The Story of American Freedom

by Eric Foner

Freedom, Eric Foner writes, is "the oldest of clichés and the most modern of aspirations." But what does it mean to be free? For the people of the United States, the concept of "freedom"--and its counterpart, "liberty"--have had widely differing meanings over the centuries. The Story of American Freedom , therefore, "is not a mythic saga with a predetermined beginning and conclusion, but an open-ended history of accomplishment and failure, a record of a people forever contending about the crucial ideas of their political culture." Foner begins with the colonial era, when the Puritans believed that liberty was rooted in voluntary submission to God and civil authorities, and consisted only in the right to do good. John Locke, too, would argue that liberty did not consist of the lack of restraint, but of "a standing rule to live by, common to every one of that society, and made by the legislative power." Foner reveals the ideological conflicts that lay at the heart of the American Revolution and the Civil War, the shifts in thought about what freedom is and to whom it should apply. Adeptly charting the major trends of 20th-century American politics--including the invocation of freedom as a call to arms in both world wars--Foner concludes by contrasting the two prevalent movements of the 1990 the liberal articulation of freedom, grounded in Johnson's Great Society and the rhetoric of the New Left, as the provision of civil rights and economic opportunity for all citizens, and the conservative vision, perhaps most fully realized during the presidency of Ronald Reagan, of a free-market economy and decentralized political power. The Story of American Freedom is a sweeping synthesis, delivered in clearheaded language that makes the ongoing nature of the American dream accessible to all readers. --Ron Hogan

Genres: History, American History, Nonfiction, Politics, 20th Century, United States, College

512 pages, Hardcover

First published January 1, 1977

About the author

Eric Foner is DeWitt Clinton Professor of History at Columbia University, where he earned his B.A. and Ph.D. In his teaching and scholarship, Foner focuses on the Civil War and Reconstruction, slavery, and nineteenth-century America. His Reconstruction: America’s Unfinished Revolution, 1863–1877, won the Bancroft, Parkman, and Los Angeles Times Book prizes and remains the standard history of the period. His latest book published in 2010 is The Fiery Trial: Abraham Lincoln and American Slavery.

In 2006 Foner received the Presidential Award for Outstanding Teaching at Columbia University. He has served as president of the Organization of American Historians, the American Historical Association, and the Society of American Historians.

Reviews

[Teri · Rating 3 out of 5]

This is a concise review of American History, particularly looking at the theme of "Freedom". Foner starts with what he considers to be the birth of freedom, 1776, and covers specific eras of time in America's past noting what freedom has meant and its continued presence in politics and society. He ends the book with the late 20th century when George H. W. Bush and Clinton were in office. Many historians will find this to be a good reference on the freedom theme, but I found it to be on the dry side and somewhat unengaging. I will likely keep this copy as a reference for future research projects.

[Adam S. Rust · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book is a solid introductory text to the history of American political theory and practice. It focuses on the various meanings and uses of the word "freedom" (frequently in relation to its opposite, slavery and, later, fascism and communism). Foner does an excellent job of showing how the various definitions begin and transform over time.

As a historian of the Civil War and Reconstruction, Foner has a sharp eye for historical irony. In this book, the most obvious example is the idea of "freedom-as-equality" found in the Declaration of Independence, written by Thomas Jefferson, a man who believed in the inherent inferiority of black people and in an early state's rights. "Freedom-as-equality" became the touchstone of the early civil rights movement, a movement based on racial equality and with a robust belief in federal intervention.

The last chapter "Conservative Freedom" is excellent at illustrating how high a cost the political left has placed on itself by abandoning the language of "freedom" for the language of "rights". Our current conceptions of "freedom" tend to presume ideas of freedom such as "freedom-as-gun-ownership" and "freedom-as-free-markets". As Foner shows, however, it wasn't always so. While "rights" have usually had an individualistic cast (consistent with its origins in the 1920s avant garde movements), "freedom" has frequently been viewed as a condition that requires a baseline of material support provided by the larger community to be actualized. This has expressed itself in calls for federal land grant programs advocated for by some of the Founding Fathers to social programs from the Great Society to the New Deal.

