Another America: The Story of Liberia and the Former Slaves Who Ruled It

by James D. Ciment

The first popular history of the former American slaves who founded, ruled, and lost Africa’s first republic

In 1820, a small group of African Americans reversed the course of centuries and sailed to Africa, to a place they would name after liberty itself. They went under the aegis of the American Colonization Society, a white philanthropic organization with a dual agenda: to rid America of its blacks and to evangelize Africa. The settlers, eventually numbering in the thousands, broke free from the ACS and, in 1847, established the Republic of Liberia.
    James Ciment, in his enthralling history Another America, shows that the settlers struggled to balance their high ideals with their prejudices. On the steamy shores of West Africa, they re-created the only social order they knew, that of an antebellum Dixie, with themselves as the master caste, ruling over a native population that outnumbered them twenty to one. They built plantations, held elegant dances, and worked to protect their fragile independence from the predations of foreign powers. Meanwhile, they fought, abused, and even helped to enslave the native Liberians. The persecuted became the persecutors—until a lowly native sergeant murdered their president in 1980, ending 133 years of Americo-Liberian rule and inaugurating a quarter century of civil war.
    Riven by caste, committed to commerce, practicing democratic and Christian ideals haphazardly, the Americo-Liberians created a history that is, to a surprising degree, the mirror image of our own.

Genres: History, Africa, Nonfiction, Liberia, Western Africa, Race, Politics

320 pages, Hardcover

First published July 16, 2013

Reviews

[David Nichols · Rating 3 out of 5]

When Liberia appears in the evening news, we generally anticipate bad tidings: Ebola, gruesome civil wars, Michael Jackson’s dreadful single “Liberian Girl.” For most of its nearly 200-year history, though, the West African nation was a beacon of liberty, a country where former slaves could find freedom and their descendants could govern themselves free of European domination. Such was at least the popular image of Liberia, which James Ciment clarifies and qualifies with this study of the nation’s colonial elite.

The Americos, as their indigenous African subjects called them, descended from several thousand free blacks or manumitted slaves who emigrated from the United States to the Grain Coast, principally between the 1820s and 1850s. From an early date they specialized in trade rather than agriculture or industry, exporting palm oil and rubber produced by local African villagers. Liberians proclaimed their colony an independent republic in 1847, though in the manner of most small nations surrounded by predatory empires they preserved their independence less by force of arms than by skillful diplomatic maneuvering. Liberian leaders offered Britain and France a useful buffer zone between their colonies, offered Germany a dedicated trading partner (until the First World War), and offered the Americans military bases during the world wars.

As a democratic republic, Liberia was a bust. Suffrage was limited to the original settlers and their descendants for much of the nation’s history, and a single political party, the True Whigs, controlled elective offices for more than a century. Liberia became, essentially, an Americo oligarchy headed by an elected dictator, who in the manner of many twentieth-century oligarchies used secret police, imprisonment, and forced public confessions to quash political dissent. Opposition to President William Tubman, who ruled Liberia for much of the past century (1944-71), became so minimal that his 1959 electoral opponent declared that “this venture of mine is purely sportsmanlike, and is in response to the ardent desire of Dr. Tubman for fair and friendly competition.” (p. 214)

The Americos’ exploitative relationship with their Gola, Grebo, and other indigenous neighbors, meanwhile, became a scandal in the 1920s and ‘30s, when the League of Nations investigated claims that Liberia was exporting slaves to the colony of Fernando Po (Equatorial Guinea). This proved an exaggeration, and the Liberian government soon ended the practice of labor contracting that observers (with some justification) construed as de facto slavery. Indigenes, however, remained outside of Liberia’s national elite, even as Tubman and his successors brought more of them into the schools, army, and bureaucracy. Samuel Doe’s 1980 coup against the Americo-dominated government was the perhaps-inevitable result of these two developments, but the ferocity of the civil wars that gripped the country in the 1990s and early 2000s and killed over 100,000 people remains inexplicable, at least to the author and this reviewer. These wars lie beyond the scope of Ciment’s book, which is primarily a narrative history of Liberia’s colonial elite, heavy on biographical detail and light on analysis. Experts, or those seeking more information on the history of the non-colonial population, will find ANOTHER AMERICA shallow, but for non-experts it provides a clear and reasonably informative introduction to Liberian history.

