Customer Reviews

The Genius of America: How the Constitution Saved Our Country--and Why It Can Again

5 star:		(9)
4 star:		(1)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

I would have never expected that a book on the Constitution and its continuing importance in American life would be so engaging and enjoyable. In a highly approachable manner the authors made me truly understand, for the first time since being in school, why the future of our country depends on the understanding and protection of this remarkable creation. I am going to recommend it to all my friends, especially to those who are parents with school age children so they can put pressure on educators to give this subject the attention it deserves.

I'm a business person--not student, not a scholar. This book is fantastic--readable, digestible, and incredibly well-written. It does a great job of presenting the information, and avoiding the typical pitfalls of trying to use a modified version of history to support a political view. It was interesting to read, and it kept my attention through-out. The modern day tie-ins are great as well; the examples of the Constitution's struggles and victories are well-presented. My hunch is that scholars will admire the book, students will learn from it, and I can vouch that as a business person who likes to expand my depth of knowledge and look for historical lessons in the country's successes/failures that I can apply to business, I certainly appreciate this book...Thanks for writing it!

Intelligent, well written, and totally accessible. This is a book for everyone. It tells not only one of the most amazing stories in history - the creation of our country's constitution - but also reminds us what this great document means for our future.

A must read, I highly recommend.

The right of habeas corpus, established in England in 1215, is a glory of the American Constitution. But when habeas corpus was effectively abolished at the federal level in 2006 --- not by a Constitutional amendment, but via the Military Commissions Act --- few howled. You may wonder why.

The answer is partly political: That legislation was ostensibly aimed at terrorists, and in Washington you have only to say the T-word to transform even passionate defenders of the Constitution into lapdogs of an ever-expanding Executive branch. But our passivity in the face of the loss of one of our most cherished rights also reveals our lack of interest in our past. History? That's for Advanced Placement exams. The Constitution? Sooooo 1789.

Eric Lane and Michael Oreskes --- a professor and a journalist --- were sufficiently alarmed by our dangerous bout of amnesia to write a 220-page primer on the Constitution. For them, America's "extraordinary success" is not because of our square-jawed politicians or our innovative businessmen or our hard-working farmers ---it's our "unique form of government."

Unique in what way? Our form of government is "self-contained" --- there's no Higher Authority, either in the form of God or king. The Constitution acknowledges that people are selfish and generally care only about themselves; it forces us to compromise for the greater good. In short, our 7,000-word Constitution is a radical philosophical breakthrough that's also rubber-meets-the-road practical.

And the result? The longest-lived democracy in the history of the world.

Lane and Oreskes begin by telling the story of the years between 1776 and 1787, when the success of the American experiment was anything but certain. We've all studied that period; I had forgotten almost everything about its divisiveness. And its aftermath: Do you remember, for example, that in 1798 John Adams and his allies criminalized criticism of their activities --- and arrested their critics?

Entire books have been written about the years leading up to the Bill of Rights; for Lane and Oreskes, it's just the prequel. The real protein in these pages is what happened next --- challenges to the system from the Confederacy to Martin Luther King to women's rights, seen through a Constitutional perspective.

For me, the most fascinating passages are about events of the last century --- in historical terms, "current events." I thought I was up on the Depression, but I had no idea that, in Franklin Roosevelt's first inaugural address, he got a huge ovation for suggesting he might need extraordinary powers to deal with the economic crisis. And FDR wasn't alone; Barron's Magazine called for a "genial and lighthearted dictator."

As it worked out, FDR found other ways to get what he wanted. But surviving the Depressing and emerging as a superpower after World War II didn't dampen that conversation. Our recent history suggests that we don't agree on much --- Lane and Oreskes frame the story of the last half-century as a debate between government-as-problem and government-as-solution.

Starting with Ronald Reagan, they write, Americans began to question the value of once-sacred institutions. To say this worries them is to understate: "We make mistakes as a country when we move away from how our system was built to work." Their warning is stark: "The wrong crisis at the wrong moment could push us over the edge before we realize what we have done."

The important contribution of this small book is to remind us that democracy is fragile --- and that we should not despair at the debate we are having. The framers would smile at our struggles; they knew them well. And they would presumably tell us what Lane and Oreskes do: Look back, look back. If we want to move forward, for the sake of our democracy, look back.