Ultimately, if I were to recommend one book on the history of American political thought who wants a quick overview, this would be it. Foner's history is an invaluable reminder that freedom is being fought for every day, and the most important battles occur in determining how to define it. Whoever defines "freedom" defines the country.

[Gabriel Williams · Rating 4 out of 5]

Rlly effective history of the US - probs the wildest moment was the bit where the south and Edmund Burke start arguing that u can only really be free if you own slaves. The main thing it achieves is showing that freedom is essentially an entirely abstract term without any fixed meaning and the US is obvs a pretty prime example of that

[Megan · Rating 2 out of 5]

This book ruined my life two stars because im so glad apush is over

[Timothy Riley · Rating 4 out of 5]

I felt while reading this book that it is especially pertinent given the current political stalemate in US politics with both sides promising that they truly represent freedom and liberty as the founding fathers designed. A large portion, but not overly so, is on the slavery debate. The argument against, using the concept of freedom and liberty, is pretty straight forward that slavery represents the theft of another human's rights and is wrong. The argument for was more convoluted in that the denial of the right to own slaves was a violation of economic liberty and the free market (with no sense of irony of course). So went at least a full hundred years of political debate. Benjamin Rush from PA was one of the earliest major critics of slavery ahead of his time. Today the parameters of the argument aren't much different concerning health care. Some would say it is a natural right and allows people the freedoms of health and economic security and it is in the nation's interests to provide that freedom while others say that forcing people-or denying that right to employees- (corporations) to provide that freedom is tyranny and violates their rights as corporations (people). Or during Civil Rights-southern business owners said it was a violation of their constitutional rights to have to serve blacks in their shops or restaurants.

Southerners believed that Blacks weren't "men" and were a lower form of life and therefore the constitution did not and should never apply to them. They were strictly property (this comes up later of course in legal definitions during the Union's war effort). Second, slavery was justified because of their natural inferiority. But John Stuart Mill tried to explain that it was pretty natural for a dominant culture to manipulate that superiority to reason that rights should not exist for the group with less power. You need a reason to violate another's rights and that is frequently the reason given.

Lincoln used this property argument against the south when he said fine, if slaves are property than the war powers act gives me the power to confiscate property during time of war. (the south believed this insisted it didn't because the US was not at war with a separate nation all while announcing secession as a distinct state and following all nationhood procedures)

After the war Freedom became the hot button issue with its definition at its core. Freedom to the south meant that slavery was abolished while enacting the Black Codes which denied Blacks essentially every other right and forced them back into economic slavery-leasing their former owner's land and "signing" contracts that would forever bound them to that land. The North and abolitionists went crazy but Lincoln's successor Andrew Johnson looked the other way even while Black congressmen were being elected and even controlling state legislatures. The 14th amendment said all citizens had equal protections of the law. The only reason these amendments made it into the constitution-if I remember right-was that many southern states were not given back their full membership until they met certain criteria and therefore never voted-so it got the 3/4ths of states. The 15th amendment in 1870 said states couldn't restrict voting. Once the federal government withdrew the Army from the South, they went back to their old ways and the 14th and 15th amendments were not enforced until almost 100 years later. Violence against Blacks was probably the worst in the 1920's and 30's. Northern abolitionists called for land reform meaning the partial confiscation of certain former slave owners' land would be given to freed slaves.

Next came the liberty of workers to negotiate a contract. The negotiation process and unionism in general seems to me to be the purest definition of free market capitalism. If you can find someone to the do the job cheaper than do it. If I can find someone to pay me more than I can do that. A strike is just one tool in the chest and if the bosses can give my job to someone else during this time, so be it. Owners lobbied at the time that there should never be any restrictions on working hours because working people should have the right to work as many hours as they wanted. Western states like Kansas, Colorado and Idaho were groundbreakers in the area of workers' rights. What happened? (note: Ida B. Wells)

The Freedom of abundance and materialism was the next major use of the word. It showed that kitchen tools and such gave freedom to americans. Access to department stores and mail order shopping with advertising using "Freedom" became the norm. This was the weakest part of the book in my opinion.

