave up on because it too was little more than a political rant. Again, I agree with Mr. Ledbetter. So what are my issues with Ledbetter's final product? Actually, there are quite a few.He states early on that he's not a historian (Kindle location 300) but he writes history books. Should I trust him to understand his subject matter? If a person tells me he's not a surgeon but he can remove a cancerous tumor, should I trust him? Or he says he's not a mechanic but he will work on my car . . . the list can go on and on. There are things historians learn that are fundamental to the profession, and these are what Ledbetter's book is lacking, namely the quotation of sources and proof-reading. He also gets certain facts wrong. For example in Kindle location1373 he's writing about the "Five (later six) Nations of the Iroquois Confederacy" in the French and Indian War. By 1754 the Catawba of North Carolina had been the sixth nation for three decades. The way Ledbetter writes, the sixth tribe had yet to join the confederacy.
I also question his sources. He quotes lyrics from the Disney movie Pocahontas (Kindle location 551) and mentions the film Last of the Mohicans (location 1696), uses another non-historian, Robert Leckie (location 7513), but fails to use as sources some of the biggest names in the field, scholars such as Bernard Bailyn (colonial period), a two-time Pulitzer Prize winner, revolutionary and constitution specialist Gordon S. Wood (Pulitzer and Bancroft recipient), and Articles of Confederation scholar Merrill Jensen. By ignoring these scholars he missed out on a lot of valued information. One very peculiar statement Ledbetter makes is in his bibliographic essay on a book by Leckie in Kindle location 8296 where Ledbetter writes "Leckie being Leckie, his account of the French and Indian War must also be good, though I haven't read it." Why on earth would someone include a source in a bibliography that he has not read? This is a huge assumption of content, and clearly demonstrates to me the degree of Ledbetter's amateurism.
The sources Ledbetter does employ are less than remarkable. His admission at the beginning of his bibliographic essay "yes, footnoting might have been nice" but it wasn't important enough to actually include notes. He admits to using Yahoo and Google, which are starting points, not ultimate destinations, shows an author not fully committed to historical scholarship. While many primary sources are available online, can these be fully trusted for authenticity? Reviewing actual primary documents eliminates any possibility of a misprinted word or an inaccurately attributed comment. But such authenticity apparently was not important enough for Ledbetter to spend his time verifying.
Those who read this book to gain an accurate account of American history beware. I call out a couple of examples. I challenge any reader to read the section titled "Pontiac's War" and tell me what this war was all about. Ledbetter never explains any of the issues Pontiac attempted to resolve, how he wanted to resolve them, or what the outcome of this "war" was even all about. Chief Pontiac, a great orator and organizer, has his name mentioned exactly one time in the entire section. Worse yet is what I consider Ledbetter's biggest flaw in the entire book. He actually gets a date wrong. In Kindle location 2427 Ledbetter writes of George Washington's "night-before-Christmas crossing of the . . . Delaware" then goes on in Kindle location 2469 to write of "the Christmas Day attack" of Washington's troops. Washington crossed the Delaware on Christmas Day night and fought the Battle of Trenton on December 26. Even Wikipedia has the right day of the battle. Theories and opinions are always subject to interpretation, but no historian, professional or amateur, should ever write the wrong date of a battle under any circumstances. One last example of incomplete historical research involves the British Army post-Battle of New Orleans. Ledbetter boldly writes that after the British had been defeated at New Orleans "the troops of the empire boarded their ships and went home." (Kindle location 7903) Actually, the British sailed in the direction of Mobile Bay, Alabama, and attacked and captured Fort Bowyer. Just a few pages before this, at location 7861, Ledbetter wrote "if the British had prevailed at New Orleans, it might have been difficult or impossible to expel them." Yet once word of the Treaty of Ghent's ratification reached the British at Fort Bowyer, they packed up and left. A British held New Orleans would have had the same result.