--- Jesse Kornbluth, for HeadButler.com

The Genius of America by Eric Lane and Michael Oreskes examines the foundation of our constitutional government in a concise and compelling manner. Throughout this work, the authors refer to our "Constitutional Conscience" as a vital component of the American political system. Democracy in and of itself will not protect the rights of citizens. A constitution in and of itself will not preserve democracy. Germany was a constitutional democracy in 1933, when Adolf Hitler came to power.

In 1787, our founding fathers ingeniously created an entirely new form of democracy--one designed to protect minorities from majority rule and majorities from minority rule. Checks and balances between three branches of government keep any one branch from obtaining too much power. While our system is slow and often leads to frustrating stalemates, it requires that people work together to produce results. Such a government has built-in impediments against militant groups who might take control at the expense of other citizens. In other words, the very machinery that makes governmental change so maddeningly slow preserves our freedom.

Lane and Oreskes clearly explain challenges our Constitution has faced over the years, such as Proposition 13, which allowed the 50% of Californians who voted to make a sweeping decision for the entire state on tax revenues. Direct democracy doesn't always provide a centrist approach. This is something our founding fathers understood when they wrote the Constitution.

In closing, the authors called for more Civics Education for our young people. If there are flaws in our government and changes are needed, they must be made with a solid understanding of what we already have. Reading The Genius of America has reaffirmed my admiration for our uniquely American democracy and inspired me in my own efforts to promote Constitution Day activities on September 17th.

I read The Genius of America with great interest, both from an historical perspective as well as a view on the current application in our country today. The book was brief and succinct but powerful. Although I have studied American history, it gave me a summary not only of decisions made but the important rationale behind these decisions.
It's an amazing tribute to the Framers that a relatively short document could withstand over 200 years of use and scrutiny and still be as meaningful in 2007. If politicians today could get beyond their own narrow, party-driven, polarizing issues and work as our Founders did to reach compromise for the best interest of the country, we'd all be better served.
I recommend this book to anyone who has an interest in sustaining our Democracy, and it should be mandatory reading for young students who need to understand the freedoms they take for granted and how to preserve them.

Although I have not finished reading this book, I have found it to be interesting and informative. Genius is the correct word for the understanding and foresight of our founding fathers.

Genius of America is a historical commentary and analysis of the making of the Constitution of the United States. The Authors show how the Constitution was born out of difficult struggles, political, economical, and civic that helped to sharpen and clarify important principles and values needed to establish liberty. They assert that American's have gradually forgotten the important values and principles that helped form our Constitution. These are the same values that founders were trying to institutionalize by creating the Constitution and in so doing help instil a "Constitutional Conscience" that would serve to guide and unite US Citizens through the most difficult struggles.

Some of those important principles and values that help to form this "Constitutional Conscience" are listed as follows: 1) people are imperfect and self-interested, and government cannot legislate that away; rather it is better to leverage these human traits for the benefit of the whole of society. 2) Seeking consensus and compromise is just as important if not more important than seeking perfection. 3) No segment of the population should be able to impose their values on the whole of society without the whole consent (albeit represented/elected consent). 4) Power in government needs to be continually checked. 5) Every sector of government should derive its power from its citizens. 6) Political process should be valued/prized above political outcome; there is safety in deliberation that transcends any given policy or result.

That last principle, Political Process should be valued above political outcome, is perhaps the most important principle of all because it's the processes found inside the constitution that help promote our inalienable rights, which rights must endure through the ages despite any single political outcome. Unfortunately, as the authors point out, we have become a "sound bite" society focused more on the outputs of the political process and less on deliberation and thoughtful counsel. For the constitution to work, citizens must be engaged and participating in the processes of government with a keen awareness of the issues impacting our core values, the values codified in the US Constitution including the Bill of Rights. We the people must ensure that our federal government works, that congress truly checks the power of the president and visa versa, and that we have strong judges, and return back to the principles that empower us, the principles embodied within the Constitution.

I found this book was inspiring to read and I hope my good friends of all nationalities will take the opportunity to read it, and make the resolve that I did, to be a better citizen and helpt to preserve the principles of freedom.

The right of habeas corpus, established in England in 1215, is a glory of the American Constitution. But when habeas corpus was effectively abolished at the federal level in 2006 --- not by a Constitutional amendment, but via the Military Commissions Act --- few howled. You may wonder why.

