50 of 51 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Is Grover Cleveland a "great" president and Woodrow Wilson a "bad" one? See why it might be so...., January 13, 2009
This review is from: Recarving Rushmore: Ranking the Presidents on Peace, Prosperity, and Liberty (Independent Studies in Political Economy) (Hardcover)
Wikipedia's article "Historical Rankings of United States Presidents" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_rankings_of_United_States_Presidents) features a spreadsheet of twelve scholarly surveys. In general, the presidents were judged on "achievements, leadership qualities, failures and faults (such as corruption)." Consistently topping the lists were Lincoln, Washington, FDR, and Jefferson, with conservative and liberals disagreeing only on the placements of our 1st and 32nd presidents.
Ivan Eland questions the criteria used in these conventional rankings. In his RECARVING RUSHMORE, his Introduction states that undesirable biases shape surveys conducted by such as the Siena Research Institute. There is the "effectiveness bias" which supposedly focuses on a president's ability to get his programs enacted while not weighing the value of the programs. In other words, action trumps judgment. Then Eland mentions biases for "charisma," "service during a crisis" (i.e., war or depression), and "activism."
Eland wants to evaluate presidents on other criteria, namely, how well they procured or perpetuated peace, prosperity, and liberty. His rankings "reflect the degree to which presidents upheld the founders' original vision of a limited federal government with an appropriately constrained executive" although Eland concedes that "each president has to be evaluated at his point in time" and "cannot be blamed for the size of government he inherited or the power he was expected to wield at the time he took office." Still, the idea is to assess the presidents on whether they avoided "wars of choice;" whether their economic policies contributed to prosperity; and whether they respected the constitution, checks and balances on their office, and individual freedoms.
The resulting Eland ranking is consequently radically different from the Siena (2002) or Wall Street Journal (2006) surveys reprinted in RECARVING RUSHMORE for comparison. Among the Eland "Excellent" presidents is Grover Cleveland (#2). He ranks at #12 in WSJ and at #20 in Siena. Bill Clinton comes in at #11 (Eland), but at #22 (WSJ) and at #18 (Siena). George W. Bush registers close to the bottom with Eland (#36) whereas he fared somewhat better with WSJ (#19) and Siena (#23).
The bulk of RECARVING RUSHMORE consists of chapters on each president examining his record on peace, prosperity, and liberty. Woodrow Wilson's chapter, for instance, naturally discusses his entry into World War I at length and is labeled the "Most Interventionist President in U.S. History." He also scores poorly for prosperity because he pursued "an activist domestic agenda contrary to the history of the Democratic Party, which has been a bastion of small government." Likewise, Wilson received low marks for liberty because his policies eroded civil liberties and because to him "some racial groups were more equal than others." These chapters are invaluable as a means of viewing the presidents from perspectives seldom published.
RECARVING RUSHMORE is a contrarian reevaluation of presidential contributions. And it is precisely for this reason that it ought to be widely read (or at the very least studiously browsed) and its conclusions debated. Eland has supported his rankings with solid arguments and a definite and distinctive philosophy about what Americans ought to look for and value in men and women they choose to hold the office of President of the United States. Recommended. 4.5 stars.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
22 of 23 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Important, Thought provoking, February 22, 2009
This review is from: Recarving Rushmore: Ranking the Presidents on Peace, Prosperity, and Liberty (Independent Studies in Political Economy) (Hardcover)
This is an important and thought provoking book. The author clearly has a detailed understanding of US Presidential history as well as a sound understanding of economics, and uses that knowledge to rank the Presidents by the degree to which they tried to advance peace, prosperity, liberty, and their adherance to the Constitution. The result is enlightening; but also sure to create debate over the resulting ranking. He is careful to explain that his ranking is based upon the actions and results of the Presidents while in office, not before or after. He also doesn't demand that later day Presidents strictly uphold the Constitution, only that they try to move in the right direction within their abilities to do so. This results in, for instance, Jefferson being ranked in the bottom 20, while Ford, Carter, and Clinton are in the top 20. This, despite the fact that Jefferson was fully concious of the original meaning of the Constitution and understood full well his limitations under it. He agonized over the unconstitionality of the Louisiana Purchase and sucessfully reduced the size and scope of government to adhere to its Constitional limits. Yes, he abused his power in regards to the embargo and Native Americans; but should his Presidency be judjed more harshly than the modern Presidents who seem so utterly ignorant of and disinterested in Constitutional government? Jefferson's America was flawed by his inconsistancies; but it was a society in which government was all but non-existant in the daily lives of most people. The government of the modern Presidents is all intrusive. Each reader will need to wrestle with these issues. It is to Mr. Eland's credit that he kindled this debate.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
13 of 13 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
How Presidents Run the Country -- into the Ground, May 7, 2009
This review is from: Recarving Rushmore: Ranking the Presidents on Peace, Prosperity, and Liberty (Independent Studies in Political Economy) (Hardcover)
This book presents a refreshing evaluation of the presidents. As someone who has studied presidents for quite some time, I found myself agreeing with most of the book's assessments, as if I had written the book myself. I always thought John Tyler, Grover Cleveland, Martin Van Buren, and Warren G. Harding were criminally underrated and that the so-called greats -- Lincoln, Wilson, Reagan, FDR -- were merely cold-blooded, excellent politicians who were blessed with the mantle of greatness not because of their dubious leadership but because they knew how to sell themselves. This book illustrates how the so-called greats were great only in the extent that they harmed the country's prosperity and liberty.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No