[Ricky Callahan Jr. · Rating 3 out of 5]

Over all, I'd say that this book held my interest. However, to be perfectly blunt, this book is exceedingly dense. This is not a book written in a manner to weave the history of Liberia into a cohesive, linear story. Rather, Ciment's choice is to throw gobs of information at the reader at a rapid pace and then leave them to shuffle through everything. If you have the patience to really focus and pay attention to the barrage of all facts, dates, times, names, and places, then you may find that this book warrants more stars than I'm giving. In addition, the book doesn't necessarily run in a completely linear fashion. True, it's not written completely in flashbacks, however the story-line jumps from decade to decade, presidency to presidency, and time period to time period. In fact, some presidencies and other information is completely overlooked in favor of proceeding to the next part of the narrative.

In short, if you're looking for a scholarly and in depth study of Liberia in a strictly linear fashion, then this is not the book for you. However, if you're looking for something that gives you information about Liberia from multiple different angles, in multiple different ways, then you may find this book intriguing.

My knowledge of Liberia was indeed increased, however, this book really left me with more questions that, unfortunately, I will probably have to read another comprehensive study of Liberia to have answered.

[Da1tonthegreat · Rating 4 out of 5]

Liberia was one of the most unusual states of the modern era. Founded in West Africa in the early 1800s under the auspices of the American Colonization Society, it was intended as a refuge for freed slaves and, ideally, as a beachhead for the repatriation of all black persons from the United States to their ancestral motherland. Obviously this did not come to pass, but that was the dream held by the illustrious men of the ACS, the courageous black settlers heading home, and later visionaries like the great black nationalist leader Marcus Garvey.

After being released from paternalistic white guardianship, the so-called "Americos" set up their own crude imitation of the alien society whose margins they had inhabited. An insular core of merchant elites dominated the country for well over a century, until they were overthrown and violently exterminated in the 1980s by the tribal natives they had long oppressed. The Americos had jealously guarded their buffoonish pastiche of mid 19th century American gentility, and they had failed to either assimilate the native majority into their pseudo-Western society or to be assimilated themselves back into the culture of their ancestors. In fact, they had often warred with them or, quite egregiously for a nation founded by freedmen, enslaved them.

"Freed slaves, given the chance to govern
themselves, had turned out to be no better than the white imperialists who had descended upon Africa around the same time." Left to their own devices with a Western-style civilization but no Westerners around to run it, Liberia quickly degenerated into a farce, and ultimately ended in tragedy. The Americos were rootless and denationalized, merely aping a culture that was not their own and that they could not possibly reproduce. The native Africans, living in harmony with the environment they had evolved in and according to their own customs and traditions that had developed organically to suit their own needs, rose up and destroyed them. But being a Stone Age people accustomed to tribal living, they couldn't run a Western-style nation state any better than their erstwhile oppressors, and descended into the psychopathic barbarism that is endemic to modern Africa. In our present time of globalism, woke egalitarianism, mass immigration, and demographic replacement, the story of Liberia has much to teach us.

[Kari · Rating 4 out of 5]

Despite being an extremely slow read and very dry, this book contains a great overview of Liberia's history from 1820 to the present. Since Ciment covered so much information, I came away with a great working knowledge of a country I previously knew little about. I greatly appreciated the picture inserts in the middle of the book (putting faces to the names helped with the amount of players in this wide history), but I would have liked to see at least one map, or even a few maps, on the pivotal years in Liberian history such as 1820, 1847, and 1980. Since the publishers took the space to add photos and the book is directed towards people who might not know all that much about this country it seemed odd to me that there wasn't one. Additionally, I would have liked for the author to spend more time on Liberia post 1980. Although I understand that the argument to not do so was due to the Americo-Liberian class having "dissipated" by then and that this people group was the heart of the book, it was frustrating that Ciment himself said that the Americo Liberians were still very much a controlling entity in postmodern times, even if in a quieter fashion. The huge events of the last few decades deserved more than a quick explanation in the epilogue. But I could see how this could turn into another complete book considering the civil wars shook the country to its core. I will definitely be reading another book on later Liberian history, but if you are wanting to know about the origins of this country, this book is worth your time.