It's easy to pick apart a book whose primary purpose is teaching a political philosophy instead of historical education. Ledbetter's rants about the virtues of limited government and the evils of big government are an extension of the old Jeffersonian-Hamiltonian debate and won't be settled here or anywhere else. His long tangents on Libertarianism's benefits become tedious and repetitious. He occasionally contradicts himself such as his criticisms of the Articles of Confederation compared to the Constitution, where Merrill Jensen's work would have helped Ledbetter understand the Articles in a stronger light. By their nature the Articles kept the federal government weak. By their name they gave ultimate power to the states and the people. A confederation requires a weak central government, which is Ledbetter's ultimate point. Why he suggests the Constitution was meant to keep the central government weak is somewhat baffling. The Federalist promotes a strong federal government throughout its 85 essays Ledbetter's accounts of George Washington borders on hero worship. Washington, Ledbetter states, was a strong leader above reproach. Yet Washington rode at the head of the 13,000 man army sent to western Pennsylvania to put down the Whiskey Rebellion, whose forces were made up of the common man exercising their rights to challenge government policy. Ledbetter also endorses both natural and God-given rights, neither of which can be substantiated. Nature has laws (thermodynamics, gravity, electricity), but not rights. What does nature care if people are oppressed? Nature is about survival, not political doctrine. Such rights are only claimed by certain western philosophers. Further, what rights has God given to mankind? Where are they written? American's have constitutional rights to free speech or gun ownership, but these originate with the writings of our founders, they do not come from God. Ledbetter appears content to assume the validity of these so-called rights based on unchallenged reading of John Locke. Ledbetter spends too much time debating national banking and militias versus standing armies and promoting small versus large government. This is Libertarianism, but Libertarianism is just another form of political theory.
So if one can forgive historical inaccuracies, errors, and asumptions, Ledbetter's book will provide insight into Libertarian values. As a history book it rather misses the mark. Because he believes in what he's writing is true, and he did put some effort into this work, I couldn't give him just one star. Even though the historical errors and omissions are severe, even two stars seemed a bit harsh. But there was no way I could give this book five stars or even four. So I'm content to give this three stars. If you're a budding libertarian, there is a lot to consider in these pages. I do appreciate some of Ledbetter's conclusions. He's critical of conservatives and liberals alike. I like that. Where we part ways is his willingness to follow a political path and my overriding cynicism about any political solution. Ledbetter is wrapped in idealism which I believe taints his ability to look critically at the flaws in his own arguments. But realism invites cynicism. The human flaws found in leadership often do not manifest themselves in idealism. But once the realities of actual governance are thrust upon someone (Washington, Jefferson, and Madison all were forced to give up ideals for the realities of situations) ideals take a back seat. I left John Adams off this list because he seemed, at least as Ledbetter described him, to bring fewer ideals to the presidency and was more grounded in realism from the outset of his term. That he only served one term may attest to his willingness to see the real world and not an ideal world.
In the end I say that this is not a bad book, it's just not a very good book. I do have Mr. Ledbetter's other works, but it may be a while before I get around to reading them. What I read in this first book did not instill much confidence in the author's ability to get facts right nor do I want to hear more of the same political argument ad nauseam played out against the backdrop of American history. History is meant to be educational and this book fell a bit short.
Product details
|
Tags : America's Forgotten History, Part 1: Foundations - Kindle edition by Mark David Ledbetter. Download it once and read it on your Kindle device, PC, phones or tablets. Use features like bookmarks, note taking and highlighting while reading America's Forgotten History, Part 1: Foundations.,ebook,Mark David Ledbetter,America's Forgotten History, Part 1: Foundations,Mark David Ledbetter,History United States Revolutionary Period,History United States Colonial Period
People also read other books :
- Delphi Complete Works of Plato Illustrated Delphi Ancient Classics Book 5 eBook PLATO
- Icewine R R Bruno Books
- Tipping the Scales in Your Favor edition by Dian Thomas Health Fitness Dieting eBooks
- SingleLady Trifft Klammeraffen German Edition Marion Romana Glettner 9783735785503 Books
- El ocaso de los ídolos o cómo se filosofa a martillazos Spanish Edition edition by Friedrich Nietzsche Politics Social Sciences eBooks
America Forgotten History Part 1 Foundations eBook Mark David Ledbetter Reviews
I first read Ledbetter's first two books in this series about three ago. Ledbetter has gotten me into US history. When I purchased his first two books, I wasn't paying a lot of attention and thought his work was about historical scandals and for $1.50, why not?
Ledbetter is an amateur historian and thoughtful patriotic libertarian. Politically, I am a liberal with moderate tendencies. Ledbetter has given me a lot to think about. My favorite thing about his writing his that he does an exceptional job of summarizing historical issues and individuals. He also is able to discuss the strong points of authors, historical figures and political ideologies he agrees with and disagrees with exceptional clarity. He doesn't demonize those he disagrees with or put those he agrees with on a pedestal. He is a rare individual who can advocate a position and be unbiased (as much as any human can) at the same time. His writing is conversational and appears common. Ledbetter is appropriately humble, but deceptively sophisticated in his simplicity.
I wondered after reading his lucid, compact and rational summary of hundreds of years of US and to a lesser extent British and European history if he was as insightful as he seemed. Because of this I have watched documentaries and read thousands of pages of biographies on the founding fathers. To date, even though he and I have very different political views, I have yet to disagree with any of his assessments of individuals or historical time periods.
