The shorter tales are good but are really like imperfect sketches made in study for the grand finale piece Death in Venice. Most of the tales deal with sensual longing which is never satisfied or consummated and that gets a bit tiring unless you see the sensual longing representing some higher longing as well, the sensual longing perhaps being one in the same with spiritual and artistic longing. That way you are more in the frame of mind to see that Death in Venice is not just about an older mans lust for a younger man but a prolonged meditation about time and art and all those highly valued goods. I have to confess I get tired of Mann pretty quick because he dwells on the same themes over and over again but if you are a student of fiction he really is one of those writers who has much to teach. Still it sometimes seems to me that Mann's characters would be better off if they occasionally just went ahead and did it. That may sound to be an awful oversimplification but I think they would feel better and their already instable identities and worlds would not constantly be shaken to the ground by those too long suppressed desires. As for the spirit and artistic sense, they too would be happier, much more contented, with the occasional release and renewal of energies, a bit of fleshen contact would connect them to something more real than their "thoughts" about things. Anyway if you haven't already read Death in Venice you are lucky because it is a great read, though a strange and sometimes disturbed one. If you like your main characters made of more earthy substance than Mann's suffering spirits read D.H. Lawrence who also loved Italy by the way and who contemplated time and art in a much more relaxed manner.

This collection of Thomas Mann's early short works presents one of the greatest authors of the 20th Century in an expert and fluent translation, unbowdlerized.The title story, Death in Venice, is an example of lush late Romanticism in its most extravagent and vivid form. Mann, as always, dramatizes the tension between the bourgeois life of strict propriety, symbolized by the renowned Gustav Aschenbach, the protagonist, a literary titan specializing in learned tomes, and the seductions of art and beauty as symbolized by Venice and Tadzio, the focus of Aschenbach's fatal obsession. Some might find the description of the dissolution and its content as repugnant. But if you allow yourself to visualize the words as written and at least allow yourself to feel something of what Aschenbach is feeling, you will be transported outside of yourself strangely and hauntingly .The other stories, including Tonio Kroger, an earlier work that brought Mann great renown after the publication of Buddenbrooks, his first novel, are also wonderful examples of how the tensions of art and life, growing up and thinking affect their main characters. Not to be ignored is the sexual tension that pervades all of Mann's work and is deeply embedded in his consciousness. (I highly recommend Anthony Heilbut's critical biography of Mann for an understanding of the man, his work and the context of German life, literature and history in which it was written.)

Like many German writers, Thomas Mann contained the cancerous seed of anti-semitism, which rears its ugly head in these stories, now and then, and he has a tendency toward pedantry, going on and on in an abstract vein about the strengths and weaknesses of the outsider, the artist, the sensualist, ho-hum. When I was younger, I worshiped his writing, and Buddenbrooks was one of my favorite novels of all time (still is).

Despite my recent and more mature awareness of his weaknesses, he remains a surprising, brilliant writer. His prose style is dynamic and I continue to emulate that. I was amused to find, however, that I liked the lesser known stories. I found "Death In Venice" ponderous. I liked the stories about the incestuous twins, the tragic man who was dwarfed from a childhood fall, the cuckolded buffoon who is talked into wearing a tutu at a community recital and the eccentric who is compelled to continually mutiliate his dog and heal him. Now these are what I would call real "case histories." I'm sure Mann would scorn me for being partial to these, scornfulness being one of his main attitudes in life. His very disdain of pretension, however, seems like a pretension in itself. Still - his command of language is like no other's.

I have not seen some much garbage and simple stupidity in one book in a long time. This book is full of half "truths", misleading statements,and dubious and shady quotes. It is hard for me to understand (which I don not) how can anyone even bother to waste his/her time writing this stuff. Doesn't the author has anything better to do? I guess not!!!!!!

The editor feels that by associating these 100+ excerpts with the word "racist" he can instantly refute them. On the contrary there is much here for reasoned minds to agree with--especially in the selections by Murray/Herrnstein, Shockley, Jensen. George and D'Souza. Certainly some of the older racial tracts are just silly but much of the modern writings hold true. Even some of the predictions made many years ago, like in Ross' "The Old World and the New" (1914) about the future of America have proven quite accurate. Joshi also peppers the book with some egalitarian essays meant to counter the rest, but despite the pleasant platitudes, these sections do little for the book and basically attempt to refute the "racists" with not much more than a few doses of "shame on you" scorn and a few shots of saccharine sweet sentimentality. No positive proof for equality is presented, but then again, egalitarianism has never required proof for their beliefs.