The answer is partly political: That legislation was ostensibly aimed at terrorists, and in Washington you have only to say the T-word to transform even passionate defenders of the Constitution into lapdogs of an ever-expanding Executive branch. But our passivity in the face of the loss of one of our most cherished rights also reveals our lack of interest in our past. History? That's for Advanced Placement exams. The Constitution? Sooooo 1789.

Eric Lane and Michael Oreskes --- a professor and a journalist --- were sufficiently alarmed by our dangerous bout of amnesia to write a 220-page primer on the Constitution. For them, America's "extraordinary success" is not because of our square-jawed politicians or our innovative businessmen or our hard-working farmers ---it's our "unique form of government."

Unique in what way? Our form of government is "self-contained" --- there's no Higher Authority, either in the form of God or king. The Constitution acknowledges that people are selfish and generally care only about themselves; it forces us to compromise for the greater good. In short, our 7,000-word Constitution is a radical philosophical breakthrough that's also rubber-meets-the-road practical.

And the result? The longest-lived democracy in the history of the world.

Lane and Oreskes begin by telling the story of the years between 1776 and 1787, when the success of the American experiment was anything but certain. We've all studied that period; I had forgotten almost everything about its divisiveness. And its aftermath: Do you remember, for example, that in 1798 John Adams and his allies criminalized criticism of their activities --- and arrested their critics?

Entire books have been written about the years leading up to the Bill of Rights; for Lane and Oreskes, it's just the prequel. The real protein in these pages is what happened next --- challenges to the system from the Confederacy to Martin Luther King to women's rights, seen through a Constitutional perspective.

For me, the most fascinating passages are about events of the last century --- in historical terms, "current events." I thought I was up on the Depression, but I had no idea that, in Franklin Roosevelt's first inaugural address, he got a huge ovation for suggesting he might need extraordinary powers to deal with the economic crisis. And FDR wasn't alone; Barron's Magazine called for a "genial and lighthearted dictator."

As it worked out, FDR found other ways to get what he wanted. But surviving the Depressing and emerging as a superpower after World War II didn't dampen that conversation. Our recent history suggests that we don't agree on much --- Lane and Oreskes frame the story of the last half-century as a debate between government-as-problem and government-as-solution.

Starting with Ronald Reagan, they write, Americans began to question the value of once-sacred institutions. To say this worries them is to understate: "We make mistakes as a country when we move away from how our system was built to work." Their warning is stark: "The wrong crisis at the wrong moment could push us over the edge before we realize what we have done."

The important contribution of this small book is to remind us that democracy is fragile --- and that we should not despair at the debate we are having. The framers would smile at our struggles; they knew them well. And they would presumably tell us what Lane and Oreskes do: Look back, look back. If we want to move forward, for the sake of our democracy, look back.

Hello,

This book leaves me with a bitter taste. Although there are some things of important value in the book, it turns partisan. They claim the importance of understanding the Constitution but they seem to be mistaken about some important parts of it. For instance on page 159 they say "nothing in the Constitution constrained the president from aggressively asserting himself into domestic policymaking". They were talking about FDR and his greatly expanding government. Their quote is the opposite view that the founders had and very importantly that the government had enumerated powers, a certain and limited number of powers and no others. The other powers were left to the states and the people. The Constitution is clear on this. However these authors propose the idea that the president and government is okay to take on whatever powers they desire so long as it is not strictly forbitten in the Constitution. This view is the opposite of what the founders viewed and is dangerous. I am no expert but I seem to know at least this.

Also on page 55 the authors say that Madison thought that "public virtue could not moderate self interest at least when it came to the governmental tasks of regulating people's conduct and redistributing their wealth." Did Madison believe that the government's tasks were to regulate people's conduct and redistribute their wealth? No no no. I at least know that much.

In the second half of the book they hammer the Republicans a lot for going beyond their constitutional limits. But they fail to bring up many of the Democrats throughout history who have done as much or more to go beyond and seize power and expand government unconstitutionally.

So although there are some good explanations about the Constitution in this book there's too much that is with a perverted view or biased view and a biased perspective and explanation. And so I cannot recommend this book to anyone who is a young adult wanting to learn about American history and the Constitution, it is just too one-sided, partisan and misguided.

Steve