I have never read a more useful summary of history in my life. Ledbetter is gifted characterizing sociopolitical movements, technological realities, religious, intellectual ideologies and individual personalities in well balanced, entertaining, useful and exceptionally insightful ways. In addition to this, Ledbetter seems like a truly nice guy I would love to have an extended discussion with. David McCullough, Edmund Morris, Ron Chernow are phenomenal authors (and phenomenally successful) who have written amazing biographies of US Presidents and founding fathers. I can honestly say that Mark David Ledbetter is as good as them in his own way.
Give this author a chance. If you have read the great modern biographers, you will be impressed at the ability of Ledbetter. If you want a starting point to learn a tremendous amount about the history of the USA, you can do no better. If you are a libertarian, this guy is top notch. As a liberal, I want to integrate his libertarian wisdom into my world view.
This guy is talented enough he should be famous.
I've held off on writing a review to get through not just the first book of the series but the second as well. I can't say enough good things about these books. The writing is excellent and the material interesting, relevant and well researched. More importantly, while I am a libertarian and so I share much common ground with the author, I truly appreciate his approach to both the material and his views. You'll never conclude the author is anything other than a libertarian but he manages to ensure all sides are well represented. I applaud his efforts to argue opposing views and I find in many cases he argues better than most partisans who actually take those positions. It's easy to say "x is wrong" and quite another to not just say why but also argue x's view and do it well! You may disagree with the authors positions but you won't feel like you're being run over or opposing views ignored. As a matter of fact, many Democrats and Republicans would do well to look at the arguments given by the author and use them! If you read these books you'll find a lot of interesting material that's well researched and factual. Even if you 100% disagree with the authors assessments you won't feel slighted and you will definitely think about your positions and the relevant facts (many or most of which this history buff was unaware of). I can't recommend these books highly enough. Well done David! I hope you write a lot more!
Mark David Ledbetter's America's Forgotten History is less of a history book than it is an extended essay on the virtues of Libertarianism, and because he ultimately uses history to push a personal political agenda, I struggled with this book. Mr. Ledbetter begins his book with a criticism of Alexander Hamilton in favor of Thomas Jefferson, which is a position I fully agree with and support. He also openly criticizes Howard Zinn's A People's History of the United States, which was a book I started to read but eventually gave up on because it too was little more than a political rant. Again, I agree with Mr. Ledbetter. So what are my issues with Ledbetter's final product? Actually, there are quite a few.
He states early on that he's not a historian ( location 300) but he writes history books. Should I trust him to understand his subject matter? If a person tells me he's not a surgeon but he can remove a cancerous tumor, should I trust him? Or he says he's not a mechanic but he will work on my car . . . the list can go on and on. There are things historians learn that are fundamental to the profession, and these are what Ledbetter's book is lacking, namely the quotation of sources and proof-reading. He also gets certain facts wrong. For example in location1373 he's writing about the "Five (later six) Nations of the Iroquois Confederacy" in the French and Indian War. By 1754 the Catawba of North Carolina had been the sixth nation for three decades. The way Ledbetter writes, the sixth tribe had yet to join the confederacy.
I also question his sources. He quotes lyrics from the Disney movie Pocahontas ( location 551) and mentions the film Last of the Mohicans (location 1696), uses another non-historian, Robert Leckie (location 7513), but fails to use as sources some of the biggest names in the field, scholars such as Bernard Bailyn (colonial period), a two-time Pulitzer Prize winner, revolutionary and constitution specialist Gordon S. Wood (Pulitzer and Bancroft recipient), and Articles of Confederation scholar Merrill Jensen. By ignoring these scholars he missed out on a lot of valued information. One very peculiar statement Ledbetter makes is in his bibliographic essay on a book by Leckie in location 8296 where Ledbetter writes "Leckie being Leckie, his account of the French and Indian War must also be good, though I haven't read it." Why on earth would someone include a source in a bibliography that he has not read? This is a huge assumption of content, and clearly demonstrates to me the degree of Ledbetter's amateurism.
The sources Ledbetter does employ are less than remarkable. His admission at the beginning of his bibliographic essay "yes, footnoting might have been nice" but it wasn't important enough to actually include notes. He admits to using Yahoo and Google, which are starting points, not ultimate destinations, shows an author not fully committed to historical scholarship. While many primary sources are available online, can these be fully trusted for authenticity? Reviewing actual primary documents eliminates any possibility of a misprinted word or an inaccurately attributed comment. But such authenticity apparently was not important enough for Ledbetter to spend his time verifying.