This book is very inspiring for those who love humanity. It contains a lot of inspirational material. It is a nice historical completement to books such as: Why Race matters (by Michael Levin); Race, Evolution and Behavior : A Life History Perspective (by J. P. Rushton); The Real American Dilemma: Race, Immigration and the Future of America (by Jared Taylor.); Duke's My awakening. I especially recommend Joshi's book to anyone who cares about America.

May be a good starting point....The United States in 1800 by Henry Adams. First Six Chapters of Vol.1

Adams' work here ranks with Macaulay and Carlyle in terms of telling an intricate history through the private letters and conversations of the players involved. From the first pages where he describes the America over which Jefferson presided, Adams clearly defines idealogies and principles as they were defended and practiced by the Federalists and Republicans of the day. Throughout Jefferson's two terms, the president was forced to abandon favorite principles and to defend others that were ulimately (if not immediately) untenable. Through skillful hands we watch how moods changed and policies switched, and how the main characters attempted to reconcile their inconsistencies. Jefferson hoped to expose the wrongfulness of Federalist policies, yet wound up forwarding the same tenets in his management. The President who rose to such a height of popularity and power left the office as disgraced and as generally disliked as any Chief Executive before or after. A masterful work about eight important and formative years in the early republic.

Even though it was written in the 1880s, this is the best history of early American diplomacy yet written. It is important to mention that this is primarily a diplomatic history, and it certainly reflects the author's interest and family history in foreign affairs. Adams has meticulously researched all matters of State and diplomacy, but he has reserved the topics of culture, economics, and education for far more subjective analysis. It becomes obvious early in the text that Adams is highly deferential to Great Britain, and the young American republic is constantly compared and trivialized, in contrapuntal regularity, against the great European powers. Adams has a lot to say about America's poverty, provincialism, and anti-intellectualism when compared to England, France, and Russia. American culture cringe pervades the text. While frequently accurate, he drives the point to excess: America becomes somewhat of a play-thing for the imperial ambitions of Europe. We're treated to page after page of material on the British ambassadors. In short, this is probably the kind of American history we would have expected Henry James and T. S. Eliot to have read, the kind that gets all the facts and dates right but can't conceal the author's sincere desire to be English.

This book was interesting reading if you think Jefferson's wall of separation phrase was meant to be one-sided (if there could ever be such a thing). For the true meaning of Jefferson's phrase, read Justice Hugo Black's opinion in Everson v. Board of Education, 330 U.S. 1

If you have ever wondered about the origins of the "wall of separation" metaphor or why it is so influential in American law and politics, then this is the book for you. It is the definitive work on the history of the celebrated metaphor that has informed the way many Americans, including influential judges and scholars, think about church-state relations. No other book provides more information and perspective on the historical, political, and legal development of this important trope and how it has shaped American church-state law and policy. The book challenges much of the conventional wisdom about the "wall of separation" metaphor, especially the United States Supreme Court's interpretation of the figurative phrase, and questions the propriety of its use as a substitute for the text of the First Amendment. This trenchant book is scholarly, yet witty and engaging. It will appeal to the specialist and nonspecialist reader alike.

Thomas Jefferson and the Wall of Separation Between Church and State written by Daniel L. Dreisbach is a in-depth study into what Jefferson ment by his statement "wall of separation between church and state."

Introduced in an 1802 letter to the Danbury, Connecticut Baptist Association, Jefferson's "wall" has been accepted by many Americans as a concise description of the U.S. Constitution's church-state arrangement and conceived as a virtual rule of constitutional law. This book delves into what Jefferson really had in mind about the separation of church and state, and gives the reader a scholarly understaning of this famous phrase.

The book is not very long, but the impact that you get from reading it feels like a book much larger. At 128 pages long we are provided an opportunity to disseminate Jefferson's views on the constitutional relationship between church and state and, in particular, to explain his reasons for refusing to issue presidential proclamtions of days for public fasting and thanksgiving.

The "wall of separation" metaphorically represents the constitutional provision, the admendment, however, differs in significant respects from Jefferson's felicitous phrase. The former prohibits the creation of laws "respecting an establishment of religion" (excepting, perhaps, laws to protect religious excerise), thereby limiting civil government; the latter, more broadly, separates "church" and "state," thereby restricting the actions of, and interactions between, both the church and the civil state.