[Mei · Rating 2 out of 5]

it took me eleven months to finish this book which tells you all you need to know about how i felt about it

[Henry Lovgren · Rating 4 out of 5]

Good and surprisingly quickly read. Not the best historical book I’ve read but I learned a lot and enjoyed it. Ease of reading was a plus but the multitude of historical figures was at times hard to keep track of

[Robin · Rating 2 out of 5]

Fascinating history, but the bar for narrative non-fiction is a lot higher these days, and this would benefit from more engaging storytelling since there are so many amazing stories to tell.

[Magnus Godvik]

I'm starting Another America: I found this book after the brilliant novel «She Would Be King» left me with a newfound interest in Liberian history. Ciment’s book deliver what is promise: a concise and engaging character driven account of the country’s history. An excellent introduction.

[Cole · Rating 4 out of 5]

Definitely recommend if you don’t know squat about Liberia or it’s history, I was not familiar at all with the country other than the fact that it was founded by former slaves.

I do wish the book was longer though, as many important people got only a brief mention while transitioning from period to period, jumping throughout time all the way.

And although I know the focus was on the Americoes, I wish more attention had been given to the native groups that lived there, as well as the civil war (which got maybe half a page?)

[John Crippen · Rating 3 out of 5]

A readable, brief history of Liberia. The last full chapter ends with Samuel Doe's coup, and the Epilogue rapidly covers Doe, Charles Taylor, and Ellen Johnson Sirleaf. So not much modern history, but still a good description of the country's history up until Doe.

[JRT · Rating 5 out of 5]

“Another America” tells the tragic story of the creation, development, and ultimate decadence of the first “independent” Black republic on the African continent, the Republic of Liberia. More specifically, it details how the “Founders” of the nation—formerly enslaved / free Black people born in the United States—sought to replicate the colonial dynamic they had escaped from in the American South, but this time with them at the top. Author James Ciment does a nice job demonstrating how the project of Liberia was flawed—if not doomed—from the very beginning, not least because it was the brainchild of the American Colonization Society, a white organization intent on ridding the United States of its non-enslaved African population. Ciment makes clear that the ACS had no intention of supporting real Black self-determination in the settlements that would later become Liberia, as the white American power structure held the belief that Black people were fundamentally incapable of self-governance. Accordingly, the ACS (as well as many of the few individual Black settlers who were convinced to join the endeavor) saw Liberia as an opportunity to “civilize” the “savage” natives of West Africa by spreading Christianity. Unfortunately, and despite the valid reasons for wanting to get away from the slave society that was the United States, the Black Americans who joined the Liberian project as settlers were explicit about their “civilizing” intentions, and most of them were thoroughly disconnected from their native West African brethren. As such, Liberian settlements were rife with problems from the very beginning. The division between African natives and African America settlers was perhaps the biggest problem, and would remain so for the entire span of Liberia’s existence up until the late 20th Century.

Ciment’s depictions of the various divisions in early Liberia is fascinating. Very few Black American settlers actually wanted to establish a Pan African society that fully incorporated the native masses. Rather, the Black American settlers (who would come to be known as “Americoes”) wanted to become an elite ruling class in their own right, and sought above all to maintain their sovereignty and position as a ruling class in the face of challenges from all directions (including European colonizers, the meddling and paternalistic ACS, and hostile natives). The divisions in Liberia were stark: class, color, nationality, ethnicity, and race. The divisions were so entrenched that natives often referred to the Americoes as “white Black men,” as the Americoes consistently engaged in colonizer behavior that could have been taken straight from the pages of the American West. Very few Americoes sought to challenge the foundational settlerism of the colony-turned-Republic. Ciment discusses in depth the work of Edward Wilmot Blyden—who served as a top historian and intellectual of Liberian society, and was one of the only non-continental born Liberians in the 19th Century who really sought to embrace Indigenous African people and culture. Blyden’s efforts amounted to an early form of Pan African Nationalism that would later serve as the foundation for the Hon. Marcus Garvey’s plans for Liberia, which Ciment also discusses in detail. Unfortunately, both Blyden and Garvey’s Liberian agenda ended in miserable failure. Garvey’s fate was particularly disheartening, as it appears that Garvey miscalculated just how thoroughly divided and classed Liberian society was. These divisions led to the dismantling of Garvey’s movement in the nation, as enemies took advantage of UNIA missteps to undermine the entire Pan African agenda. This failure—in typical tragic fashion—set the stage for the country’s takeover by American capitalist interests, namely, the Firestone Rubber Company.