The New Deal was the next big use of liberty. Was it the governments role in taking care of the needy (allowing for economic security and freedom from want) or was it the free markets? FDR securely believed it was the role of big government and the alphabet soup that we know from middle school.

Obviously during the war many Freedoms that were thought to be inalienable for Americans were curtailed with Japanese having their homes taken from them and put in concentrations camps for re-education and German americans were prohibited from playing german music and german teachers had to take loyalty oaths (something that no matter the reason I will never do).

The next chapter was the most engrossing on the ideological switch of the political parties. With FDR enacting federal legislation to protect the needy the Democratic party now believed in a large government and with that change Republicans lost many elections. Southern Democrats and major wing of the party did not care for much of the party's beliefs but they became known as Dixiecrats because they historically clung to that party (Lincoln=Republicans=evil). There is an unexplored effect of the New Deal and FDR on black rights. Blacks therefore in 1934 and 1936 fled the Republican party because of FDR's new philosphy (where they could vote). Southern white Democrats still filibustered a federal anti-lynching law. It shows things are always fluid as political parties change to reflect the electorate and some voting populations still cling to old allegiances to a certain extent. FDR used Freedom From Want as a way to get support for public spending on the poor, unemployed, disabled, old, etc. That trend continued with Goldwater's racism as a Republican carried 5 southern states-the first time in a century.

In many ways the US followed 'nazi like' racial theories like how the Red Cross refused the mix the blood from blacks and whites. And a huge number of lynchings went unpunished during the war. This is probably why Blacks in the army were relegated to mainly non-fighting roles.

The Freedom Train after the war is an amazing story of contradictions. Several southern stops had to be canceled because local authorities insisted on segregating visitors. It was also made to provide the contrast between the rights we have in America with the Germans and Soviets. The FBI compiled lists of Americans who found the train objectionable and it was also made to "aid the country in its internal war against subversive elements". Obviously the entire Cold War is a contradiction in 'spreading american freedoms'. Fascist Spain and Apartheid South Africa were applauded as free but democratically elected presidents were overthrown and their nations invaded if they didn't toe the line.

(The FHA played a huge role in modern segregation and lower home ownership for Blacks and refused to invest money in integrated or to integrate towns. If one black family moved onto a street the whole block was restricted for federal mortgage insurance). Since I myself using mortgage insurance, I wouldn't have been able to buy a house without it. I wonder how huge of an effect this has had on the financial security of many black families. Poor whites coming home from WW2 were placed in a more advantageous situation because of their race.
Today the words "Freedom" and "liberty" have been kidnapped by conservative groups; maybe they just use them better to push their agenda. All militias out west and anti-immigrant groups, etc use freedom and liberty as their mantra as they seek to deny others simple rights.

[Majo Romero · Rating 5 out of 5]

The book is an introduction into American history. It discusses the politics and ideologies that shaped the nation, with a focus on the one talked about most often…freedom. The book explores how the meaning of this powerful word has shifted throughout the years, the peoples who’ve been granted its blessings, and how different historic events have changed the rights Americans believe necessary to live with freedom.

[Serge · Rating 5 out of 5]

Deeply intellectual reassessment of a dynamic line of discourse in Anglo-American politics. I most appreciated Foner's careful exposition of the subversion of the term freedom by conservatives such as Hayek, Goldwater. And Reagan

[Jessica Morgan · Rating 4 out of 5]

An interesting trip through American history.

[Simon Wood · Rating 4 out of 5]

FREEDOM?

Eric Foner is a marvellous historian who has written a number of books on the American Civil War and the post-war Reconstruction including the brilliant "Reconstruction" which is practically the standard overview of that period. In his "The Story of American Freedom" he widens his view to encompass the concept of Freedom, its changing and fought over meanings in the whole period of American history from the War of Independence to the end of the twentieth century.