Reading this book splits the fine hairs and you get an appreciation of what is happening and the suggnificance of why it is written as such. Dreisbach has provided appendices in which documents from the Papers of Thomas Jefferson gives the reader an insight as to Jefferson's thinkings and are invaluable. There are notes and a selected bibliography that is also very helpful.

Jefferson's architectural metaphor, in the course of time, has achieved virtual canonical status and becomes more familiar to the American people that the actual text of the First Amendment... moreover, jurists have found the metaphor irresistible, adopting it not only as an organizing theme of church/state jurisprudence but also as a virtual rule of constitutional law.

I found this book to be very interesting and the prose to be fluid and well-documented making for and interesting read.

Thomas Jefferson was no Satan. But, I will implore all the fanatics and sycophants who revere him as a 'man of justice and freedom' to wake-up from their slumber. Don't let the world laugh at your ignorance!
Mr Jefferson was by every means a slave-holder. Thus, this idea of linking his name to the Rights of Man is a contradiction.
If Dumas Malone must continue on this track, then he should mention the names of John Adams, James Monroe, John Quincy Adams, and Abraham Lincoln, and we shall listen to him. Thomas Jefferson does not fit in this realm. He doesn't belong here! But, I am not really surprised. This book was published in 1951: at the peak of Color-Bar.

What can be said about this monument to Jefferson scholarship? I am sure that somewhere in universities around the United States there are "scholar squirrels who want to put down this invaluable resource in Jefferson studies. It is always the way that mice attempt to gnaw at lions. This is not a perfect work (and my remarks refer to all of the books in the series as a whole), there are somethings, namely Sally Hemmings references which are wrong and will not sit well with American 21st century mores. There is the issue of slavery which was handled much differently 50 years ago than it is now.
Jefferson is not worthy of our interest because of Sally Hemmings and because he kept slaves. Jefferson is great because of the Declaration of Independence and his fight for the rights of man. While it may have been hypocritical to preach liberty and keep slaves, it is doubtful that slavery ever would have been abolished if Jefferson had never gained the prominence that he did. This book and the others that follow show why we should continue to honor the public man even though his private side may have been wanting.

Jefferson and the Rights of Man written by Dumas Malone is the second installment of a six part biography of Thomas Jefferson. As the first volume Jefferson: The Virginian was in the time frame of (1743 - 1784), this volume takes us from where the first volume ended in Jefferson's life, to the end of Washington's first term as President of the United States and his subsequent unanimous re-election, (1784 - 1792).

Jefferson's European mission starts off this volume, concluding with his service as the United States's first Secretary of State under George Washington. But, in between we see Jefferson laying the seeds of his philosophy and the implication regarded as timeless and universal.

George Washington's first term was a proving ground for Jefferson to get his views across to Washington, but Washington has Hamilton and there in lies the rub. As political parties were in their infancy, the time was ripe for a political view points to be exploited and Hamilton was up to task. So, naturally Jefferson had a different view point and was voicing his opinion to Washington.

Jefferson in this period of time was primarily concerned with foreign affairs which kept him busy as Great Britain was being pulled into a European war. But the "war" between Jefferson and Hamilton was just begining. Jefferson was well aware of the implicit dangers in the political and economic situation, but Enlightenment was budding and thus, begining to give proof of his undying faith, that men and society can be saved by means of knowledge.

This period in Jefferson's life is the richest with regards to private friendships and will lay the bricks to the foundation to the rest of his life. As Jefferson begins his battle with the Federalists, Hamilton is his primary opposition.

When I opened the first volume of Dumas Malone's biography of Thomas Jefferson, I expected to spend hours of reading in the company of one of the greatest men who ever lived, vicariously reliving his life in its minutest details and basking in his genius. These expectations were partly satisfied with the first volume, which describes Jefferson's formative years- if such years can indeed be set apart from the life of a man who never ceased to grow. However, as I closed this fourth volume, I was forced to admit that I had gained very little new insight in its purported subject, and that the whole volume had proved rather tedious to read.

The six-volume series has been described as « a major achievement in the half-way house between history and biography ». Laudatory though this comment may be, it summarizes for me the major flaw of Malone's enterprise : its failure as biographical writing. Nowhere is this clearer than in this fourth volume, where Jefferson himself seems to recede in the background while the author retells the most tedious details of the workings of his administration, however unrelated to Jefferson himself.

