The History Book Club discussion

Hello Everyone,

For the week of January 16, 2012 - January 27, 2012, we are reading Jackson's Third Term which is Chapter 13 of What God Hath Wrought.

The thirteenth week's reading assignment is:

WEEK THIRTEEN: January 16, 2012 - January 27, 2013
13. Jackson's Third Term (483 - 524)

We will open up a thread for each week's reading. Please make sure to post in the particular thread dedicated to those specific chapters and page numbers to avoid spoilers. We will also open up supplemental threads as we did for other spotlighted books.

This book is being kicked off on January 16th. We look forward to your participation. Amazon, Barnes and Noble, Borders and other noted on line booksellers do have copies of the book and shipment can be expedited. The book can also be obtained easily at your local library, or on your Kindle. This weekly thread will be opened up on January 15th.

There is no rush and we are thrilled to have you join us. It is never too late to get started and/or to post.

Bentley will be moderating this discussion.

Welcome,

~Bentley


TO ALWAYS SEE ALL WEEKS' THREADS SELECT VIEW ALL

by Daniel Walker Howe

REMEMBER NO SPOILERS ON THE WEEKLY NON SPOILER THREADS - ON EACH WEEKLY NON SPOILER THREAD - WE ONLY DISCUSS THE PAGES ASSIGNED OR THE PAGES WHICH WERE COVERED IN PREVIOUS WEEKS. IF YOU GO AHEAD OR WANT TO ENGAGE IN MORE EXPANSIVE DISCUSSION - POST THOSE COMMENTS IN ONE OF THE SPOILER THREADS. THESE CHAPTERS ARE EXTREMELY DENSE SO WHEN IN DOUBT CHECK WITH THE CHAPTER OVERVIEW AND SUMMARY TO RECALL WHETHER YOUR COMMENTS ARE ASSIGNMENT SPECIFIC. EXAMPLES OF SPOILER THREADS ARE THE GLOSSARY, THE BIBLIOGRAPHY, THE INTRODUCTION AND THE BOOK AS A WHOLE THREADS.

Notes:

It is always a tremendous help when you quote specifically from the book itself and reference the chapter and page numbers when responding. The text itself helps folks know what you are referencing and makes things clear.

Citations:

If an author or book is mentioned other than the book and author being discussed, citations must be included according to our guidelines. Also, when citing other sources, please provide credit where credit is due and/or the link. There is no need to re-cite the author and the book we are discussing however.

If you need help - here is a thread called the Mechanics of the Board which will show you how:

http://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/2...

Glossary

Remember there is a glossary thread where ancillary information is placed by the moderator. This is also a thread where additional information can be placed by the group members regarding the subject matter being discussed.

http://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/1...

Bibliography

There is a Bibliography where books cited in the text are posted with proper citations and reviews. We also post the books that the author used in her research or in her notes. Please also feel free to add to the Bibliography thread any related books, etc with proper citations. No self promotion, please.

http://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/1...

TOC and the Syllabus

The following is a link to the table of contents for the book and the weekly syllabus:

http://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/1...

Book as a Whole Thread

http://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/1...

by Daniel Walker Howe

This thread is open for discussion so as you get caught up - please feel free to post regarding your interest areas in the reading.

I had forgotten the Amistad trial, and did not realize Van Buren's part. I have never been impressed with his presidency and even less so now. Howe does show his bias, but this book is so well written it does not detract.

Yes, Kathy - the bias is so obvious that it is just like listening to an opinionated old family member you revere and love (smile). I also should add that I too believe that this book is a spectacular work aside from that.

Van Buren seems to be the type of person who made you believe that everything you were saying was exactly what he believed - but then he did that with everyone. One of his quotes was:

"I tread in the footsteps of illustrious men..."
—Martin Van Buren

Being a chameleon and pleaser had its price - but you have to remember that he was a very skilled political operative. He owed his presidency to Jackson and yet it probably was his continuing the Jacksonian policies which was part of his undoing.

I always say you have to walk in their shoes before you understand these presidents - who after all are simply common mortals like us all.

Following in the footsteps of illustrious men does not necessarily make you also illustrious. You have to make your own path.

The Amistad did not help Van Buren and his legacy.

I do have to add that it was the abolitionists who came up with the money for the return of the Mendians' not Van Buren or Tyler who was President when the verdict was made that they should be sent back by the Supreme Court. Tyler would not provide a war ship and he was another pro slavery President. And JQA for that matter took the case but he was not an abolitionist either (weak support at best). And at this time the Supreme Court nor any other branch of government after the verdict did anything to address either the legality of slavery or the status of runaway slaves in America.

