Having heard Botstein speak and having had the opportunity to question some of his beliefs it became clear to me that his proposal is more a random thought than a well thought out idea. Sure, Botstein manages to write a book filled with great words, most of which are unknown the majority of the population in this country, but he fails to aknowledge one, huge problem in his idea. His idea is based more off of physical maturity than mental maturity. I think it's absurd to assume that students are maturing mentally at a faster pace, or even an equal pace to those 30 years ago. The fact of the matter, students generally don't have to mature that fast because of their lives at home, and those who do often turn to drugs or violence. That's just the way I feel.

As a university professor at a prestigious and highly "diverse" institution, I find it extremely unclear just how we are to transform today's American population into the spontaneously reflective, bibliophiliac, broad-horizoned culture-vultures that Botstein proposes we refashion our schools to create. I LOVE the ideal, but that's as a person of literate, upper-middle-class background who grew up stepped in those very ideals. I am not sure Botstein has been exposed to the true depths of anti-intellectualism in America, or perhaps among humans in general -- most people WORLDWIDE simply do not LIKE to "think" for its own sake, and today's universities are much more deeply permeated by unthinking radicalism than Botstein's experience has apparently shown him, which will make it almost inconceivable that the typical college student will be taught with the truly broad horizons Botstein sings of.

As much as I applaud Botstein's general vision, I cannot help thinking that it would much more practical if we were dealing with a student body composed entirely of white kids from Scarsdale, a demographic type which dominates the Bard students he has the most experience with.

His proposal that high school be eliminated, however, is thoroughly sound, as are his calls for what should be taught before students either go to college or elsewhere. It is curious, however, that he does not mention Simon's Rock, a school exemplifying this very principle, which he even heads. I am an alumnus of it and can attest that describing the place would have made his argument even more compelling.

I have known that there are many problems in our high schools, but no one has ever talked about them till now. This book tells how high school is just wasting valuable time for kids and giving them innumerable worries and stresses by having to have to learn things that will never again be used in life. I think that high school should be geared toward an individual's plan for a future occupation. This book is a must read for anyone who has ever thought about this subject before!

Any reasonable, truth seeking person will find this work outstanding, especially for the young and for those who influence young people. It offers a touchstone for success for all walks of life. Mr. Remick has put into understandable words the importance of virtue for a successful US military and a moral United States.

I agree with Mr. Remick that virtue can be tought. I also agree that humans striving to learn virtue require an arduous and prolonged experience similar to the West Point experience.

Civil society requires a "remnent" of virtuous, well educated
leaders with moral character. The West Point model is a remarkable and unreplaceable resource for the continuation of our free republic.

Some friendly editing would make this book even better.

A breath of fresh air from all the typically dry, uninspiring, uncomprehensible, pretentious, high-brow, gadfly, skullduggery on the subject, which make good kindling for a fire.
Norman Thomas Remick is an interesting, independent scholar with a sense character and, more importantly, a sense of humor.
Do yourself a favor, and buy this book, because it's so original...scholarly text with cartoons and photos! This one won't collect too much dust. One of my favorites: P.289 The cartoon of Thomas Jefferson throwing up his hands saying, "STEADY ON THERE! I DIDN'T SAY A MILITARY ACADEMY WASN'T A GOOD IDEA. I ONLY SAID IT'S NOT CONSTITUTIONAL!"

Simply the best text available for anyone interested in learning why our youth develop into the most outstanding military leaders in the world when they complete their education and training at Mr. Jefferson's Academy.

This is a very good mystery. Tom Shephard has come back home to be the lead detective in Laguna Beach. People keep getting killed and no one knows why. Tom figures out what the person looks like but still no why. The mystery goes back to events of many years ago. He keeps digging and comes up with the answers. The ending is very surprising. Can't say much more without giving away who the killer is. I think you will like this book if you like a fast moving book that will hold your attention and keep you guessing. Even though it is good I liked Blue Hour and Red Light better.

It can when it's as well written as this one. Nothing happens that shouldn't; everything that should happen, does. This is one of the best first books that I've read. There is an inevitability to events, but it's not routine. It's just the way things should be.

