33 Questions About American History You're Not Supposed to Ask [Paperback]

Thomas E. Woods (Author)

Book Description

Release date: July 22, 2008

News flash: The Indians didn’t save the Pilgrims from starvation by teaching them to grow corn. The “Wild West” was more peaceful and a lot safer than most modern cities. And the biggest scandal of the Clinton years didn’t involve an intern in a blue dress.

Surprised? Don’t be. In America, where history is riddled with misrepresentations, misunderstandings, and flat-out lies about the people and events that have shaped the nation, there’s the history you know and then there’s the truth. In 33 Questions About American History You’re Not Supposed to Ask, New York Times bestselling author Thomas E. Woods Jr. reveals the tough questions about our nation’s history that have long been buried because they’re too politically incorrect to discuss, including:

Are liberals really so antiwar?

Was the Civil War all about slavery?

Did the Framers really look to the American Indians as the model for the U.S. political system?

Did Bill Clinton actually stop a genocide in Kosovo, as we’re told?

The answer to all those questions is no. Woods’s eye-opening exploration reveals just how much of the historical record has been whitewashed,overlooked, and skewed beyond recognition. 33 Questions About American History You’re Not Supposed to Ask will have you wondering just how much of your nation’s past you haven’t been told.

Editorial Reviews

From Publishers Weekly

Woods (The Politically Incorrect Guide to American History) argues that the history lessons schoolchildren learn are ideologically driven distortions aimed at producing citizens who believe that big government is good and big business is evil. He aims to set the record straight. He says that Americans have been fed propaganda about the origins of Social Security, which is nothing more than a tax. Indeed, Woods thinks nothing good came out of the New Deal, which, far from lifting the U.S. out of the Great Depression, actually prolonged the nation's economic woes. Much of the book touches on issues of race: desegregating public schools hasn't really helped black children; racial discrimination is not the main cause of the gap between blacks' and whites' salaries; and Martin Luther King Jr. was a dangerous radical who sought an immediate, palpable improvement in blacks' material condition, a vision he thought could be achieved by racial quotas and socialism. Blacks, according to Woods, should model themselves not on King, but on an enterprising if oft forgotten 20th-century self-made man, S.B. Fuller. (July 10)
Copyright © Reed Business Information, a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. --This text refers to an out of print or unavailable edition of this title.

From Booklist

Spread among current events and constitutional law, Woods' 33 questions extend his criticism of liberal viewpoints on American history elaborated in The Politically Incorrect Guide to American History (2004). Ideas that the Constitution is a "living" document, that the New Deal ended the Depression, and that foreign aid alleviates world poverty are some nostrums the author critiques, while others are more populist. Should you heed, for example, historians' rankings of presidents? Perhaps as measurements of the history profession's ideological tilt, avers Woods, who holds that such lists favor big-government presidents and slight little-government types such as Cleveland and Coolidge. Woods is also concerned that the concept of states rights is viewed negatively, so several questions probe its con-law pedigree and the assertion that it, more than slavery, is what the South fought for in the Civil War. Alighting rather disconnectedly on "the biggest unknown scandal of the Clinton years," George Washington Carver's scientific significance, and Social Security, Woods is at least consistent in maintaining that Americans' historical awareness is befogged by myths. Marketed through conservative media, the assertive Woods will generate requests. Taylor, Gilbert --This text refers to an out of print or unavailable edition of this title.

See all Editorial Reviews

Product Details

• Paperback: 320 pages
• Publisher: Three Rivers Press; Reprint edition (July 22, 2008)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 0307346692
• ISBN-13: 978-0307346698
• Product Dimensions: 6.1 x 0.6 x 9.2 inches
• Shipping Weight: 11.2 ounces (View shipping rates and policies)
• Average Customer Review: 3.9 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (51 customer reviews)
• Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #91,686 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)

More About the Author

I hold my master's, M.Phil., and Ph.D. in history from Columbia University and my bachelor's from Harvard. I've written numerous books, including The Church Confronts Modernity (Columbia University Press) and two New York Times bestsellers -- Meltdown: A Free-Market Look at Why the Stock Market Collapsed, the Economy Tanked, and Government Bailouts Will Make Things Worse, and The Politically Incorrect Guide to American History. My two latest books are Rollback: Repealing Big Government Before the Coming Fiscal Collapse and Nullification: How to Resist Federal Tyranny in the 21st Century.

