23 of 24 people found the following review helpful:
2.0 out of 5 stars
An argument, not a biography or history, June 2, 2004
By A Customer
This review is from: William McKinley: The American Presidents Series: The 25th President, 1897-1901 (American Presidents (Times)) (Hardcover)
Phillips is a political commentator, not a historian or biographer. His goal with this book isn't to sketch in McKinley's life but to argue a thesis. His thesis is that McKinley was a important president, and the thing that makes him important is that he illustrates Phillips' career-making mega-theory about realignment politics. It's a campaign strategist's view of history.
Phillips doesn't seem to have consulted any primary sources at all. We get a lot of "he must have reflected" stuff, and assertions that McKinley deliberately wore a mask of conventionality, and that his blandness was a conscious strategy, etc., with no attempt to demonstrate the historical validity of any of it.
Still, there is some good stuff about Ohio's political centrality in the post-Civil War era, and a very good summary of the gold-silver debate, which was a matter of passionate interest in the 1880s and 1890s but is so baffling to modern Americans.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
26 of 30 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
A lively, bold apologia for a possibly underrated president, October 24, 2003
This review is from: William McKinley: The American Presidents Series: The 25th President, 1897-1901 (American Presidents (Times)) (Hardcover)
I have tremendously enjoyed the volumes that have appeared so far in Arthur Schlesinger Jr.'s The American Presidents, but this is the first volume to have appeared so far that managed to transcend the limitations inherent in a series such as this. Most of the other volumes consist of a chronological recounting of the relevant president's life and career, with some assessment of his significance and achievements. Kevin Phillips, in a comparable number of pages, manages to present a case for a complete revision of the popular understanding of William McKinley, our 25th President. Although many of McKinley's biographers have argued some of the same things that Phillips does here, he does so in a much more vigorous fashion.
The stereotype of McKinley is that he was a somewhat dimwitted puppet under the control of Big Business, a man of little imagination, no culture, and a nonprogressive who was eclipsed by the ascendance of Teddy Roosevelt following his assassination. Phillips, on the other hand, wants to argue that he was a self-confident reformer who masked his goals under a congenial exterior, possessed a highly cultivated knack for maneuvering others to his own position, was vastly more concerned with protecting laborers and wages than the desires of business, and laid the foundations for progressive reforms that he himself would have begun had his life not ended so suddenly. Phillips shows that McKinley's obsession with tariffs had little to do with a desire to reward the rich, but with a desire to increase the wages of American workers.
Though but lightly stated, much of Phillips's book is intended as a polemic against contemporary misuses of McKinley, such as Karl Rove, George W. Bush's chief aide. Many conservatives envision turning government back to a time before the unquestionably Progressive Roosevelt, to a mythical William McKinley who is assumed to share many of the values of contemporary supporters of Bush. Phillips shows over and over, however, that McKinley in fact shared almost no basic political goals or values with contemporary conservatives. Continually throughout the book, Phillips shows that McKinley had deep ties to labor, and was concerned with the needs of business primarily to the degree that healthy business meant higher wages for workers. He was quite sympathetic to organized labor, to a degree unusual in his time, and even the right of workers to strike. On the other hand, he, like all 19th century American presidents, found the accumulation of excessive amounts of wealth to be repugnant and a little obscene, hardly a quality he holds with contemporary conservatives. Even further destroying the parallels between current conservativism and McKinley, Phillips refers to McKinley's concerns with tax fairness, which did not mean lessening the tax burden on the wealthy and business, but the demand for a progressive tax structure that required those best off paying more than those less well off. McKinley's progressivism in the book comes out also in his strong support for women being given the right to vote, for blacks to be allow to vote unimpeded, and for senators to be voted by direct vote by the people, and not by selection by state legislatures.
Phillips notes that many give McKinley more credit for achievements in foreign policy, but brings the credit he deserves into sharper focus, noting that during the crisis with Spain he essentially took on the jobs of Secretary of State (due to the unexpected rapid aging of John Sherman) and Secretary of War.
Lest one imagine that these are all creative rereadings of McKinley's career based on playing lose with the facts, Phillips shows that the essential assessment he makes was borne out by the evaluations of the illustrious individuals who served in his cabinet. He also displays the causes for the unflattering portrait of McKinley that grew up after the onset of the New Deal.
One could easily disagree with much in the book, and nonetheless celebrate it for being a significant and spirited reevaluation of a significant American president. Nearly all the writers in this series have attempted to validate the claim that their subjects were underrated presidents (except Robert Remini, who though maintaining that John Quincy Adams is one of the great American public servants, concedes that he was a pretty dismal president), but Phillips wants to do more than that. In Schlesinger terminology, he wants to argue that he is a near great president, but on top of that has been horribly misunderstood in profound and important ways. Whether one agrees with his reassessment, this book performs a great service by dismantling a persistent but untenable stereotype. Of all the books in this series (I have read all but Garry Wills book on Madison), this one is by far the most invigorating one that I have read. The other volumes have deepened my knowledge of several of our presidents, but this one has actually changed my mind.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
11 of 13 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
"Teddy" McKinley?, June 5, 2004
This review is from: William McKinley: The American Presidents Series: The 25th President, 1897-1901 (American Presidents (Times)) (Hardcover)
The previous reviewer is correct that Phillips has written an extended argument more than he has a traditional biography. But the argument is so cleverly advanced, and covers so much of McKinley's political life and presidency, that I found the book of compelling interest -- the best of the more than half-dozen biographies I've read in this wonderful The American Presidents series so far.
The core of Phillips's argument is that much of the credit given to Theodore Roosevelt properly belongs to his predecessor McKinley. In establishing a political realignment in 1896 based on both labor and urban-dweller votes, in greatly expanding America's world role, and in beginning the reforms to tilt the balance of economic power from capital to labor, McKinley either preceded Roosevelt, setting the pace for the latter's presidency, or outdid TR altogether.
Phillips's argument holds up fairly well, although some parts are better than others. He is very convincing in describing how McKinley created a political realignment in 1896 (and solidified it in 1900), but less so when discussing the importance of McKinley's rather circuitous route to protect labor against big capital.
Some of the most interesting parts of this book are its sidebars. Phillips should be commended for including short write-ups on the importance of Ohio to late-nineteenth century and early-twentieth century politics, as well as the importance of silver in that era. I even enjoyed the sections on McKinley and the tariff. This is not your typical biography, but its unusual approach is a strength, not a weakness.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