In a remarkably restrained manner, given the contentiousness of the matter he's dealing with, Foner takes us through the debates that surrounded the formation of the American constitution, how the founders rationalised their "free" State with Slavery. In the early years of the Republic leading up to the Civil War itself he covers the debates between free and slave labour and covers the expansion of the United States West at the expense of Mexico and the Native Americans. The sections that cover the Civil War and the period of Reconstruction are, as to be expected, excellent summaries of those times. The book then moves on to cover the Populist and Progressive era, World War One and the subsequent "Red Scare" before moving on to the Depression and the heated debates about the economic aspects of Freedom and what the role of the State was to promote economic freedom for ordinary Americans when the "free" market had so obviously failed. The Cold War, from McCarthyism to Regans support of "freedom" fighters in Nicaragua, Afghanistan, Angola is also covered as well as the blossoming of dissent during the 1960's during the Vietnam war and after the stultifying McCarthyite era. The book as a whole deals with what freedom meant in terms of personal liberties, as well as the economic and political spheres. It would have been nice to get his view on the reign of Bush II but unfortunately the book was written in the late 1990's.

The Text is accompanied by a number of illustrations that are indicative of different eras and interests attitude to freedom. The typeface is awful, but one gets used to it after the first couple of chapters. If you want a good introduction which deals with the concept of "freedom" as argued and fought over in the United States this book fits the bill admirably. Other books that cover specific periods in more detail would include Foners book on Reconstruction cited above, for McCarthyism Ellen Schreckers "The Age of McCarthyism", for the Cold War period as a whole Francis Stonor Saunders "Who Paid the Piper?: CIA and the Cultural Cold War". Edward Morgan's "American Slavery, American Freedom: The Ordeal of Colonial Virginia" is an excellent study of a specific geographical area that covers the contradiction between freedom and slavery in a manner that is relevant to the American experience as a whole.

[Michael · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is a very good, and intellectually stimulating, book about the meaning of the words liberty and freedom. For such important terms in the lexicon of American politics, they are not often defined with any precision, and their usage varies across time periods and among different groups of people. We began with a 'freedom' that only included property owning white men. There is freedom to and freedom from. There is religious freedom, social freedom, cultural freedom, and economic freedom...sometimes. We've expanded our definitions and practices of freedom in the pursuit of, as Lincoln called it "a more perfect union" but at each time, and at each turn, there has been struggle. The struggles of the poor, the struggles of people of color, the struggles of women, the struggles of LBGTQ people, the struggles of the disabled, the struggles of immigrants...freedom is a lot of work.

America, to me, isn't so much an ethnicity, like "I am an American by birth" or something, but instead is an acceptance to a set of ideals. It is giving affirmation to certain fundamental principles, and it is these principles that need to make the core of our nation's ever-expanding quest for freedom and liberty: All men (and women!) are created equal. We have inalienable rights, like life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Just government is derived from the consent of the governed. Freedom is not free. Ordered liberty and the social contract are not optional, but necessary. Loving America doesn't mean we shouldn't be critical and self-reflective.

Things like that.

It's been interesting to read this book in the year of our Lord 2020, while COVID-19 has shuttered the nation and killed 100,000+ people, the economy is gasping for life (40 million unemployed), and there is rioting taking place in dozens of cities (late May/June). In the time of one Donald J. Trump, the wheels are coming off a bit, or so it seems to me. What does freedom look like in the face of massive, systemic failure on this level?

Dark days indeed. I still believe, though. I still have hope, and I have faith. I may even have some love for the crazy country of mine. We will get through this, and I can only pray that--on the other side--we will expand our ideas about, and practices of, freedom.

[Rick · Rating 4 out of 5]

Published in 1998, this survey of the concept of “freedom” in the United States, what it is has meant to Americans over the course of our history, how that meaning has changed, been embraced, challenged, and been used and abused in social, political and economic debate, is strongly relevant almost 20 years later. Foner’s main point is that the word has never had a stagnant meaning; nor, of course, has it always applied to all citizens or residents, but been continually but not consistently expanded in its application—from land-owning white male citizens to most white male citizens to African-American men (but limitedly and then ) to women and Asians and others.

What we were free to do has also changed over time and the connection to the Bill of Rights, both in word and practice has shifted with circumstances and context. This shape-shifting of a definition is Foner’s main point because the notion that there has always been one clear meaning that has consistently expanded in some positive, if contested, struggle is yet prevalent and the necessary debate about freedom (and other American values—equality, opportunity, etc.) is not served by ignorance of the fact that establishing and applying the principles of our country and its government is the gritty work of democracy.