The status quo still remained the same. A different time which is hard for many to understand in this day and age.

The Amistad Case

The National Portrait Gallery

http://www.npg.si.edu/col/amistad/ind...

John Quincy Adams begins to argue the Amistad case

http://www.history.com/this-day-in-hi...

The Massachusetts Historical Society:

http://www.masshist.org/objects/cabin...

United States v. The Amistad

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_S...

Wow - this was some chapter and to quote one of Bentley's earlier remarks it is "not a casual read"

Page 487 notes an interesting fact about new votes - in 1836 most new voters voted for one of the opposition candiddates - so does this teach us that new voters are often motivated by want to replace the existing power? Is this a reflection of how Obama won, especially in the primaries, in 2008? - just thinking and curious if there are other thoughts on this view.

Page 490 again shows the tenacity of South Carolina in limiting the vote. They did not until after the Civil War relent on a property requirement for voting. I am forming stronger and stronger opinions that the slave owner Barbados origin of the SC settlers carried influence for a long long time.

Page 491 has a tremendously interesting explanation of the second amendment and the basis for the "right to bear arms.... for a well regulated militia". I will photocoply this page for some of my guns rights discussions.

On page 494 the reference to the New York Herald makes me, less young guy that I am, remember the Herald Tribune of New York (I do believe a descendant of that paper) which rivaled the NY Times in the 50s as a good newspaper. Better sports columns so during baseball season, or your favorite sport time, you might take that rather than the Times on ciritcal sports story days.

Some things also don't seem to change - page 502 "silver....sent to China to pay for our unfavorable balance of trade".

On page 510 the reference to the antebellum doughface northerners make me think that they felt if we could keep it somewhat civil all would be OK. Well they were wrong that the civility, the lack of facing the slavery problem led to the Civil War. Is this what Obama and others are letting happen with Global Warming?

pg 514 - Jonh Quincy Adams - what a guy -do we wonder why other past presidents don't also do more modest jobs after the presidency? What would JQA have done if there was a high paid speaking circuit to follow? - I think he would still have been impressive.

Regarding the Amistad, more details than I had known are now known by me, Inote theletter (pg 523) written by Cinque, in english, to JQA - Can one read that and think at all that these people were less civilized or less intelligent than the while Europeans and their North American descendents?

The other thing brought home even more by this chapter is the unrelenting genocide of the Indians. Howe may be against Van Buren and Jackson in this area but the results are greatly true.

One final thought about Howe. I thinkt hat someone wrote early on that he took other research and references to write this book - sort of impling, I thought - a lack of original research. Well I think the book is a well crafted presentation. If we look at the details on page 515 petition and voting statistics I have to appreciate the compilation of, organization of and presentation of this book maybe more than the actual research

Young voters are sometimes voting with their heart and with deep fervor. And many times as they get older they vote with simply a "measuring intellect" or even sadly with just their "pocket book" - women or "wallet" - men. What is better or worse - not sure. Some young voters like a change or a different candidate than their parents but I do not think we are giving them much credit if we think that is the only criteria they use. It could be that in 2008 they identified more with Obama than McCain.


In terms of age solely - this is the breakdown of voting for Obama versus McCain"

AGE 18-29
18 Pct.
66 % for Obama
32 % for McCain

AGE 30-44
29 Pct.
52 % for Obama
46 % for McCain

AGE 45-64
37 Pct.
50 % for Obama
49 % for McCain

AGE 65 & over
16 Pct.
45 % for Obama
53 % for McCain

Regarding South Carolina - Their history runs long and deep and it still does to a large extent. This has always been the "deep South".

I am sorry that I do not remember the Herald Tribune - but you should not feel bad about it. Another connection to history.

As far as Global Warming - much more should be done - but possibly a reason for not doing more now might be the economy.

JQA just kept moving along - he gave much service to the country even when he was a child. And I think he would have been very much in demand with his family background.

Yes, what to do about the Native Americans has been troubling for American History since the beginning. But we have to remember that the early settlers took their land - plain and simple. But what happened to the Indians on their forced march was over the top. But judging this after the fact does not allow us to understand what was accepted and expected by the American people during that time period (good or bad). It does not excuse it in any way nor would it have been tolerated today (we hope). But the world has stood on the sidelines when it is happening in other countries today.

Yes, I agree that Howe is a talented and brilliant writer.

Thanks Vince once again for all your detailed notes and insights and I hope others jump in with their comments and observations to foster a good discussion with you.