The « un-biographical » character of the work is reinforced by its format : instead of following Jefferson chronologically, Malone has chosen to offer us a series of chapters organized around such themes as the executive appointments, Marbury vs. Madison or the Louisiana Purchase, thus imposing conventional textbook divisions on the organic flow of Jefferson's life. As a result, the « biography » reads as a series of historical essays, and certain important topics are relegated to the next volume. Nothing is said for instance about Jefferson's personal relation with Meriwether Lewis or his involvement in the preparations of the Lewis and Clarke expedition.

Perhaps even more regrettable is the general impression of Jefferson given by Malone as a relatively unintellectual man who had apparently done most of his reading in his youth and never bothered to systematize his thinking, being more concerned with his presidential duties, his social life and the occasional joys of the countryside.

Apart from a few interesting chapters, therefore, such as « The Religion of a Reasonable Man », and the welcome refutation of the Sally Hemings myth, this curious hybrid of a volume should be eschewed by those who seek a genuine understanding of Jefferson the man. To them, David Mayer's « The Constitutional Thought of Thomas Jefferson », and a good selection of Jefferson's own writings, should prove much more profitable reading.

Jefferson: The President First Term 1801 - 1805 is the fourth volume in a series of six. This volume is exclusively Jefferson as the President of the United States. Jefferson's first task as President was to unite a politically divided country.

Jefferson's immediate goal was to show a peaceful transfer of authority and then never lose sight of this goal then maintain unity within his party. Jefferson was more moderate politically than his party partisians, but he did require unity and loyalty.

Jefferson was a man of paradox, he was recognied as the head of his party, but he longed of his home in the Virginia foothills. Jefferson put his faith in the individual as he sought to increase personal freedoms, but he was plagued early on by the Hamiltonians wanting a stronger central government. Later on John Marshall appointed as Chief Justice of the Supreme Court by John Adams in his waining Presidency would be at odds with Jefferson. This conflict was mainly a political viewpoint, but the arguments would be heated as the successive phases took shape.

Jefferson had forethought and wanted the river rights of the Mississippi. This later worked toward the Louisiana purchase and the expansion of the United States west of the Mississippi. Jefferson was determined that New Orleans should be part of the United States. So, by shrewd dipolmacy, the deal was struck. But to acquire West Florida was not to come till his second term and so with the exploration of the Louisiana territory with Lewis and Clark.

Jefferson symbolized freedom and democracy, but friends clearly showed respect. Jefferson's composure while President showed and he ran a balanced government. This is a very good and scholarly work, but the deals and facts are there... only thing the author needed to do was bring out Jefferson the man more to the forefront.

What can be said about this monument to Jefferson scholarship? I am sure that somewhere in universities around the United States there are "scholar squirrels who want to put down this invaluable resource in Jefferson studies. It is always the way that mice attempt to gnaw at lions. This is not a perfect work (and my remarks refer to all of the books in the series as a whole), there are somethings, namely Sally Hemmings references which are wrong and will not sit well with American 21st century mores. There is the issue of slavery which was handled much differently 50 years ago than it is now.
Jefferson is not worthy of our interest because of Sally Hemmings and because he kept slaves. Jefferson is great because of the Declaration of Independence and his fight for the rights of man. While it may have been hypocritical to preach liberty and keep slaves, it is doubtful that slavery ever would have been abolished if Jefferson had never gained the prominence that he did. This book and the others that follow show why we should continue to honor the public man even though his private side may have been wanting.

Interesting, but poorly edited: too many misspellings and grammatical errors detract from admirable account of author's travails in getting the movie made; her clear dislike of the film's director amounts to "telling tales out of school."

The film was successful; she would have been better off forgiving the director's derelictions and hiring a decent manuscript editor.

I think that this book should not have been rated on the basis of grammatical errors. It seems condescending and arrogant. It seems especially irrelevant when very good writers, including Jefferson, would occasionally mispell a few words.

I read the book and saw the movie, and I thought the first part of it, particulary the part relating to the alleged time spent in France, was excellent. I think she did a good job in completing what must have seemed an impossible task which could not have been easy from start to finish.

My only complaint, however, is that in relasing the movie within the desired time frame, there seemed to have been more of an allowance for the misrepresentation or elaboration of many of the facts.

