simonmee's review against another edition
1.0
Rediscovering Americanism is a throwback to the hottest book craze of the early Middle Ages: The compilation.
At a minimum, two-thirds, two-thirds of Rediscovering Americanism is block quoting from other texts. Perhaps Levin is expecting an apocalyptic destruction of the Internet, audiobooks and libraries. Rediscovering America will then serve as a link to the past, apparently unfillable by an encylopedia or a photocopier.
Because otherwise, I have to ask, what the **** is the point of this book?
The Point?
There is this concept of "natural law", derived from external, objective sources. According to Levin, natural law is good and America's founding documents have a lot of it.
In effect, the United States is blessed with "big naturals".
In contrast, Progressivism is legal positivism, and that is bad:
Berlin was also well aware of the calculating psychology and behavior of the autocratic masterminds, among whom I include the progressives.
These dastardly progressives are not even principled about it:
For the progressive, the answer is the centralized administrative state, where the individual is coerced in infinite ways, as willed by the machinery of the state. As such, reason transforms into will, which in turn transforms into an ideological pursuit of control and power.
The problem with Rediscovering Americanism is that it’s all text and no context. Levin throws spaghetti on the wall then asks you to decipher the tomato sauce dripping down. Lengthy extracts without explanation just reminds the reader that they could obtain the contextual clues by reading the full set of texts directly.
By way of example, Levin includes a letter by Jefferson from 1826 where Jefferson toots his own horn about the amazingness of the Declaration of Independence as a piece of natural law. This letter is 6 years after the Missouri Compromise, an arrangement that Jefferson himself foresaw (and wrote about!) as destructive to the Union. With the Missouri Compromise, concepts of "natural law" ran up against political reality. It is negligent for Levin to pretend that history was unfolding in a different direction than as portrayed by a man on his deathbed. Jefferson writing about how good a job he did is not a permission slip to ignore the context in which he wrote.
The Point?!
As most of the texts Levin block quotes are well past copyright expiry, “natural law” is not new. Levin fails to advance the discussion from 1792’s neighbour, who manufactures woollen cloth. Levin, how about having some guts and show us how natural law can be applied in a relatively contemporaneous situation, such as, I dunno, an ectopic pregnancy? No one needs Levin to reproduce the first ten Constitutional Amendments in full and tell us they are a set of negative liberty directives. That’s just some weak tea.
The point of Levin's book is that it is an argument from those he deems to be authorities, be it Jefferson, Locke, or Rousseau. Yes, Milton Friedman was a Nobel Laureate and prominent free market economist but capitalism is a necessary condition of political freedom is not correct just because Friedman says it.
Hilariously Levin gets himself lost on this economics point. While all these superb thinkers are right (so much so their thoughts need to cover several pages) natural law is even more critical to understanding the American revolution. Thanks Levin for letting us know that you cannot find a text linking free market capitalism to natural law. We all know you would have reproduced it at length if you could. The values and workings of free market capitalism does not fit the point of his book. He risks engaging in, dare I say it, moral relativism.
Thanks for the compilation, but these aren’t the Greatest Hits.
At a minimum, two-thirds, two-thirds of Rediscovering Americanism is block quoting from other texts. Perhaps Levin is expecting an apocalyptic destruction of the Internet, audiobooks and libraries. Rediscovering America will then serve as a link to the past, apparently unfillable by an encylopedia or a photocopier.
Because otherwise, I have to ask, what the **** is the point of this book?
The Point?
There is this concept of "natural law", derived from external, objective sources. According to Levin, natural law is good and America's founding documents have a lot of it.
In effect, the United States is blessed with "big naturals".
In contrast, Progressivism is legal positivism, and that is bad:
Berlin was also well aware of the calculating psychology and behavior of the autocratic masterminds, among whom I include the progressives.
These dastardly progressives are not even principled about it:
For the progressive, the answer is the centralized administrative state, where the individual is coerced in infinite ways, as willed by the machinery of the state. As such, reason transforms into will, which in turn transforms into an ideological pursuit of control and power.
The problem with Rediscovering Americanism is that it’s all text and no context. Levin throws spaghetti on the wall then asks you to decipher the tomato sauce dripping down. Lengthy extracts without explanation just reminds the reader that they could obtain the contextual clues by reading the full set of texts directly.
By way of example, Levin includes a letter by Jefferson from 1826 where Jefferson toots his own horn about the amazingness of the Declaration of Independence as a piece of natural law. This letter is 6 years after the Missouri Compromise, an arrangement that Jefferson himself foresaw (and wrote about!) as destructive to the Union. With the Missouri Compromise, concepts of "natural law" ran up against political reality. It is negligent for Levin to pretend that history was unfolding in a different direction than as portrayed by a man on his deathbed. Jefferson writing about how good a job he did is not a permission slip to ignore the context in which he wrote.
The Point?!
As most of the texts Levin block quotes are well past copyright expiry, “natural law” is not new. Levin fails to advance the discussion from 1792’s neighbour, who manufactures woollen cloth. Levin, how about having some guts and show us how natural law can be applied in a relatively contemporaneous situation, such as, I dunno, an ectopic pregnancy? No one needs Levin to reproduce the first ten Constitutional Amendments in full and tell us they are a set of negative liberty directives. That’s just some weak tea.
The point of Levin's book is that it is an argument from those he deems to be authorities, be it Jefferson, Locke, or Rousseau. Yes, Milton Friedman was a Nobel Laureate and prominent free market economist but capitalism is a necessary condition of political freedom is not correct just because Friedman says it.
Hilariously Levin gets himself lost on this economics point. While all these superb thinkers are right (so much so their thoughts need to cover several pages) natural law is even more critical to understanding the American revolution. Thanks Levin for letting us know that you cannot find a text linking free market capitalism to natural law. We all know you would have reproduced it at length if you could. The values and workings of free market capitalism does not fit the point of his book. He risks engaging in, dare I say it, moral relativism.
Thanks for the compilation, but these aren’t the Greatest Hits.
karlif's review against another edition
2.0
Had to quit reading - too boring. I'm sure it has good content but I kept getting distracted.
vaderbird's review against another edition
4.0
Despite being a best seller for weeks, I am amazed at how our press has not done any interviews about this book.
What a shocker.
What a shocker.
moonprismbooks's review against another edition
5.0
Through examples of philosophy, history, economics, government, and culture, Mark Levin fantastically explained the difference between America's founding principles vs progressivism.
It was interesting reading about Karl Marx and Jean-Jacques Rousseau's ideas in this book because it was more than I ever was taught in school. Levin went into depth of their ideas and how progressive thinking stems from their works. This book also gave me a new insight into our past Presidents, Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson. Levin went into details about writings/speeches they've done that we'd never learn about in school.
It was interesting reading about Karl Marx and Jean-Jacques Rousseau's ideas in this book because it was more than I ever was taught in school. Levin went into depth of their ideas and how progressive thinking stems from their works. This book also gave me a new insight into our past Presidents, Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson. Levin went into details about writings/speeches they've done that we'd never learn about in school.
caffeine_books's review against another edition
A great look at how progressives want America to forget its history. As is written in the book, "If all men are created equal, that is final. If they are endowed with inalienable rights that is final. If governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed, that is final" (pg 54). This book exposes the progressives and their ultimate goal of having a centralized, nanny government. The Constitution is here to "safeguard" the individual and to "control the rulers and uphold the society" (184). The government works for the people, not the other way around.
stephang18's review
2.0
More of a graduate reader than a book. Large swathes of text from Progressive and other thinkers. Levin also quotes himself a lot = never a good sign.
More...