The Story of American Freedom begins with the American Revolution and continues to the rise of conservatism in the 70s, 80s and 90s, which followed and overlapped with a decades-long period of liberalism from the 30s through the 60s Foner’s survey, which is broad, balanced, and does not slight nuance, despite its sweep, nonetheless is sometimes hampered by the concision of its survey—almost three hundred years of history—and giving the reader a sense of too clean a pendulum arc, with decades swinging alternating liberal then conservative, as if self-correcting, when in fact there is a pretty constant tug of war over what freedom means for us as citizens, our government, our economy, and our well-being. In both the 30s-60s liberal era and the 70s-90s conservative era the opposing force is vitally present. Foner says as much, often, so despite the pendulum impression provided by the topical arrangement of chapters, and the urge to argue with some of the narrative liberties that put some topics too neatly in one thematic chapter rather than another (Cold War Freedom and Sixties Freedom, where the Civil Rights Movement is shoe-horned into the latter with the anti-war movement though it pre-dates it by better than a decade), The Story of American Freedom is more than useful as a starting point for considering questions that have never been as resolved as we might like to think them. It’s not that simple, nor will it be; but it is ever urgent.

[Harald · Rating 5 out of 5]

A sharp look at what we mean by freedom.
"Freedom" is repeatedly used as a slogan for both the Democrats and the Republicans in this year's election campaign. Historian Eric Foner examines the changing meaning of the word in American social life since the 18th century. The book is at the same time an excellent, concentrated overview of the development in the view of popular government, the relationship between the sexes, racial differences and economic and social rights up to the turn of the millennium.

Progress with setbacks
Foner writes detailed, but clearly, about ideological trends, political movements and individuals who have helped to radically change the United States from its starting point in 1776. But there have also been setbacks, as when the policy of racial segregation was allowed to consolidate after the end of the civil war. Finer finds the 1950s characterized by conformism and a paralyzing Cold War mentality. In contrast, the 1960s ushered in a massive wave of liberation movements among blacks and other ethnic groups, which also stimulated a new women's movement. All in all, these movements lead to extensive civil and social reforms. But in the 1980s, President Ronald Reagan — like Republicans before him — again associated the term "freedom" with market liberalism free from governmental restraints.

[Héctor · Rating 4 out of 5]

Muy bueno. Un repaso por cómo se ha ido modificando el concepto de libertad en sus diferentes aspectos (política, económica e individual) y para los diferentes grupos (mujeres, negros, obreros, etc) a lo largo de la historia americana y de las luchas sociales o guerras (IGM, IIGM, Guerra fría). Al mismo tiempo y puesto que la libertad es uno de los derechos inalienables recogidos en la Declaración de Independencia, la pregunta ¿quién es libre (de hacer qué)? lleva implícita la de ¿quién es americano? Más allá de las batallas particulares: como la tensión entre la "libertad de contrato" y la libertad como "salario vital", o la tensión entre la libertad como ausencia de intervención estatal (en el mercado o en la vida privada) y la libertad que necesita de la intervención federal estatal (para garantizar sus condiciones sociales), algunas de las cuales resuenan hoy en día, el libro deja claro como las luchas sociales y los cambios materiales moldean, amplian o limitan una y otra vez conceptos abstractos (en este caso "libertad" pero también "democracia" o "seguridad") y como en pocas décadas pueden producirse cambios muy bruscos en el uso político (conservador o progresista) de determinados términos.

[Philip Horspool · Rating 4 out of 5]

I struggled initially to engage with this despite liking the idea behind it. In part it was the dreadfully small print but it took a while to get the 'thread'. Once I got going I started to really value it. The book examines the self-profesed 'Land of the free ' in the context of race, gender and later the relationship to wealth and inequality. It is a reminder actually of just how little right the USA has to 'preach ' freedom and liberty. Freedom in the US was until recently, and arguably still is - particularly since 1980, the domain of white men. I always find it sobering to think that in my lifetime the colour of your skin could determine where you could and could not sit and go in America. The crux of the message is the battle over the meaning of 'freedom' , I wouldn't say the author offers an impartial overview but he does attempt to keep his (obvious) views largely to himself and present an historical account. Later chapters focus on how the conservatives have effectively taken ownership of 'freedom' in a post Soviet world. The book finishes with Reagan really but the path that led to Trump is established. I'd recommend this if you want to increase your understanding of probably the 'greatest' power to have existed and the leader of 'the free world'.

