3 of 5 people found the following review helpful:
1.0 out of 5 stars
Inaccurate and unfocused, January 29, 2001
By A Customer
This review is from: The History of the Third Parties (Your Government & How It Works) (Library Binding)
Norma Jean Lutz's The History of Third Parties is more apt to confuse than inform the young adult reader. This six chapter, 60-page title is not only unfocused, but critical information about United States government and history is absent.
Lutz neglects to explain the structures and laws under which political parties and elections operate. While the book uses "third-party" to describe minor parties, it fails to enumerate the two major parties and to indicate when they are in power. The greatest confusion comes in the section that describes members of the free-soil movement joining the new Republican Party in 1854. What were the major two parties before the mid-nineteenth century? Lutz doesn't tell the reader.
Lutz enumerates the "Third-Party Hurdles" which have limited the success of minor parties in the U.S. In this section, there is no description of the Electoral College. There is no explanation of "winner take all" elections. An understanding of the system's basic structure is fundamental to comprehending the challenges faced by minor parties. This material is not too advanced for the young adult reader, and the absence of such information promotes confusion rather than clarity.
Another shortcoming is the intermixing of terms. Descriptions of political parties, independent candidates, political factions, and social movements are treated synonymously. The book opens with a chapter dedicated to Ross Perot's 1992 presidential bid and Jesse Ventura's gubernatorial victory. Descriptions of Perot's personally funded candidacy and the Reform Party are commingled; no clarifications are made between individual candidates and the institutions of a political parties. Later in the book, abolitionists are described as a political party rather than a movement. While having many political implications, the abolitionist movement crossed many party and social lines.
Throughout the book, historical descriptions of political unfoldings are weak. Rather than presenting past actions or statements, Lutz attributes emotions and attitudes to significant political actors. In discussing conflicts between Thomas Jefferson and Alexander Hamilton, Lutz writes that President Washington "was greatly distressed over the conflict". There is no further mention of anything the president said or did in response. Rather the description continues that Jefferson "felt" and "believed" in the rights of men and that the ordinary people "hated" the Federalists (pp. 18-19). No writings, letters, or journals are cited to support these assertions. While these may be an accurate descriptions of their sentiments, it is not a sufficient substitute for describing their actions and public statements.
Imprecise language and inadequately defined terms leave readers guessing meanings throughout the book. A glossary provides definitions to only 12 terms. In one paragraph, readers are referred to the glossary for the term "political convention" but not referred anywhere to find out what or who "the Barnburners" and "Hunkers" might be. Phrases that might be unknown or unclear to young people are often used. To describe Roosevelt's entry in to the presidential race, Lutz only writes he "threw his hat in the ring" (p. 44). Unquantified descriptions such as "paupers' wages" and "unimaginable wealth" are meaningless to many as well (p. 33).
The most egregious issues of language are those that reflect racial and ethnic bias. The opening sentence of a section on the American party reads, "Yet another problem that arose during the 1840s and 1850s was that of record numbers of immigrants coming to this county." (p. 30) This anti-immigrant tone is further reflected in a discussion of the temperance movement, "More powerful were the large groups of immigrant drinkers. Theirs was the voice that moved the major parties." (p. 39) Certainly Irish and German immigrants were neither the central political force nor the only anti-temperance voice in the later half of the 19th century. Other potentially insensitive word usage includes "tramps" and "hoboes" instead of " the unemployed" and "homeless" (p. 34).
The History of Third Parties leaves more questions than answers for readers. The book meanders through U.S. political history uninformed and without focus. Look elsewhere for a history of minor parties and political movements in the U.S.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