My wife and I have four young daughters and live in Topeka, Kansas.

My full biography can be found at www.TomWoods.com/about. My upcoming appearances, in addition to plenty of free audio, video, and articles, are also available at my website.

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

187 of 205 people found the following review helpful

5.0 out of 5 stars Question 34: What if he's right? July 9, 2007

By Andrew S. Rogers TOP 1000 REVIEWERVINE™ VOICE

Format:Hardcover

As historian Thomas E. Woods, Jr., notes on page 78 of this important new book, "the modern state trains its citizens to think" in a certain way. Whether the issue is the role of the State in regulating the economy ... how racial minorities can succeed ... or how we should judge success or failure in a politician, a narrow range of opinions has been deemed acceptable by Establishment Left and Establishment Right. Questions that could lead to different conclusions are ones "we're not supposed to ask."

Tom Woods is out to change that. Picking up where he left off in "The Politically Incorrect Guide to American History," the author again plays Manolete to the Establishment's sacred cows. But he's after more, I think, than just a tasty barbecue.

Some of the questions here are ones people are actively discouraged from answering the "wrong" way -- questions about the causes of the Civil War, the influence of unions, the effectiveness of desegregation as a tool for improving education, or the validity of PC mythology about native Americans. Other questions confront conventional wisdom so solidly entrenched that the questions don't occur to most people in the first place: what if the Depression wasn't a failure of capitalism, and what if the New Deal didn't save us? But the most interesting questions, I think, are the ones you have to look deeply into American history even to discover the context of the questions, so thoroughly have they been buried under official neglect: Why does the Whiskey Rebellion matter; what does the "elastic clause" really mean; or what if the presidency wasn't meant to be what it is today?

At first, I found parts of this book problematic: the chapters are long enough to intrigue (or outrage), but often not long enough to convince beyond the traditional "reasonable doubt." At a few points, the author stopped just short of diving into some Hoppean or Spoonerian analysis of constitutional issues. And yet, entire books have been written on most of these questions -- many of which Woods cites in his text and endnotes. I suspect the author's deeper goal (beyond the above-mentioned barbecue) is less to provide the answers than to urge readers to begin pondering the questions. If rescuing the Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions or the true meaning of "states' rights" from the Memory Hole are "essential to a proper understanding of American history" (p. 157), intellectually honest people should be able to work out the implications.

Another objection I can see is the so-called "realist" argument that whether or not we ask these questions, the expansion of federal power is a fait accompli --- one the American people by and large seem content with. (The author himself gives us political science in one lesson on page 202: "Enforcing federal supremacy always comes first.") Given that "we" seem to want Social Security, OSHA, and a "national drug control policy," what does it matter what James Madison intended by the commerce clause two centuries ago?

But if Woods' presentation of American history is true, then it *matters* that it is true: ideas, after all, "have consequences," and as Father Abraham might have put it, a house built on lies cannot stand. Ask yourself: if the facts presented here are true, would it change how you think about government, politics ... and America itself?

And if so, then what?

119 of 137 people found the following review helpful

5.0 out of 5 stars Whoa Mama! July 9, 2007

By Robert Busko TOP 1000 REVIEWERVINE™ VOICE

Format:Hardcover

33 Questions About American History You're Not Supposed to Ask is a wonderful book through and through. It should upset every public educator that picks it up. The separation between what's taught in our public schools and what Woods maintains is true is absolutely stunning. Cutting a swath through topics about the pilgrims, discrimination, race relations, law, the constitution, labor unions, and even Bill Clinton, 33 Questions is a lesson in civics and history.