While I do believe that Jefferson fathered these children, I think, the part of the movie depicting the alleged events upon the return to America was entertaining, but should have been researched more for accuracy with regard to the actual depiction of time, dates, and events.

Tina Andrews, in her book gives many reasons for her elaboration in dealing with various matters. But in depicting the life of such an important man as Thomas Jefferson, and especially in how he will be consequently viewed by young and impressionable minds from having watched the movie, I think respectfully, more time should have been devoted for a more accurate depiction.

I vaugely remembered Tina Andrews from her acting days. How she goes from being a contract performer on a soap opera to a movie writer and producer is a fascianting story. I'd buy the book for this alone. The struggle to make the Sally Hemmings mini-series is another remarkable tale. Although I think the actress playing Sally was miscast,(I collect books on Sally Hemmings and the actress looks nothing like the description given by both whites and former slaves of Sally) and the addition of the beating scene was unnecessary I enjoyed the mini-series. Ms. Andrews overcame huge odds to bring this story to the public. If you are interested in Sally Hemmings or if you are interested in how movies get made or if you want a glimpse of what it's really like to be black in Hollywood then check this book out.

It is a wonderful idea to make available recordings of great speeches. I hope we have more of this in the future.
In the case of older speeches, the selection is very good, considering the restraints of time, and the readers are uniformly excellent.
As for the modern speeches, it is a marvel of technology that we can hear these speeches as delivered. It is incredible that we can hear the voice of William Jennings Bryan. I can listen to Martin Luther King's "I have a dream" a thousand times and never tire of it! How I wish I could listen to the voice of Patrick Henry! But this selection is too heavily weighted to the modern, and many of those do not deserve billing as the GREATEST speeches of ALL TIME. Also, some of the modern speeches which are included are abridged, e.g. Reagan is cut off in the middle of a sentence, while lengthy and undeserving speeches are played out in their entirety.
Also, with only a few exceptions, the selection is almost entirely American. It is hard to understand why Jimmy Carter's lengthy speech on energy policy is included, while Pericles' funeral oration is not; or why only a small portion of a single Winston Churchill speech is included; why while Bill Clinton's complete 1993 pulpit address, in excess of 20 minutes, is included.
It would be helpful if the complete list of speeches were available to online buyers, as it would be to shoppers in a brick and mortar store.

I have listened to this collection twice now, both times with pleasure. Hearing the acutal voices of Amelia Earhart, Rev. Martin Luther King, Winston Churchill and Neil Armstrong made a deeper connection than simply reading their words. The collection showcases different subjects and many times contrasts opposing viewpoints of the ideas. This volume is a fantastic introduction to the moving ideals and sometimes sad truths that have influenced Western Civilization.

I enjoyed reading the book, but since the author purported to be telling the entire story, I would liked to have seen other characters who played a role in the Louisiana Purchase included: General Wilkonson, head of the American Army, a "confidant" of Jefferson while a spy on Spain's Payroll, Aaron Burr, the big intriguer who was scheming to make New Orleans part of a Southern Empire, and others including George Rogers Clarke who was intriguing with Spain and France to organize an Army, invade New Orleans and place it under French control

The other problem I had with the book is that the author led the reader to believe that, in the War of 1812, Jackson's defeat of the British was the deciding factor in America keeping New Orleans and thus the entire Louisiana Territory. Not true. Amerca and Britain had concluded a peace treaty before the battle of New Orleans was waged and won.

Jefferson's Great Gamble, by Charles Cermani is a gem. The author has exhibited the rare ability to lift the historical character right off the page, and allow us to meet that person on a very intimate basis.

The strength of Mr. Cermani's book rests on the wonderful characterizations of Jefferson, Bonaparte, Talleyrand, Marbois, Livingston, Madison and Monroe. The author expertly weaves the personalities of these men, their strengths, and weaknesses, into the fabric that is the story of The Louisiana Purchase. It is a complete story as told by Mr. Cermani. The actual facts of the purchase are not neglected, but highly enhanced by the various character studies, and exploration of how personalities, and circumstances determined the ultimate outcome.

Of particular interest were the descriptions of how Jefferson and Madison used disinformation to influence a decision by the French, and the very strange relationship the Jefferson administration had with their man in Paris, Robert Livingston.

Mr. Cermani also employed a style of writing that produced a very readable book. The flow of the text was wonderful, and was almost novel like as at times I could not put the book down.

I would encourage anyone with an interest in American history, or just good writing, to read this well researched, and written offering on one of the great events in American history. You won't be disappointed.