This book demonstrates with damning clarity the futility of Black replication of white statecraft. African American colonization of native Africans in what became Liberia has only led to the further degradation of African identity, culture, and sociopolitical organization. Instead of working to forge a cohesive Pan African unity, Black settlers brought with them the colonial logics they sought to escape, thereby leading to the super-exploitation of the native population, which ultimately led to decades upon decades of political corruption, instability, and bloodshed. This is a sad but necessary historical account to learn.

[Jerrodm · Rating 3 out of 5]

Having recently read a couple of books from the late 19th/early 20th century on Liberian history, I was interested to read something more recent about the country's history, especially the famous coup of 1980 and the civil wars and collapse of the economy that occurred over the following 25 years. As someone involved in development, it's a fascinating case study to see a country that had per-capita gross domestic product of $450 in 1980 and subsequently fell to below $65 by 1995. It's hard to think of another place where things have gone so badly so quickly in recent history.

Aside from their recent huge problems--coups, civil wars, regional instability, Charles Taylor, now the Ebola crisis--Liberia really does have a pretty fascinating history. It was originally founded by free American and West Indian blacks and former slaves from the United States as a refuge for mistreated blacks and as a possible solution to the "Negro problem"--that is, the problem, from the perspective of whites in the United States, of the presence of several million people of color in "their" country. Even white abolitionists (as well as many free blacks) in the US who argued for the fundamental equality of people of different skin colors worried about the ability to assimilate culturally, economically and socially a large group of people who, due to systematic segregation and oppression, had been given no opportunity to "become American". One solution to this "problem" was thought to be the establishment of a settlement where black people could govern themselves.

Of course, as a solution this was pretty ridiculous, given that it would have required the resettlement of at least most of the about 2 million black people (as of 1820) to some foreign place, the vast majority of whom had never been anywhere outside of the Southern US. They weren't African any more than a third- or fourth-generation American of German descent is German--in fact, they were likely less so, since the experience of slavery was so dislocating. Individuals were separated forcibly from their families, moved around a foreign country, and put into a dehumanizing economic system that, in many cases, actively attempted to strip away everything that tied those individuals to each other or to any sense of themselves apart from their work and obligations to their owners.

The most idealistic promoters of the movement hoped these individuals would go to West Africa to (1) develop a black-led society in a completely foreign environment and amongst rightly hostile existing communities and (2) "civilize" these natives by bringing them the fruits of Western society. This whole idea was both unrealistic and deeply problematic, since it was based on the idea that black people who acted like white people were somehow more legitimate as organizers of society (of course, only society in Africa) than were black people who already lived there.

All that said, I do think that the author could present a slightly more nuanced view of the motives of those, principally the American Colonization Society (ACS), who advocated black American colonization of Africa and led to the founding of Liberia. Looking back on their views from nearly 200 years later, they certainly do seem both morally objectionable and terribly antiquated, but I think it's important to recognize the context that they were operating in. The debates about whether or not poor white Americans could effectively take part in the governance of the country (a la the Federalist Papers) were not so far in the past. Moreover, the subsequent history of African Americans in the US is undoubtedly one of imperfect assimilation with the (until recently) predominantly white society.

I'm not suggesting that colonization was an appropriate response to the "problem" of assimilation, nor am I suggesting that there was anything inevitable about the inequities in black/non-black social and economic outcomes in the US, historically and today. Those inequities were and are by and large a product of policies that explicitly attempted to maintain the barriers between the black and white Americas. However, I think it is important to recognize that the "problem" was (and remains) a real one--that is, how can a society, in which relations between two physically identifiable groups--people of dark and light skin--have historically been and (to some extent) continue to be so fraught with prejudice, conflict and ill will, move toward a place where those differences lose their divisiveness, and where individuals, families and communities succeed or fail on a basis other than that of their skin color?