I really enjoyed Laguna Heat. T. Jefferson Parker knows Orange County, where I've lived forever. This book has a top of the line story, great characters, and a real ambience. I am slowly reading through all of Parker's titles. I expect to be thoroughly entertained for quite a while.

The shorter tales are good but are really like imperfect sketches made in study for the grand finale piece Death in Venice. Most of the tales deal with sensual longing which is never satisfied or consummated and that gets a bit tiring unless you see the sensual longing representing some higher longing as well, the sensual longing perhaps being one in the same with spiritual and artistic longing. That way you are more in the frame of mind to see that Death in Venice is not just about an older mans lust for a younger man but a prolonged meditation about time and art and all those highly valued goods. I have to confess I get tired of Mann pretty quick because he dwells on the same themes over and over again but if you are a student of fiction he really is one of those writers who has much to teach. Still it sometimes seems to me that Mann's characters would be better off if they occasionally just went ahead and did it. That may sound to be an awful oversimplification but I think they would feel better and their already instable identities and worlds would not constantly be shaken to the ground by those too long suppressed desires. As for the spirit and artistic sense, they too would be happier, much more contented, with the occasional release and renewal of energies, a bit of fleshen contact would connect them to something more real than their "thoughts" about things. Anyway if you haven't already read Death in Venice you are lucky because it is a great read, though a strange and sometimes disturbed one. If you like your main characters made of more earthy substance than Mann's suffering spirits read D.H. Lawrence who also loved Italy by the way and who contemplated time and art in a much more relaxed manner.

This collection of Thomas Mann's early short works presents one of the greatest authors of the 20th Century in an expert and fluent translation, unbowdlerized.The title story, Death in Venice, is an example of lush late Romanticism in its most extravagent and vivid form. Mann, as always, dramatizes the tension between the bourgeois life of strict propriety, symbolized by the renowned Gustav Aschenbach, the protagonist, a literary titan specializing in learned tomes, and the seductions of art and beauty as symbolized by Venice and Tadzio, the focus of Aschenbach's fatal obsession. Some might find the description of the dissolution and its content as repugnant. But if you allow yourself to visualize the words as written and at least allow yourself to feel something of what Aschenbach is feeling, you will be transported outside of yourself strangely and hauntingly .The other stories, including Tonio Kroger, an earlier work that brought Mann great renown after the publication of Buddenbrooks, his first novel, are also wonderful examples of how the tensions of art and life, growing up and thinking affect their main characters. Not to be ignored is the sexual tension that pervades all of Mann's work and is deeply embedded in his consciousness. (I highly recommend Anthony Heilbut's critical biography of Mann for an understanding of the man, his work and the context of German life, literature and history in which it was written.)

Like many German writers, Thomas Mann contained the cancerous seed of anti-semitism, which rears its ugly head in these stories, now and then, and he has a tendency toward pedantry, going on and on in an abstract vein about the strengths and weaknesses of the outsider, the artist, the sensualist, ho-hum. When I was younger, I worshiped his writing, and Buddenbrooks was one of my favorite novels of all time (still is).

Despite my recent and more mature awareness of his weaknesses, he remains a surprising, brilliant writer. His prose style is dynamic and I continue to emulate that. I was amused to find, however, that I liked the lesser known stories. I found "Death In Venice" ponderous. I liked the stories about the incestuous twins, the tragic man who was dwarfed from a childhood fall, the cuckolded buffoon who is talked into wearing a tutu at a community recital and the eccentric who is compelled to continually mutiliate his dog and heal him. Now these are what I would call real "case histories." I'm sure Mann would scorn me for being partial to these, scornfulness being one of his main attitudes in life. His very disdain of pretension, however, seems like a pretension in itself. Still - his command of language is like no other's.