What's really scary is that Woods backs up what he writes with sound research and "reasoned reason." I'd be hard put to pick the most important chapter but I do have a favorite or three.

Chapter One, "Did the Founding Fathers Support Immigration?" is an eye opener. Perhaps the most stinging chapter is chapter 3; "Were the American Indians Really Environmentalist?" is the most surprising. According to Woods the native Americans used fire to bend the environment to their purpose. Quoting Woods..." Some indian fires, spreading for weeks at a time over several hundred thousand square miles, utterly destroyed plant and animal life. Grassland fires in the northern plains, for instance, did substantial damage to the buffalo population..." This is certain to raise eyebrows among the environmentalists who insist upon holding the native Americans as the ultimate caretakers of the natural world.

I could go on but the fact is that each chapter is interesting and will absolutely cause debate among all who read.

33 Questions About American History You're Not Supposed To Ask is a book that has been needed for a long time. Whether you agree with all the information that is included isn't important. What is important is that there seems to be another side to many of our most dearly held beliefs. In other words, PC history may not be the history we should believe in.

Enjoy the read.

65 of 73 people found the following review helpful

3.0 out of 5 stars Thought Provoking Mix: Interesting and Important October 18, 2007

By Taylor Rand VINE™ VOICE

Format:Hardcover

I didn't know how to rate the book: 5 stars because it was interesting and useful "food for thought"? 1 star because a lot it was recycled, either from Mr. Woods' earlier book or other authors and seemed to leave out alternative arguments? Ultimately, I split the difference.

I thought the strength of the book was its focusing on specific issues that could spark further research and awareness. I come from a generation of American schoolchildren that were taught such a reduced version of American history that I wouldn't be surprised if my less historically-minded classmates (which is, frankly, 95% of them) only remember that the American Indians were noble environmentalists who all but wrote the U.S. Constitution, the Civil War was fought in the 1960s to by M.L.K.Jr. to win civil rights, and capitalism is an evil that increased government programs can correct by giving us all more goodies.

Another strength was in questioning commonly accepted - by the average citizen - beliefs in such ideas that the U.S. traditionally welcomed immigrants, or that school desegregation has helped black schoolchildren, or that discrimination is primarily responsible for income differences, or that liberals have always been anti-war/ anti-imperialists.

The weakness of the book, in my opinion, arises from the fact that many questions were either not too important, not too original (i.e., historians have already been asking the questions "you're not supposed to ask" - and not just in recent, obscure books either), a matter of opinion (even more than such questions usually are), or were phrased and answered in such a way that left out some pretty important info.

Is it so important to question George Washington Carver's scientific status? Is it really taboo to ask about states' rights or whether the Civil War included the slavery question and other issues? Some of the answers that Mr. Woods provides are a bit narrow; the Founding Fathers had different opinions on immigration but we're given only the anti-immigration sentiments. Was the "Wild West" really so wild? Mr. Woods asks and answers that the rule of law was enforced by many voluntary citizen associations almost from the beginning. Well...if you mean that the West wasn't completely "live by the gun, die by the gun," then sure: there was order. If you mean that non-whites, like Mexicans, Indians, African-Americans could expect justice in anywhere the same proportion as Whites? It's no secret that Mexicans were displaced everywhere from landholdings, government, jobs (for example, driven out from the California goldfields by White miners), Indians reduced to reservation lands, and African Americans...well we know that history.

I was favorably impressed by the majority of the questions though and overall thought the book a great read. Some say he is a conservative - and I definitely have that feeling too - but is a person necessarily conservative because he questions whether government intervention in the marketplace is a good thing? Or asks whether American Indians truly were enviromentalist champions? Placing a label on Mr. Woods, incorrect or not, is distracting. It's also too tempting to get hung up on one question and forget the others. I may not agree with what he seems to be implying by the Founding Fathers' immigration viewpoints but there are several questions on economics, education, and current events that I think are spot on. Give him a try.