What do you think?
Rate this book
Rage and the Republic: The Unfinished Story of the American Revolution
On the 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence, law professor, legal analyst, and bestselling author of The Indispensable Right Jonathan Turley explores how the unique origins of American democracy set it apart from other revolutions, whether it can survive and thrive in the 21st century, and how the unfinished story of the revolution will play out in a rapidly changing world.
Most countries are the progeny of revolution. At the birth of this nation, the Founding Fathers faced the quintessential question of how do you keep democracy from devolving into violent anarchy or brutal despotism? Drawing on little-known facts from the founding, Jonathan Turley reveals how the United States escaped the cycles of violence and instability that plagued other democratic movements, from ancient Athens to nineteenth-century France.
As the nation approaches a new era marked by artificial intelligence, robotics, and profound economic shifts, America must again withstand the pressure of radical forces that seek to curtail our natural liberties under the guise of popular reform. In this crisis of faith, many politicians and pundits are questioning the very principles of American democracy, and some law professors are even calling for scrapping the Constitution.
Synthesizing sources from history to philosophy to the arts, Turley offers a hopeful account of how the lessons of the past can guide us through today’s “crisis of faith” in democracy and see us into the future. He “From redcoats to robots, our challenges have changed. Yet, we have remained. Our greatest danger is not forgetting the history detailed in this book, but forgetting who we were in that history.”
Most countries are the progeny of revolution. At the birth of this nation, the Founding Fathers faced the quintessential question of how do you keep democracy from devolving into violent anarchy or brutal despotism? Drawing on little-known facts from the founding, Jonathan Turley reveals how the United States escaped the cycles of violence and instability that plagued other democratic movements, from ancient Athens to nineteenth-century France.
As the nation approaches a new era marked by artificial intelligence, robotics, and profound economic shifts, America must again withstand the pressure of radical forces that seek to curtail our natural liberties under the guise of popular reform. In this crisis of faith, many politicians and pundits are questioning the very principles of American democracy, and some law professors are even calling for scrapping the Constitution.
Synthesizing sources from history to philosophy to the arts, Turley offers a hopeful account of how the lessons of the past can guide us through today’s “crisis of faith” in democracy and see us into the future. He “From redcoats to robots, our challenges have changed. Yet, we have remained. Our greatest danger is not forgetting the history detailed in this book, but forgetting who we were in that history.”
448 pages, Hardcover
Published February 3, 2026
282 people are currently reading
367 people want to read
About the author
Jonathan Turley
8 books29 followersJonathan Turley is an American attorney, legal scholar, writer, commentator, and legal analyst in broadcast and print journalism.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 7 of 7 reviews
February 8, 2026
Good analysis of what makes the American Revolution unique and worthy of protecting.
February 23, 2026
Not normally what I read, but I really enjoyed seeing things from a different perspective.
Some of my favorite quotes:
Page 85-86:
"Where the ancient Greeks saw the demos as a "collectivized monarch," Madison saw an alternative in a tripartite system exercising representational powers. If there is a single overriding purpose to the Madisonian system, it is to prevent the concentration of power in any one person or one branch. That purpose was achieved through the division of powers in a system of checks and balances to avoid what Jefferson described as "an elective despotism," which he noted "was not the government we fought for." Instead, he said that citizens had learned from experience that the best government could be found in authority "divided and balanced among several bodies f magistracy, as that no one could transcend their legal limits, without being effective checked and restrained by the others." Madison believed that the division of governmental authority on multiple levels (including through federalism) created a "compound republic" that would serve as a "double security" for the rights of citizens. Notable, one of Madison's greatest regrets was that he failed to secure one additional check in this compound republic: a national veto of state legislation. Madison was well aware of the factional interests raging on the state level as well as the ability of states to target minority rights. He wanted the national government to be able to heck such abusive measures, but the "federal negative" proved arguably his greatest loss in the drafting of the Constitution."
Page 148:
"Executions reached a height in the fall of 1793 when as many as forty thousand people were killed. This included figures like Olympe de Gouges, a playwright who championed women's rights and wrote the Declaration of the Rights of Women and Citizenesses. She earned the ire of the Mountain by writing The Three Urns, suggesting that citizens be allowed to vote in a referendum on the best form of government among the three estates. Ironically, she had previously called out the Jacobins for the absence of women in government positions, asserting, "If a woman has the right to mount the scaffold she also has the right to mount the tribune." The Mountain lethally proved her point by sending her to the scaffold on November 3rd, 1793. She reportedly remained defiant to the end, bravely challenging the crowd to the point that one onlooker remarked that they were now "killing intelligence."
Page 211:
"Jill Lepore praised the attack on rights by Greene, adding, "Until Americans can reimagine rights, there is no path forward, and there is, especially, no way to get race right. No peace, no justice."
"Free speech is a particularly common target for those who seek to trade off freedoms for safety or the general social good."
page 212:
"The Internet model of free speech is little more than cacophony, where the loudest, most provocative, or most unlikeable voice dominates... If we want to protect free speech, we should not only resist the attempt to remake college campuses in the image of the Internet, but consider the benefits of remaking the Internet in the image of the university."
Page 213:
" Every person has the right to freedom of expression, association, peaceful assembly, and petition of the government for redress of grievances, consistent with the rights of others to the same and subject to responsibility for abuses. All conflicts of such rights shall be resolved in accordance with the principle of equality and dignity of all persons. Both the freedom of religion and the freedom from religion shall be respected by the government. The government may not single out any religion for interference or endorsement, nor may it force any person to accept or adhere to any religious belief or practice."