[Charles Williams · Rating 4 out of 5]

'The Story of American Freedom' examines the elusive and ever-changing concept of 'freedom' from the American Revolution to the end of the twentieth century. Admittedly, Foner gives a more even-handed treatment in the era up through Reconstruction than from the Gilded and Progressive eras forward. (As the chronology advances, Foner lays bare his own dispositions towards what freedom ought to entail, peppered with some rather outlandish statements regarding conservative restrictions on freedom from a New Deal vantage point.) Nevertheless, his overall thesis is compelling: that the concept of 'freedom', though by no means a wax nose, undergoes a series of radical transformations, in light of the political, economic, and social trends of successive generations.

An instructive read to attune oneself to the ways in which 'freedom' and 'liberty' can be tossed about in contemporary public rhetoric, for good and for ill. Highly recommended.

[Greg Brown · Rating 2 out of 5]

Not particularly great, though there are some good sections when Foner drills into his specialties. The larger problem is the book’s premise is borderline incoherent: freedom’s myriad meanings aren’t consistent at all, at any given time lumping together a bunch of semi-related issues.

The rhetoric of “freedom” is entirely epiphenomenal to the struggles at hand, so any discussion of it is going to be either meaningless or at best subordinated to examining the forces behind its use. When Foner can do the latter, the book reaches the level of just being ok. When he can’t talk about the material forces and interests at work, like in the opening Revolutionary War sections, it comes across as someone running a google scholar search and writing up a report on the results.

[Justin Dunning · Rating 5 out of 5]

Excellent narrative showing that at any given time the notion of what “freedom” means is not a fixed concept but rather a contested notion. There are always competing notions of “freedom.” Ideas about freedom change over time.

Foner shows examples of how this has played out through the course of US History.

This might seem obvious but it is good to have a book for non-specialized audiences that shows how ideas about what the Us should be differ at any given time and also in different time periods.

[Ricky Carrigan · Rating 4 out of 5]

Probably the most informative book I’ve read this year. Eric Foner is our finest American historian, and he is especially good on the Civil War and Reconstruction era. He provides great insight and analysis on how our concept of freedom has continued to evolve, expand, and contract over the last 250 years. His writing doesn’t exactly pop off the page, I’ll admit. A bit dry and at times dense, but his knowledge of the subject carries such authority that I think he overcomes any accessibility issues. This isn’t a Jared Diamond book, meaning I don’t know how wide of an audience this book has, and you’ll have to want to read this book, but there is a payoff because it is just packed with information.

[Aviram · Rating 5 out of 5]

Excellent historical exploration of the changing and contested meaning of freedom, from pre-revolutionary to contemporary United States. Contrasts the views of minority and oppressed groups, including african-americans, women and socialists, to those of the politically powerful, while offering a principled yet unintrusive commentary thoughout. Thought-provoking and ahead of its time.

[P J M]

The Gyllenhaals really do have taste huh

[Tim Tyler · Rating 4 out of 5]

Aàaaà

[CG Aubrey · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is one of those essential Ameri an History books. Highly recommend for all US citizens.

[Noah · Rating 4 out of 5]

Good read these days.,...

[Jesse Fischer · Rating 4 out of 5]

Great book- although the last few chapters provide a slightly outdated commentary on the late 20th century

[Sam Whitehill · Rating 4 out of 5]

Apparently all Americans love freedom, whether it means women can vote or that people can choose between Pepsi, Coke, or dying on the street alone is up to you!