This brief (300 pages) history of the American Revolution, as seen through the actions of Adams, Jefferson, and Washington, is a thoroughly enjoyable, pool side type of read. Granted, it is a superficial history of the Revolution, but provides an interesting perspective of the motivations, interactions, and rather different personalities of the three founding fathers. Mr. Ferling's work does seem to be at times rather colored in favor of Washington and Adams, which might be expected, as he has written biographies of our first and second presidents. He makes some rather interesting comments about Jefferson's personality; comments which come close to a psychoanalysis of our third president. Overall, if you are searching for a history of the revolution, this work is not for you. If you are ready for a relaxing narrative of the revolution, and the actions of these three individuals, you will not be disappointed.

Ferling has written an interesting story weaving the lives of Washington, Adams and Jefferson together. Given that I have just begun to read about this period in American history, this book was easy to read, follow and understand. A good read.

An excellent biography of the three leading fugures of the American Revolution. Ferling makes a compelling case to restore the reputation of John Adams to its rightful place. Adams deserves to be remembered as more than a grumpy counter-figure to Jefferson's optimism. The author also strongly attacks Jefferson by calling into question the lack of leadership evidenced by Jefferson throughout the Revolutionary years. Committment was provided by Adams and Washington when things looked bleak. When Jefferson was tending his vines at Monticello, Washington led troops and Adams served around the world. If you are interested in the Early Republic, this is a must read! You may disagree with his conclusions but they are well argued and refreshing.

An Honorable Defeat: The Last Days of the Confederate Government by William C. Davis is an interesting read concerning the final demise of the Confederate Government. It follows the Confederates through the last couple months of its existence from the retreat from Richmond to Lee's surrender and the cabinet members race for freedom.

Its central focus is the tension between Jefferson Davis and John Breckenridge, the Confederate Secretary of War. Davis wished to continue the War and Breckenridge hoped to end it in a honorable manner. History demonstrates that Breckenridge was the ultimate winner of the conflict, though his efforts cannot be said to have been pivotal to the outcome.

This book should be read in conjunction with April 1865: The Month That Saved America-- by Jay Winik. Both cover similar subjects, with different emphasis and conclusions.

While the manner in which the Civil War was to end was a basic premise of the book, the book finally devolves into the account of Breckenridge and other Cabinet Members attempts to escape. While this is interesting, Davis spends much to much time describing every minute detail. The last pages of the book border on monotony.

Davis' book is a good read even given its limitations. If one wants to gain an understanding of the end of the Civil War it is a good read.

An Honorable Defeat: The Last Days of the Confederate Government written by William C.Davis is a book using original research, has a flowing narrative with a dramatic style and clear historical accuracy.

This book is about the last few months left in the Confederate States Government with Jefferson Davis as the autocratic president and John C. Breckinridge as general and secretary of war. Jefferson Davis, though reluctant at first to serve as President of the Confederacy, later vowed never to surrender whatever the cost. While Breckenridge and others saw the writing on the wall and were trying to get Jefferson Davis to pack it in and surrender. John C. Breckenridge hoped the pragmatism would save the shattered remenants of the land he loved, but to no avail.

This book recounts the astounding journey of the entire Confederate Cabinet as they fled Richmond by train, then by whatever means were available... all the way to Cuba for Breckenridge and Benjamin. If you like the books "April 1865: The Month that Saved America" by Jay Winik and "Damage Them All You Can: Robert E. Lee's Army of Northern Virginia" by George Walsh are excellent adjuncts to this book. Reading these three books will flesh out the time period and you'll get a better picture as to what was really happening.

"An Honorable Defeat" brings those times long ago past to the light of today with factual writing making this book one of the best-researched and best-written books on history of this time period. In 1865, as the American Civil War entered its last tormented weeks, preceptive men in the Confederate States of Amreica realized that whether or not their side would fall was no longer the ultimate issue, but rather how it should fall. the tragedy of recent generation in central Europe, and in their own hemisphere in Mexico and South America, told them all too well of the retaliation, revenge, and the long dark noight of oppression that could follow defeat in an internal struggle.

In the end, "An Honorable Defeat" shows us the personal struggle between two men, both of whom had fought for the cause, but from radically different motivations, and each of whom now faced the close with dramatically opposing hopes and ideas of how it should end... Jefferson Davis And John C. Breckenridge.