The value of Cerami's rendition of the Louisiana Purchase is l) its down-to-earth clarity, and 2) the way the historical participants come alive on every page! For those who know little or nothing about the importance of the Louisiana Purchase, this book will whet your appetite for more details of this exciting, invalualuable event that brought us the territory west of the Appalachians which, without it, we may never have become the world leader for freedom and democracy.

For those who have an understanding of why Jefferson and others forsaw the importance of U.S. expansion on this continent, the author brings the major players from the U.S., Spain and France to life for you through their negotiations, their letters, private thoughts, and individual personalities. This is history told at its best with uncomplicated clarity and at the same time gives enough pros and cons from all the countries involved to allow the reader to understand why negotiations were so difficult; and how we could have lost the whole deal had other personalities been in charge.

I now have a new sense of such simple facts as why the West became "the wild west", why the northeastern states are so small and the western states so much larger, why being one country that stretched from "sea to shining sea" gave us time to grow and mature in relative peace to European countries, and land with all the natural resources needed for independence.

Jefferson's Great Gamble whetted my appetite for more on the subject, so I bought A Wilderness So Immense, by Jon Kukla. I'm very glad I read the former first because it gave me a background to help understand Kukla's book, which I might have put down before finishing the first chapter because it's slow getting started. There are a lot of characters in Kukla's book mentioned only once (check the index) and in my opinion don't add any importance to the story of the La. Purchase; rather it makes the reading drag. But since I've a long way to go, I'll reserve final judgement on Kukla's book for now. Charles Cerami's book deserves five stars.

This book should be called "misunderstanding Thomas Jefferson". Its interpretation of Jefferson's political philosophy is weak and highly speculative. One has to read everything that Jefferson himself read and wrote, philosophically, to understand him. The author looked at a narrow slice of Jefferson (ward republics) out of context with Jefferson's world view.

This book appeared to be fashionable because it was authored by the name, Gary Hart. Having read just about everything on Thomas Jefferson, I rushed out to get this one. After reading it, I was disappointed. It was long on explaining Mr.Hart's personal opinions and short on explaining Thomas Jefferson's philosophy behind his idea of "ward republics". I have to tell you, I got more information and enjoyment out of another book about Jefferson's philosophy, including a section on ward republics, that pre-dates this book that I read a couple of years ago called "West Point: Character Leadership...Thomas Jefferson" by Norman Thomas Remick.

Restoration of the Republic: The Jeffersonian Ideal in 21st-Century America written as a doctoral thesis by Gary Hart.The book in a nutshell is about bringing to light a long-neglected aspect of Thomas Jefferson's political philosphy... "the ward republic."

Thomas Jefferson proposed that a layer of American government composed of elementary, pure or ward republics should provide the foundation upon which individual State republics and the federated republic would be based. His proposal was heavily influenced both by classic republican theories of civic virtue and citizen participation and by the belief that local public affairs were best managed locally. His views, explicated most thoroughly following his retirement from public office, were not considered during the Constitutional debates and were thus neither explicitly accepted nor rejected during America's founding era.

Federalist proponents of the new Constitution, principally Jefferson's ally James Madison, argued for a Constitutional structure based upon a federal republic whose allocation of power among branches of government would check and balance each other, a republic strong enough to unite the various States and sufficiently consolidated as a national government to resist local factions and interests. Whereas Madison saw citizens as fractious, potentially oppressive, and neither enlightened for self-government. Madison saw democracy as a door through which chaos might enter; Jefferson saw it as the only means by which to prevent ownership of government by "interests" and the resulting citizen alienation from government.

With this in mind, Hart brings these views to mind as he discusses current economic globalization and the evolving of Nation-States, Republicanism, and Original objections to small republics in the light of the twenty-first-century realities.

I found the book to be well-written and the prose foundational at first, then later making cogent sense as he tries to bring Jefferson's ideas into the twenty-first-century. This book does as follows: brings consideration of the revolutionary economic, social, and political changes in the twenty-first century; an examination of whether America in the twenty-first century is an authentic republic; consideration of the objections to small-scale republicanism during the founding-era debate and discussions of the impact of these new realities on early objections to small-scale republicanism; a concluding discussion of the relevance of radical democratic republican ideals to America in the current age.

This is a thoughtful and provocative book and makes a persuasive argument for Jeffersonian principles.