[Yifan (Evan) Xu (Hsu) · Rating 3 out of 5]

The book is a historical narrative of how the ideology of "freedom" chronically evolved in America. It's main purposes are to introduce the historical knowledge of "freedom" and use them to justify US government intervention and consequent decline of classic liberal.
　　
　　I know that many with their blushed faces would shout at me about how wrong I am. Well, my view can be supported by reasoning. However, that is not the topic here. We can look forward to that in future book reviews.
　　
　　Back to this book.
　　
　　From early days, "freedom" was influenced by deliberate study of British version of "freedom". The central idea surrounding the topic of "freedom" was that people recognized power and liberty were naturally oppositions to each other. Only by making citizens equal in terms of legal rights can one state balanced power and liberty.
　　
　　Later, American revolution was attributed to by the ideology of "freedom". Upon the founding of the US, one of "Freedom" 's significant effects on America politics was the idea of "small government". The Constitution that defined and guarded freedom greatly restricted government power, and thus extended and protected liberty.
　　
　　However, what the Constitution missed was any restriction on corporation. The later now had more power than the government and any other society stakeholders, and it has once again unbalanced power and liberty. A revealing proof is today's disastrous unbalanced distribution of wealth among American citizens.
　　
　　Later, the welfare-regulatory state after the New Deal and lost of good faith in the state after two world wars led to a movement of redefining the term "freedom". This time, "freedom" is closed bonded to Progressivism. It is no longer the sense of let along or autonomous individuals whose government's only role is to provide protections. Government would then enter and play a greater role in every citizen's life.
　　
　　Throughout history, we have seen improvement as well as degeneration of freedom. But, overall, I think that declines have been far more significant than advances.
　　
　　Despite of its defense of government intrusion and decaying freedom in the classical liberal sense, the book provides ample historical knowledge of US political history. Its sentimental narrative makes the passages easy to understand and at the same time interesting to public viewers.
　　
　　Overall, it is a fun read.

[Conrad · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book looks at how the word "freedom" and symbols of freedom have been used and adopted by Americans since before the founding of the country. Far from a work of self-congratulation, the book looks at when American leaders have defined freedom as negative ("freedom from want") and positive ("freedom to..."), where our Presidents have gotten their idea of freedom from, and in what directions debates over the meaning of freedom have proceeded (and sometimes ground to a halt) over the centuries.

Foner's familiarity with American intellectuals from obscure Temperence movement leaders to a Catholic priest opposed to the Hayes code that was used to censor movies to a motorbike-riding sociologist in the 1940s is the real centerpiece here. Foner's sense of who did what and why, and his ease in teasing out fine shades of meaning from what must have been thousands of primary sources, is stunning. And yet his narrative voice is pleasantly demotic, never condescending.

If you're looking for a fairly short but infinitely smart book to read about American politics and public life, you've just found it.

In light of recent rhetorical excesses on the part of our August Leader, though, this book could stand a good updating.

[Dan Gorman · Rating 4 out of 5]

It doesn't reinvent the wheel as far as narrative syntheses go, but Eric Foner's Story of American Freedom is a fun, well-written read. Foner argues that American freedom lacks a fixed definition through time, but rather has had many different meanings, over which various groups have fought. Foner really excels here in his coverage of economic and social movements, as well as highlighting the stop-start progress in this country on women's and minority rights. The material and thesis may seem passe in 2015 for academic readers, but remember that to a non-historian reading the book in 1998, when the book was published, the material within might have seemed truly surprising. The book has potential as a teaching tool for undergraduates and portions of the book actually align well with Howard Zinn's classic A People's History of the United States.

[Nick Stumo-Langer · Rating 5 out of 5]

An excellent (if dense) historical survey of America and Americans' relationship to freedom, an extremely elusive and ever-changing term. Could not recommend it more for anyone with an interest in any time period of American history, can be read in whole or in part.

From Foner: "[Americans] can decide for themselves what freedom is. No one can predict the ultimate fate of current understandings of freedom, or whether alternative traditions now in eclipse--freedom as economic security, freedom as active participation in democratic governance, freedom as social justice for those long disadvantaged--will be rediscovered and reconfigured to meet the challenges of the new century."

[Jonathan Hedgpeth · Rating 4 out of 5]

This was an interesting series of essays about the transformation of American Freedom in the popular imagination as it translated to political activism throughout American History. I was glad to have read it, and I was glad when it was done. Foner's style can be very tough and terse. I know that sooner or later in life I will have to read his History of Reconstruction but I keep puting it off.