THis is a keeper for your Civil War History Library.

This book recounts the final months of the confederate government and its flight from Richmond, describing the individual movements of the cabinet members, their staff and escorts in riveting detail. I was personally left with newfound respect for General John C. Breckinridge, who was also serving as Secretary of War in the grim final months of the Confederacy. I found this book to be exceptionally well written. Davis is quite the accomplished author so this comes as no great surprise. However, the novelistic style of this enlightening work is captivating, and grips your attention from beginning to end.

I found this book interesting. I'm an amateur historian with great interest on the Civil War and the leaders from both sides. I originally bought this book looking for more information on the Biographay and beliefs of Jefferson Davis. It does provide some insight into who he was but REMEMBER WHEN READING the authors' state that it is a defense of Jefferson Davis and what he stood for. Therefore this book definately has a slant toward defending and sugar coating who Jefferson Davis was.

The book is a defense of State Rights (and decentralized government) as opposed to a strong centralized government. Wether you support one idea or the other this book is definately worth reading to get a different point of view.

For historical reading on Jefferson Davis read his own writings and speeches from his life and service to the United States and then the Confederate States.

In a day in which the Federal government of the United States is virtually all-powerful, nothing is needed so much as a diligent study of the United States constitution, its limitations, and the original intentions and perspectives of America's founders. "Was Jefferson Davis Right?" serves this capacity not only by employing a rigorous examination of the US constitution and early American politics and perspectives, but by challenging the modern politically-correct dogma concerning Jefferson Davis, the Southern Confederacy and the War of 1861-1865. The Kennedy brothers demonstrate key principles that impacted the events of the conflict between North and South and created the America that we live in today. Among those are: 1) The historically provable fact that the Founding Fathers did not intend that Washington's government be all-powerful but rather limited to a small range of specifically delegated powers: a conditional, not supreme union. 2) That prior to 1865, the states of the union did not hesitate to defend their reserved rights and that such actions were in fact mainstream practices. 3) That the consolidated view of the United States government was a view that evolved after the formation of the Republic. 4) That the usurpation of power by the Federal govt. began very shortly after the formation of the union and was reasonably contained until 1861. 5) That Jefferson Davis and those who advocated southern independence were in fact following the pattern originated by our Founding Fathers in their separation from England. 6) That the issue of slavery (although a heinous practice) was beyond the power of the Federal govt. and was instead a matter for the states to decide for themselves just as the Northern states (and European nations) had done during the time in which they embraced the practice. In summary, "Was Jefferson Davis Right?" is an excellent book in terms of providing evidence for its assertions and eliciting thoughtful response. I would highly recommend it to anyone interested in the great issues that so consumed our nation in the mid-19th century, and (in many ways) have dictated the society in which we live today. On the nitpick scale, I'd have to say that I had only two problems with this book. To start with, it was a bit too redundant in some places. I know that repitition is the key to learning and such but I think that this statement applies more to facts and less to logical thoughtlines. I have more trouble with remembering dates and names than I do with following ideas though, and your mileage may vary of course. The only other detractor is a Kennedy brothers predilection that is actually much reduced from "The South Was Right," and that is the use of rather harsh language directed at certain historical figures and regions. I can understand very well the frustration that these issues raise (particuarly when considering your stolen heritage...I am a Virginian, after all....), but I think that your case is weakened and sometimes lost on those who might be persuaded (or at least become sympathetic) to your point of view, if your word usage is designed to be offensive to the "facts" and perspectives with which some individuals are familiar. They take it personally. For that reason, I believe that some things could have been phrased more effectively for the undecided or skeptical reader. Overall...an excellent work. Powerfully persuasive. Highly recommended.