Many of the proponents of African colonization, I think, believed that this was essentially impossible, and that the best way to achieve a more just society was to separate the two groups. And historically this has absolutely been one method for achieving social cohesion and equality, by minimizing within-group divisions, as occurred, for example, over the course of several hundreds of years' wars in Europe. I hope that's not the only way such social identity can be forged, and I think that possibly America's only legitimate claim to greatness is in this--that, imperfect as we've been at bringing in the Other and making them Americans, we can credibly claim to have done so more effectively than just about any other society on earth. I do feel that African Americans in many ways have been left out of this cycle of assimilation, and a huge policy challenge going forward is to figure out how to fix that and reduce the discrepancies in outcomes for American blacks relative to just about everyone else--in education, health, crime and incarceration, income and economic status, and many other areas.

OK enough social preaching, back to the book: the author paints the ACS as essentially a paternalistic organization, whose larger aims were little more than removing the irritant of free blacks and problematic slaves from the US, and colonization as at best a salve for the white conscience and at worst a pawning-off of the problems of slavery by getting rid of the evidence--the former slaves themselves. I disagree with that characterization, for reasons stated above. I think the book I read a couple of months ago, A Social History of the American Negro , outlines these motivations in a more nuanced matter, although that book certainly has its own set of problems.

Getting away from the question of motives for founding Liberia, the strongest part of this book to me was the section from about 1840 to 1950, covering the series of governments that took Liberia from its founding era through to the modern (post-WWII) period. The book does a great job of highlighting the ongoing divisions within Liberian society, the position of natives in Liberia, and the structures that the Americo settlers used to sustain their dominance. I found especially fascinating the parallels between the Liberia created by the settlers and antebellum Southern society--it makes a kind of perfect, though twisted, sense that former slaves and free blacks, who were disproportionately from the Southern US and the West Indies, would develop a social order that reflected what they knew--plantation-based economy, rigid social hierarchy based on family ties, and the disenfranchisement of large proportions of the country. It certainly doesn't justify it, but it was really interesting to read about.

The final part of the book, dealing with Liberia's modern history, was frankly a little disappointing, only because it was so cursory. The last three chapters focused on Liberia's strong-man president, the last period of Liberia's first regime, the coup that overthrew that regime and the series of political events that followed. But those chapters really just scratch the surface--I feel like I could have gotten the same amount of basic information about this period in Liberian history from reading a series of Wikipedia articles. I'm sure the book is better written, but still, 40 or so pages to cover the most salient part of a country's recent history really just feels like an afterthought. For example, I think Charles Taylor, his wars against the central government, his subsequent term(s?) as president, and his arrest and trial before the International Criminal Court, are all squeezed into eight pages of the epilogue. I'll grant that the author gets to choose his own timeframe for analysis, but it does seem to me that he could have spent a little more time teasing out how the issues he brought up during the middle section of the book played out after the fall of the regime in Monrovia. I guess it just means I'll just need to read another book about Liberia.

[Nemanja Sh · Rating 5 out of 5]

An absolutely wonderful and captivating read. Author's extremely pleasant and light style of writing makes this book an even greater pleasure to read.

If anything, this book should come as a warning to all of us that idealism and good intentions are not enough when it comes to state-building.
Building a country requires much more than an idea or even a vision. It requires people who are competent enough to turn a vision into reality.
There is no doubt that Liberia's founding fathers had what was needed to successfully sail the stormy seas of 1820s Africa. Unfortunately the elite that succeeded them paved a very different path thus taking Liberia in a completely different direction.

Economic stagnation, lack of proper infrastructure, systemic intolerance, endemic corruption... are just some of the issues that became the fabric of Liberia's society.
However, we should not solely focus on why the Americos lost power after 133 years. Nor we should focus on what their elite did and what mechanisms they used to maintain their grip on power. A more pressing question should be why the revolution(s) did not bring the desired result?

This is not a question that should be exclusively addressed to the Liberians. This, unfortunately, applies to almost all African countries. Where did it go wrong? Why did one oppressive regime replace another?

Could the international political science community be at fault here? How often do we look at certain political transitions from an ideologically reinforced position? We might condemn Tubman's radical capitalism but is it time to maybe take a closer look at what role Maoism and Communism played in African power politics?

Or maybe we should look at all this from a completely novel angle? Do African politicians have ideological allegiances or are their political and ideological affinities just a medium through which they attract international support for their cause? This should be an interesting topic for discussion as it seems that all African revolutions, no matter what ideology fueled them, came to the exactly same outcome.

