dixiet's review against another edition
5.0
This, along with his American Nations, should be required reading for every American. There should be AN/AC discussion groups everywhere.
kbellows27's review against another edition
4.0
4.25 stars for this very interesting read. Fascinating concept explaining the long standing political and cultural divisions in the United States. I do think it’s helpful to have read, 11 Nations, before this one as it will give you the context for the argument. Very interesting and readable! Highly recommend.
fallona's review
4.0
This is a fascinating book that looks at the interplay between regional and political identity. It is almost certainly best read after Woodard's American Nations, as it builds on the ideas he develops there. Woodard is far from the only writer to approach the question of American regionalism, but his work is more accessible than most. He's an engaging writer, and his work seems to be well-researched. He raises interesting points about the ways regional identities have played into American political history.
As with American Nations, Woodard's sympathies and his own regional affiliation are visible. Some readers may find this grating. Woodard is a Mainer--a product of what he defines as Yankeedom (though I do highly recommend Woodard's Lobster Coast for a more nuanced portrait of the cultural history and landscape of at least the coastal portion of Maine, and perhaps a slightly clearer image of where Woodard himself comes from). Whether you agree with him or not, it is interesting to consider how his own definition of his native region plays into his ideas and how he writes about them.
As with American Nations, Woodard's sympathies and his own regional affiliation are visible. Some readers may find this grating. Woodard is a Mainer--a product of what he defines as Yankeedom (though I do highly recommend Woodard's Lobster Coast for a more nuanced portrait of the cultural history and landscape of at least the coastal portion of Maine, and perhaps a slightly clearer image of where Woodard himself comes from). Whether you agree with him or not, it is interesting to consider how his own definition of his native region plays into his ideas and how he writes about them.
jcovey's review
4.0
Phenomenal when it delves into history from the 30s to the present. Since this period is covered swiftly in American Nations and not at all in Union, and his lens on history cuts with customary incisiveness. Slightly weakened by the rest of the book being a cribnotes of American Nations and prelude to Union, before concluding with a call to reasonableness that while certainly correct seems overwhelmingly optimistic.
bobbo49's review against another edition
4.0
A very good - complex and thought-provoking - read for the present moment in our fractured America. Written before the 2016 election, with a forward written just after, the book looks at the perspectives at the heart of our current divide, between a socio-political orientation toward either the individual or the community. With chapters going through analyses of every period of American history, Woodard suggests that we are a conglomeration of 11 different geo-political/cultural nations, with the starkest extremes in the Deep South (extreme individualists) and Yankeedom (extreme communalists), and everything in between (such as Appalachia, individualists but community-oriented, or the Left Coast, communalists but also individual-oriented). In light of our current politics, Woodard provides some good insights into how we got here - and how the divide has played out through our history - as well as some hopeful words (again, written in 2016, and clearly from the perspective of a communitarian) about how we can come together in most of the 11 districts in a manner that narrows the issues that divide us and allows us to preserve our liberal democracy experiment.
donzhivago's review against another edition
4.0
Really good, especially the last 1/4 where Woodard goes, in depth, into how the right wing have destroyed the nation over the last few decades. This acts as an excellent quasi-sequal to American Nations, as it explores collectivism vs. individualism in American history.
leaton01's review against another edition
5.0
Woodard provides a fascinating framework for understanding the differences in the United States between those who lean towards more collectivist approaches to society and those that believe in more individualistic approaches. Building off his previous work, rather than provide a simple divide of socialist vs. libertarians, he articulates the presence of eleven "nations" within the United States that represent different historical-cultural origins and occupy different geographical spaces in the country. From there, he delves into the history of the country and illustrates how different alignments of the nations resulted in the swaying of the country between its more collectivist and individualistic modes of governmental involvement. It's a fascinating book that highlights the often-complex ways in which different people align and dissent from the different political groups in the country (and why so many people identify as "independent"). It will be interesting to see how much this work is used to better understand and address current politics.
fallona's review against another edition
4.0
This is a fascinating book that looks at the interplay between regional and political identity. It is almost certainly best read after Woodard's American Nations, as it builds on the ideas he develops there. Woodard is far from the only writer to approach the question of American regionalism, but his work is more accessible than most. He's an engaging writer, and his work seems to be well-researched. He raises interesting points about the ways regional identities have played into American political history.
As with American Nations, Woodard's sympathies and his own regional affiliation are visible. Some readers may find this grating. Woodard is a Mainer--a product of what he defines as Yankeedom (though I do highly recommend Woodard's Lobster Coast for a more nuanced portrait of the cultural history and landscape of at least the coastal portion of Maine, and perhaps a slightly clearer image of where Woodard himself comes from). Whether you agree with him or not, it is interesting to consider how his own definition of his native region plays into his ideas and how he writes about them.
As with American Nations, Woodard's sympathies and his own regional affiliation are visible. Some readers may find this grating. Woodard is a Mainer--a product of what he defines as Yankeedom (though I do highly recommend Woodard's Lobster Coast for a more nuanced portrait of the cultural history and landscape of at least the coastal portion of Maine, and perhaps a slightly clearer image of where Woodard himself comes from). Whether you agree with him or not, it is interesting to consider how his own definition of his native region plays into his ideas and how he writes about them.
tanyarobinson's review
4.0
I was drawn to this title because I've seen a vehement battle right in my own neighborhood between individual liberty and the common good when it comes to wearing masks to prevent the spread of Covid. Woodard does a nice job of putting this tension in a historical perspective, showing how from the earliest colonial period various regions of the country differed in where they found the "sweet spot" on the spectrum between complete freedom and communitarianism. Regional traditions stem largely from the philosophies of each settling population. For example, New England's Puritans always valued group righteousness over individual liberty, and today's Yankees are inheritors of that tendency. Those from the Deep South have always placed primary value on the freedom of each (white) man to reach his maximum potential, unfettered by government regulation. Woodard identifies 11 distinct regions, each with its own traditional stance. Granted, these are conglomerate pictures and don't account for the many people living in each geographic region who don't fit the mold, but the stereotypes have value in helping one understand the lack of a shared "American" view on the individual liberty/common good debate.
The second half of the book follows America through its political history, showing how the balance teetered closer to one side of the equation or the other over time. It was in this section that the writer's own political views became obvious, and I would have preferred he remain more objective in his analysis of presidents over the past 50 years.
I learned a lot, and enjoyed the book. 3.75 stars rounded up to 4.
The second half of the book follows America through its political history, showing how the balance teetered closer to one side of the equation or the other over time. It was in this section that the writer's own political views became obvious, and I would have preferred he remain more objective in his analysis of presidents over the past 50 years.
I learned a lot, and enjoyed the book. 3.75 stars rounded up to 4.