This book is: 1. A book that opens up bringing Jeff Davis to life telling us of his lifes joys and sorrows. His adventures and his sufferings. His victories and his defeats. 2. It vindicates Davis's character and faith shrugging off the lies told about him as well as John Edsmoe vindicates the Founding Fathers in "Christianity and the Constitution: The Faith of our Founding Fathers" 3. It provides some solid Constitutional points Davis and his countrymen made about states rights and secession. Davis was definatly NOT a traitor. 4. It shows the reader that the issue of slavery was not as cut and dry as television and movies would have us believe. Not everyone who owned slaves was a cruel barbaric beast. And just because the Abolitionists were called abolitionists does not mean they were interested in the well being of black people. In fact they, like the Environmentalists and Anti-Smoking crowd today, were just using the issue as a vehicle to gain control wealth and power. A great book

Whatever you think of Thomas Jefferson, his life was hardly boring. Yet the first half of Mr. Randall's biography of Jefferson was painfully dull at times. I kept setting it aside to read other books and when I'd come back to it, I wondered why I was punishing myself. It took until almost halfway through the book, around the time Jefferson was getting involved in the Revolution, that I finally got into this book. Once I did, I enjoyed it a lot and breezed through the remainder of "Thomas Jefferson: A Life". But I couldn't help but wonder if this book contains too much about what I didn't care that much about and not enough about what I wanted to learn.

As other reviewers have lamented, there is one solitary chapter on Jefferson's two terms as President and a mere 10 pages on his post-Presidential years. Yet it took Mr. Randall about half the book to get to where Jefferson is participating in the Continental Congress and penning the Declaration of Independence. I learned more about Jefferson's post-Presidential years in John Adams' biography by David McCullough. I learned more about Jefferson the friend, colleague and politician in James Madison's biography by Ralph Ketcham.

I did enjoy the way Randall detailed Jefferson's writing of the Declaration. He showed how a multitude of ideas, theories and philosphies studied and meditated upon by Jefferson coalesced into that historic document.

If you are interested in Thomas Jefferson and are particularly interested in his childhood, his years as student and a young lawyer, you will love this book. Similarly, if you're particularly interested in Jefferson's years in France as ambassador, you'll get a lot out of this book. But if you're looking for more than a 50+ page treatment of his Presidency, you may wish to look elsewhere.

Having read, what i believe to be the best book regarding Jefferson, "Understanding Jefferson" previous to this, i felt that there was no way Randalls book could compare. However, by the end of the book I was amazed at how incredible to book was. While most books on Jefferson examine the same famous aspects of his life, the Declaration of Independence, the Lousiana Purchace, and his presidency, this book does not focus on those subject. Instead it examines less famous aspects of Jeffersons life. From his early childhood to the time he spent in France. This provides another different look at Jeffersons life. I would highly recommend this book for anyone who wants to know more about our most accomplished president. However, if you are looking for an introductory "quick" read on Jefferson I would also suggest "Understanding Jefferson."

A well-written and informative biography of Thomas Jefferson, much of Randall's focus is on Jefferson's early life. In many ways it's a superior biography because of it. The reader is exposed to the educational and early vocational world that shaped Jefferson's outlook.

Jefferson's study of law is interesting in itself. His own experience in the legal field is contrasted with other early founding fathers such as Patrick Henry who, also a lawyer, followed a different avenue towards the law which was more bombastic and less founded on legal realities. The early legal education is important because much of his later writings are extensions of ideas accepted within common law. Also important is his time as a real estate lawyer, which influenced heavily his concept of private property and speculation.

There is a lot to cover in a biography of Jefferson, his years as governor of Virginia, as ambassador to France, the building of Monticello, architect of the Declaration of Independence and founder of UVA. Randall does well with this overwhelming task. Jefferson left a large amount of writings in letters, journals, articles and books that should make a biographer's job easier, but in reality has had them scratching their heads attempting to read the nuances and subtleties of his beliefs.

"Thomas Jefferson: A Life" is a worthwhile, rewarding read and an excellent starting point for introduction into his fascinating life.

