The Politically Incorrect Guide to American History

By Murphey, Dwight D. | The Journal of Social, Political, and Economic Studies, Summer 2005 | Go to article overview

The Politically Incorrect Guide to American History


Murphey, Dwight D., The Journal of Social, Political, and Economic Studies


The Politically Incorrect Guide to American History

Thomas E. Woods, Jr.

Regnery Publishing, Inc., 2004

It's a strange thing about myths. They define a society's heroes, villains and idealized memories. Scholars love to pierce them, since they are not exactly what one would call "truth." And yet it hardly seems a society can get by without them. They provide the consensus that cements the society into a common polity, affirming the shared premises of a people. Without shared premises, all discussion flounders, dissolving into chaos. Moreover, it is likely that myths are an inescapable part of how people face the world. Symbols that embody simplifications are, for the most part, how we deal with what would otherwise be the overwhelming complexities of social reality. Not only are myths indispensable aids to comprehension; they are also the vessels into which is poured much of the meaning that people assign to their lives. Without unifying conceptions, there would be nothing larger or more meaningful than discrete facts.

Myths are much of what the contending ideologies, social philosophies and religions struggle to create and demolish. The insistence upon "political correctness" in the United States and Europe in recent years can be understood as an attempt by the elite that prevails at virtually all the commanding heights of the society to fashion new myths and destroy old ones. The emphasis on "multiculturalism," with its elevation of Third World immigrants to honorific status and its condemnation of much that governed Euro-American sensibilities before the midtwentieth century, requires the knocking down of old heroes, ideals and archetypes and the substitution of new ones. The process is intolerant for a number of reasons, not the least of which is that myth-making is not, by its very nature, something that invites debate. The impulse is to impose a viewpoint by overwhelming consensus, so that it requires a heretic to question it.

During American history the governing myths have varied greatly over time. There were decades during which "Americanism" was the reigning concept, extolling the Constitution as a document that limited government and protected states' rights, revering the Founding Fathers and the intrepid heroes of the frontier, perceiving Americans as fundamentally a "good" people, exalting Lincoln as a sainted figure, and swelling with pride over the American victories in the Spanish-American War, in France during World War I, and (near the end of the period) in World War II. It may now be obvious that this Americanism was something of an incongruous mixture, since idealizing the post-1861 United States (with its deflation of state sovereignty) and especially the post-1898 United States (with its off-and-on, but mostly on, vision of America's role as the world's policeman and social worker) is not exactly the same thing as idealizing the early Republic.

Comes now historian Thomas E. Woods, Jr., with a Politically Incorrect Guide to American History that applies a libertarian perspective to deconstruct several of the myths both of today and yesterday. The early Republic and Founding Fathers weren't all of one piece, of course, with sharp differences, say, between Hamilton and Jefferson over the role of the national government, and later between Webster and Hayne over whether the states had a right to secede. Woods sides with those who wanted a strictly limited federal government and a prominent role for the states as sovereign entities. This puts him in a position to advance several ideas about the first century of American history that are provocatively at odds with impressions Americans have long assumed to be true:

- That actually the "American Revolution" wasn't a "revolution" at all, certainly not in the sense that a total transformation of society was sought. Rather, the conflict, as those who fought on the American side saw it, was to preserve long-established rights that they believed had been trampled upon. …

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
One moment ...
Default project is now your active project.
Project items

Items saved from this article

This article has been saved
Highlights (0)
Some of your highlights are legacy items.

Highlights saved before July 30, 2012 will not be displayed on their respective source pages.

You can easily re-create the highlights by opening the book page or article, selecting the text, and clicking “Highlight.”

Citations (0)
Some of your citations are legacy items.

Any citation created before July 30, 2012 will labeled as a “Cited page.” New citations will be saved as cited passages, pages or articles.

We also added the ability to view new citations from your projects or the book or article where you created them.

Notes (0)
Bookmarks (0)

You have no saved items from this article

Project items include:
  • Saved book/article
  • Highlights
  • Quotes/citations
  • Notes
  • Bookmarks
Notes
Cite this article

Cited article

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Buy instant access to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

(Einhorn, 1992, p. 25)

(Einhorn 25)

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited article

The Politically Incorrect Guide to American History
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger Reset View mode
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

Help
Full screen

matching results for page

    Questia reader help

    How to highlight and cite specific passages

    1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
    2. Click or tap the last word you want to select, and you’ll see everything in between get selected.
    3. You’ll then get a menu of options like creating a highlight or a citation from that passage of text.

    OK, got it!

    Cited passage

    Style
    Citations are available only to our active members.
    Buy instant access to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn, 1992, p. 25).

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn 25)

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences."1

    1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

    Cited passage

    Thanks for trying Questia!

    Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

    Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

    Buy instant access to save your work.

    Already a member? Log in now.

    Author Advanced search

    Oops!

    An unknown error has occurred. Please click the button below to reload the page. If the problem persists, please try again in a little while.