Those who read this book to gain an accurate account of American history beware. I call out a couple of examples. I challenge any reader to read the section titled "Pontiac's War" and tell me what this war was all about. Ledbetter never explains any of the issues Pontiac attempted to resolve, how he wanted to resolve them, or what the outcome of this "war" was even all about. Chief Pontiac, a great orator and organizer, has his name mentioned exactly one time in the entire section. Worse yet is what I consider Ledbetter's biggest flaw in the entire book. He actually gets a date wrong. In location 2427 Ledbetter writes of George Washington's "night-before-Christmas crossing of the . . . Delaware" then goes on in location 2469 to write of "the Christmas Day attack" of Washington's troops. Washington crossed the Delaware on Christmas Day night and fought the Battle of Trenton on December 26. Even Wikipedia has the right day of the battle. Theories and opinions are always subject to interpretation, but no historian, professional or amateur, should ever write the wrong date of a battle under any circumstances. One last example of incomplete historical research involves the British Army post-Battle of New Orleans. Ledbetter boldly writes that after the British had been defeated at New Orleans "the troops of the empire boarded their ships and went home." ( location 7903) Actually, the British sailed in the direction of Mobile Bay, Alabama, and attacked and captured Fort Bowyer. Just a few pages before this, at location 7861, Ledbetter wrote "if the British had prevailed at New Orleans, it might have been difficult or impossible to expel them." Yet once word of the Treaty of Ghent's ratification reached the British at Fort Bowyer, they packed up and left. A British held New Orleans would have had the same result.
It's easy to pick apart a book whose primary purpose is teaching a political philosophy instead of historical education. Ledbetter's rants about the virtues of limited government and the evils of big government are an extension of the old Jeffersonian-Hamiltonian debate and won't be settled here or anywhere else. His long tangents on Libertarianism's benefits become tedious and repetitious. He occasionally contradicts himself such as his criticisms of the Articles of Confederation compared to the Constitution, where Merrill Jensen's work would have helped Ledbetter understand the Articles in a stronger light. By their nature the Articles kept the federal government weak. By their name they gave ultimate power to the states and the people. A confederation requires a weak central government, which is Ledbetter's ultimate point. Why he suggests the Constitution was meant to keep the central government weak is somewhat baffling. The Federalist promotes a strong federal government throughout its 85 essays Ledbetter's accounts of George Washington borders on hero worship. Washington, Ledbetter states, was a strong leader above reproach. Yet Washington rode at the head of the 13,000 man army sent to western Pennsylvania to put down the Whiskey Rebellion, whose forces were made up of the common man exercising their rights to challenge government policy. Ledbetter also endorses both natural and God-given rights, neither of which can be substantiated. Nature has laws (thermodynamics, gravity, electricity), but not rights. What does nature care if people are oppressed? Nature is about survival, not political doctrine. Such rights are only claimed by certain western philosophers. Further, what rights has God given to mankind? Where are they written? American's have constitutional rights to free speech or gun ownership, but these originate with the writings of our founders, they do not come from God. Ledbetter appears content to assume the validity of these so-called rights based on unchallenged reading of John Locke. Ledbetter spends too much time debating national banking and militias versus standing armies and promoting small versus large government. This is Libertarianism, but Libertarianism is just another form of political theory.
So if one can forgive historical inaccuracies, errors, and asumptions, Ledbetter's book will provide insight into Libertarian values. As a history book it rather misses the mark. Because he believes in what he's writing is true, and he did put some effort into this work, I couldn't give him just one star. Even though the historical errors and omissions are severe, even two stars seemed a bit harsh. But there was no way I could give this book five stars or even four. So I'm content to give this three stars. If you're a budding libertarian, there is a lot to consider in these pages. I do appreciate some of Ledbetter's conclusions. He's critical of conservatives and liberals alike. I like that. Where we part ways is his willingness to follow a political path and my overriding cynicism about any political solution. Ledbetter is wrapped in idealism which I believe taints his ability to look critically at the flaws in his own arguments. But realism invites cynicism. The human flaws found in leadership often do not manifest themselves in idealism. But once the realities of actual governance are thrust upon someone (Washington, Jefferson, and Madison all were forced to give up ideals for the realities of situations) ideals take a back seat. I left John Adams off this list because he seemed, at least as Ledbetter described him, to bring fewer ideals to the presidency and was more grounded in realism from the outset of his term. That he only served one term may attest to his willingness to see the real world and not an ideal world.
In the end I say that this is not a bad book, it's just not a very good book. I do have Mr. Ledbetter's other works, but it may be a while before I get around to reading them. What I read in this first book did not instill much confidence in the author's ability to get facts right nor do I want to hear more of the same political argument ad nauseam played out against the backdrop of American history. History is meant to be educational and this book fell a bit short.
0 Response to "∎ Read Free America Forgotten History Part 1 Foundations eBook Mark David Ledbetter"
Post a Comment