I didn't care for this book very much primarily because the book's thesis, that Thomas Jefferson suffered from Asperger's Syndrome or high-functioning autism, and written by a man whose son has Aspergers, seemed contrived and forced. Throughout the book I felt the author was searching for facts to feed his thesis rather than letting the facts speak for themselves. I don't think Thomas Jefferson's admittedly rigorous and scrupulous record keeping and so-called "bizarre behavior" rose anywhere near the standard the author of this book would have us believe it does. Jefferson was an introvert but he was nothing of the disheveled, socially awkward, odd duck, that Mr. Ledgin wants or needs him to be to fit his argument.

The very publication of this book is from an odd source: Future Horizons, Inc. The web address for this publisher is listed as FutureHorizons-autism.com and I could not help but feel that this is a case of an autism-related organization claiming someone famous (in this case Thomas Jefferson) as one of their own. As history, Diagnosing Jefferson is poor and surely would have been rejected by any academic press and most trade publishing houses. There is precious little "research" in the scholarly sense; rather the footnotes are a patchwork of all of the best-known Jefferson biographies, Time Magazine, New York Times articles, and the like.

The writing is not bad but is pedestrian and the author seems blinded by his own theory as he struggles to align even the most off hand contemporary observations about Jefferson's behavior with his (Ledgin's) trusty list of Asperger traits. Nevertheless, no matter how forced the diagnosis, Ledgin taunts his detractors, saying flatly that "no other conclusion" can explain Jefferson's "strange behavior." He states boastfully, "I challenge anyone to advance a better solution to the puzzle of his idiosyncratic behavior."

One does not necessarily need formal credentials to write good history, and examples abound of unlettered men and women who have done so, but Norm Ledgin is not one of them. The author earned a bachelors degree in journalism and a masters in political science in the early 1950s, and lists among his occupations: editor of a weekly newspaper in Kansas, and a "traffic safety specialist" in Louisiana. All terribly interesting, but something short of the usual background for one who sets out to write a learned book about an 18th century thinker and political figure.

Ledgin's portrait of Jefferson is simply unrecognizable to me as it has been to most Jefferson scholars; and as far as I know, none have endorsed his thesis. Ledgin's tone is that of a crusader not a detached historian. Like many amateur historians he exhibits a zeal and single mindedness for his subject but lacks the breadth of knowledge and training to give his passions context and balance. This isn't so much a book about Jefferson at all; it is a book about Asperger's Syndrome; therefore, if you want to understand Jefferson you will find Ledgin's polemic tedious and irrelevant.

The Harrisonburg, Va., reviewer Randall See's statements about the author of Diagnosing Jefferson don't match the facts. First, Norm Ledgin was frank to admit at the start of his book that he was drawing on secondary sources (the works of respected historians) for all observations about Thomas Jefferson's idiosyncrasies, which Mr. Ledgin said match no other explanation but Asperger's Syndrome.

Second, I learned by interviewing Mr. Ledgin several years ago that his book was contracted for publication by Carol Publishing, a mainstream New York area trade publisher, and that it had been edited by one of the most respected editors in the business, Hillel Black. Carol went belly-up while preparing Diagnosing Jefferson for print. Rather than start the process of recontacting other trade houses, Mr. Ledgin turned to the specialty publisher, Future Horizons, whose president, Wayne Gilpin, had previously expressed very strong interest.

What has bothered a few people about Mr. Ledgin's book deep-down is his ready acceptance of the Sally Hemings liaison as a 38-year love affair. That acceptance is seemingly understandable to Mr. Ledgin (and now, it appears, to the Thomas Jefferson Foundation at Monticello) on the strength of known facts, but to others it is the basis for a mental and emotional block.

I've read Mr. Ledgin's book, and I've read several Jefferson biographies. Obviously the critics of this author have not read Diagnosing Jefferson through, and they have admitted as much. Intellectual integrity requires more.

The author has examined and exploited helpfully something all other biographers have missed--the opportunity to identify whatever the basis may have been for Jefferson's many idiosyncrasies and so-called contradictions. Had the biographers simply assembled the quirks puzzling them and discussed them with a neuroscientist or developmental pediatrician or psychologist, they would have arrived at the same conclusion Mr. Ledgin has given us.