[Andrew · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book was fascinating. Given that I read The House on Sugar Beach a couple of weeks back it was incredible to see a different - and more critical - perspective of the Americo-Liberian impact on Liberia. Part of me wishes I had read this before I read that because Ciment explains a lot more of the cultural raison d'etre of concepts like wardship as well as the troubling dynamic between settler and native populations whereas Cooper just kind of states "yeah, we took in this native child and she became like my sister - lots of people did it."

However, the other part of me thinks that reading this book first might have biased me in reading that one. Remembering how nostalgic an adult Cooper was about parts of her childhood in her book, as I read THIS book I started feeling a deep sense of "well yeah but what about this huge segment of the population that your ancestors subjugated?" I guess a lot of white folks who were kids in 1950s Alabama probably had some good times too but I'm not sure I would be able to hear about those without thinking the same kind of thing. Maybe I missed it but I don't remember any point in her book where Cooper says "looking back I can say now without hesitation that a lot of what my ancestors did was really messed up" and that kind of makes me feel like there needs to be some more introspection there because frankly there is (was) no excuse for a lot of the actions taken by settlers throughout the time they were in charge of the country other than "not only are we civilized and the natives are not but we have more powerful friends who can help us suppress them so we can stay in charge."

Except for the post-1980, if you want to know about Liberia's history, this is the book for you. I can understand why he pretty much stopped with Doe's coup: it ended the line of Americo-Liberian dominance over the country. It's not that he didn't cover the 1980s and on - it's just done as the epilogue.

I came here looking for the history and this book definitely delivered.

[David Harris · Rating 5 out of 5]

The history of Liberia is a perfect illustration of the old maxim that truth is stranger than fiction. This book tells the story well, and I highly recommend it.

From the 1820 arrival on the West African coast of freed slaves and free blacks in search of a better life than what was available to them in the United States to the 1980 assassination of the last Americo president, William Tolbert Jr, by an obscure master sergeant in the Liberian Army, who then managed to install himself as a dictator with the support of the American Reagan administration, the history of Americo-native relations largely mirrors that of black-white relations in America during a similar timeframe. (Americo is a term used to describe the non-native settler class of Liberians originating from the US and the Caribbean.)

Though Liberia saw itself as a bulwark against the slave trade in its early decades, it's interesting to note that, as late as the 1920s, the Liberian government was implicated in a scheme to enrich wealthy, well-connected Americoes while providing labor from among the native tribes under slave-like conditions to neighboring countries.

If all that wasn't enough, the 1990s brought a tragic civil war to Liberia complete with drugged, machine-gun wielding child soldiers.

Since the 2005 election of Ellen Johnson Sirleaf to the presidency, the country seems to be on an upward swing. But it has a long way yet to go given that a huge chunk of its economy was destroyed during the chaos of the 1990s and early 2000s.

[Yang-Yi Shen · Rating 5 out of 5]

Another America is an informative and comprehensive history of Liberia. I like how it presents, in an unbiased manner, the various phases of Liberian history, and how the cultural, societal and economic traits that make up modern Liberia came to be. I appreciate that this book did not shy away from explaining just how bad things were, as it is especially interesting to learn how the settlers landed in Africa with the highest ideals and great intentions, and how rapidly the country they founded declined into rampant corruption, nepotism, and authoritarianism. It was such a failure in every respect that a mere century after Monrovia was founded, the highest echelons of the Liberian government were participating in the same slave trade they left America to escape from.

Something I would have liked to see in the book was a more detailed description of the scale of Liberia's economy and its population over time. It is easier to make a rough evaluation of a country's geopolitical status when you know the size of its economy and its population. However, this is a minor issue that does not significantly restrict my knowledge of Liberian history.

This book is particularly informative as it is not some sort of memoir or travelogue but an actual comprehensive history of Liberia, and because of that I would recommend it to anyone who is interested in learning about the country, especially about the reasons for the current sad state of affairs.

[Miguel W.]