A staff member for the Thomas Jefferson Foundation, Dianne Swann-Wright, admitted on the Today show last year, "there was a personal side of Thomas Jefferson that many of us just simply haven't been able to understand." Mr. Ledgin explains that personal side in order to help us understand. Does intellectual curiosity extend only so far as scratching one's head, or are historians ready to listen to well-reasoned answers based in careful research?

I heard Mr. Ledgin speak in Charlottesville, Va., at the Festival of the Book this year. He is more knowledgeable about the very personal side of Thomas Jefferson than most, if not all, the biographers whose works I've read. It should be obvious to a reader of his entire work, including his bibliography and footnotes, that he has examined the Jefferson literature thoroughly, which is what he wrote was the basis for his assembling the eccentricities. His placing of Jefferson on the autism/Asperger's continuum as a result has been backed by at least four experts in that field and another in the behavioral sciences.

This is a landmark work. We must understand that autism and its high-functioning feature, Asperger's Syndrome, are parts of a spectrum condition; some people are disabled by it, some are enhanced by it. The author explains all of that extraordinarily well. One can be both productively brilliant and a high-functioning autistic--like Jefferson, quirky as can be, but a great achiever and mental giant nonetheless.

The reader can learn as much about Asperger's from this book as he or she can about Jefferson. For understanding what made Jefferson tick, this is the book to read.

This book should be called "misunderstanding Thomas Jefferson". Its interpretation of Jefferson's political philosophy is weak and highly speculative. One has to read everything that Jefferson himself read and wrote, philosophically, to understand him. The author looked at a narrow slice of Jefferson (ward republics) out of context with Jefferson's world view.

This book appeared to be fashionable because it was authored by the name, Gary Hart. Having read just about everything on Thomas Jefferson, I rushed out to get this one. After reading it, I was disappointed. It was long on explaining Mr.Hart's personal opinions and short on explaining Thomas Jefferson's philosophy behind his idea of "ward republics". I have to tell you, I got more information and enjoyment out of another book about Jefferson's philosophy, including a section on ward republics, that pre-dates this book that I read a couple of years ago called "West Point: Character Leadership...Thomas Jefferson" by Norman Thomas Remick.

Restoration of the Republic: The Jeffersonian Ideal in 21st-Century America written as a doctoral thesis by Gary Hart.The book in a nutshell is about bringing to light a long-neglected aspect of Thomas Jefferson's political philosphy... "the ward republic."

Thomas Jefferson proposed that a layer of American government composed of elementary, pure or ward republics should provide the foundation upon which individual State republics and the federated republic would be based. His proposal was heavily influenced both by classic republican theories of civic virtue and citizen participation and by the belief that local public affairs were best managed locally. His views, explicated most thoroughly following his retirement from public office, were not considered during the Constitutional debates and were thus neither explicitly accepted nor rejected during America's founding era.

Federalist proponents of the new Constitution, principally Jefferson's ally James Madison, argued for a Constitutional structure based upon a federal republic whose allocation of power among branches of government would check and balance each other, a republic strong enough to unite the various States and sufficiently consolidated as a national government to resist local factions and interests. Whereas Madison saw citizens as fractious, potentially oppressive, and neither enlightened for self-government. Madison saw democracy as a door through which chaos might enter; Jefferson saw it as the only means by which to prevent ownership of government by "interests" and the resulting citizen alienation from government.

With this in mind, Hart brings these views to mind as he discusses current economic globalization and the evolving of Nation-States, Republicanism, and Original objections to small republics in the light of the twenty-first-century realities.

I found the book to be well-written and the prose foundational at first, then later making cogent sense as he tries to bring Jefferson's ideas into the twenty-first-century. This book does as follows: brings consideration of the revolutionary economic, social, and political changes in the twenty-first century; an examination of whether America in the twenty-first century is an authentic republic; consideration of the objections to small-scale republicanism during the founding-era debate and discussions of the impact of these new realities on early objections to small-scale republicanism; a concluding discussion of the relevance of radical democratic republican ideals to America in the current age.

This is a thoughtful and provocative book and makes a persuasive argument for Jeffersonian principles.