This book is very vivid, as the back cover blurb claims. I also am quite impressed at how the author is able to find such wonderful sources and bring them not just into context but into the living desires and conflicts of these individuals. Nevertheless, this is a survey book and it definitely rushed through many interesting aspects of Liberia’s history. This also makes it difficult to follow certain strands of history and when we reach the overthrow of the Americoes, I felt unprepared to understand the changing dynamics that this coup produced. Indeed, this book’s premise (according to the introduction) was a look backwards from the 1980 coup. But the information about the people orchestrating the coup is quite limited. In fact, most information about the non-Americo people was very limited. I assume this was in big part due to the difference in quality of sources between Americo and non Americo people.

In the end, this book is more of a look into the rise and decay of this class, rather than a way to dig into the complicated social issues of modern Liberia.

[Reza Amiri Praramadhan · Rating 5 out of 5]

Brought to Africa as part of abolitionists’ project to establish an independent state for freed slaves, the former slaves, known as Americo-Liberians, ended up enslaving the native tribes. Dominating the scene of economy, culture and politics since the establishment of Liberia, the Americo-Liberians’ dominations came to an end in the hand of low-ranking soldier, Samuel Doe, who killed President Tolbert in his bedroom. The death of Tolbert signified the end of True Whig Party rule, which ruled Liberia from 1878 to 1980. Under Doe, his corruption and incompetence put Liberia under civil war, which ended with the arrest of Charles Taylor. The election of Eileen Johnson Sirleaf as the first elected woman president in Africa is also discussed. A book with a new topic for me, which make it an interesting one.

[Joaquín · Rating 4 out of 5]

Very interesting book about the Americo-Liberians and the nation they founded but the book quickly drags to a close after the 1980 coup, when they were deposed. Make no mistake, this is a book specifically about this particular group. After all, it's on the title of the book.
Little information is given about modern, post-1980 Liberia (Ex: Charles Taylor, civil wars, Ellen Johnson Sirleaf, ebola). Instead, this book is almost purely dedicated to the origins of Liberia as a state and the American-descended Liberians that ran it until that fateful coup in 1980. If you enjoy a premise as interesting as freed slaves creating their own country, I'd recommend this book. If you are perhaps going to Liberia or are interesting in the MODERN politics of the country, I'd recommend you look for something else.

[Food4 Thought · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is a really, really, good book about the history of Liberia. I read this book to learn an aspect of African/African-American history that I was never taught. My heart laments for the depth of wickedness that the African-American founders of Liberia inacted towards the indigenous people of Liberia. This book gave me a more robust context through which to view the Liberian civil war. I would encourage everyone -especially African-Americans!- to read this book.

[Drew Thomas]

Really a good read for anyone that wants to learn about the nation of Liberia. The author did a good job not going to deep into details and giving the reader the broad strokes. There were unnecessary big words that slowed me down (maybe I needed my vocabulary expanded lol), but it was a great read.

[Matthew Tebbutt · Rating 3 out of 5]

Having just moved to Liberia, I found this a good grounding in the history of the country. The writing is clear and well paced. There is more of an emphasis on the earlier period than post second world war.

[Franklin Bonner · Rating 3 out of 5]

Good peer into the history of Liberia from an outside perspective. Mr. Ciment offers a critical take on the role of the United States of America in Liberia's failings, but at times I also thinks he is too harsh.

[Michael Jr. · Rating 4 out of 5]

A good overview of the history of the country and its government from its founding, its corruption, its class structure, to its long term neglect and in some cases enslavement of the native population.

[Fancia Saydee · Rating 5 out of 5]

worthy read for every Liberian

This book definitely needs to be read by every Liberian. The history here depicts why Liberian are going through the current struggle. Maybe we can learn from our past for a better future.

[Christopher Federici · Rating 4 out of 5]

An excellent introduction to Liberian history. This text is imperfect but highly readable. It paints the tragic story of the tortured land unbelievably well. I couldn’t help but walk away with “what if?” time and time again while reading along to the brutal history of Liberia.

[Graeme Bradley · Rating 3 out of 5]

A good overview of the history of Liberia and the key events which created and shaped the country.

[Susie · Rating 2 out of 5]

Interesting to read about Liberia, but why is a white man writing it?! (Book group selection.) Also not very engaging style.

[Brian Shellum · Rating 4 out of 5]

This was a very interesting read and a useful reference book or me in writing my book about Liberia.

[Maxo Marc · Rating 5 out of 5]

Our histories will forever be linked. Liberia was America in miniature. The recent history of the country was phantasmagorical but one can be hopeful of Liberias future prospects.