Some of my favorite quotes:
Page 85-86:
"Where the ancient Greeks saw the demos as a "collectivized monarch," Madison saw an alternative in a tripartite system exercising representational powers. If there is a single overriding purpose to the Madisonian system, it is to prevent the concentration of power in any one person or one branch. That purpose was achieved through the division of powers in a system of checks and balances to avoid what Jefferson described as "an elective despotism," which he noted "was not the government we fought for." Instead, he said that citizens had learned from experience that the best government could be found in authority "divided and balanced among several bodies f magistracy, as that no one could transcend their legal limits, without being effective checked and restrained by the others." Madison believed that the division of governmental authority on multiple levels (including through federalism) created a "compound republic" that would serve as a "double security" for the rights of citizens. Notable, one of Madison's greatest regrets was that he failed to secure one additional check in this compound republic: a national veto of state legislation. Madison was well aware of the factional interests raging on the state level as well as the ability of states to target minority rights. He wanted the national government to be able to heck such abusive measures, but the "federal negative" proved arguably his greatest loss in the drafting of the Constitution."
Page 148:
"Executions reached a height in the fall of 1793 when as many as forty thousand people were killed. This included figures like Olympe de Gouges, a playwright who championed women's rights and wrote the Declaration of the Rights of Women and Citizenesses. She earned the ire of the Mountain by writing The Three Urns, suggesting that citizens be allowed to vote in a referendum on the best form of government among the three estates. Ironically, she had previously called out the Jacobins for the absence of women in government positions, asserting, "If a woman has the right to mount the scaffold she also has the right to mount the tribune." The Mountain lethally proved her point by sending her to the scaffold on November 3rd, 1793. She reportedly remained defiant to the end, bravely challenging the crowd to the point that one onlooker remarked that they were now "killing intelligence."
Page 211:
"Jill Lepore praised the attack on rights by Greene, adding, "Until Americans can reimagine rights, there is no path forward, and there is, especially, no way to get race right. No peace, no justice."
"Free speech is a particularly common target for those who seek to trade off freedoms for safety or the general social good."
page 212:
"The Internet model of free speech is little more than cacophony, where the loudest, most provocative, or most unlikeable voice dominates... If we want to protect free speech, we should not only resist the attempt to remake college campuses in the image of the Internet, but consider the benefits of remaking the Internet in the image of the university."
Page 213:
" Every person has the right to freedom of expression, association, peaceful assembly, and petition of the government for redress of grievances, consistent with the rights of others to the same and subject to responsibility for abuses. All conflicts of such rights shall be resolved in accordance with the principle of equality and dignity of all persons. Both the freedom of religion and the freedom from religion shall be respected by the government. The government may not single out any religion for interference or endorsement, nor may it force any person to accept or adhere to any religious belief or practice."
March 4, 2026
I loved this book. It started off as a history of the French Revolution and a biography of Thomas Paine. He was a rabble rouser and such people, while good in disrupting a bad regime, thereafter they are no good when bringing back stability after the revolution. Thomas Paine discovered this and went to France to help with their revolution... and Paine got his wish. They did what he thought they ought to do and found out what a bloodbath his ideas would produce. He almost lost his own head. Many others who were the victimizers soon became the victims of their own brutality and were beheaded. That is what we (thankfully) missed in the American Revolution by following the more moderate voices who knew how bad things could get if they didn't gain control over the violence.
But while writing, the author was disturbed by the current protests against President Trump. The author is not a Trump supporter, but he did notice the similarities between how the French Revolution got out of control and how we might get out of control today and unleash something terrible.
I agree.
You might say, "But Alex, we are not like those French people 250 years ago (or so). We are much smarter now!. Yeah. Sure you are. You may be able to operate an espresso machine with alacrity, but human nature remains human nature.
I suggest reading:
"The Wave" by Todd Strasser. Based on actual events in an extremely liberal, forward-looking town. They found how intelligent people (and they were very intelligent) could be turned to violence against each other simple because "You aren't one of us."
"The True Believer: Thoughts on the Nature of Mass Movements" by Eric Hoffer. This is an amazing book about how any organization can be turned in various directions including the exact opposite direction in which they were headed with eyes wide open, knowing what they were doing. Scary. If you don't recognize you own organization in this book you just aren't paying attention... and you are ripe to be flipped.
I'd love to read this book again. Great stuff.
But while writing, the author was disturbed by the current protests against President Trump. The author is not a Trump supporter, but he did notice the similarities between how the French Revolution got out of control and how we might get out of control today and unleash something terrible.
I agree.
You might say, "But Alex, we are not like those French people 250 years ago (or so). We are much smarter now!. Yeah. Sure you are. You may be able to operate an espresso machine with alacrity, but human nature remains human nature.
I suggest reading:
"The Wave" by Todd Strasser. Based on actual events in an extremely liberal, forward-looking town. They found how intelligent people (and they were very intelligent) could be turned to violence against each other simple because "You aren't one of us."
"The True Believer: Thoughts on the Nature of Mass Movements" by Eric Hoffer. This is an amazing book about how any organization can be turned in various directions including the exact opposite direction in which they were headed with eyes wide open, knowing what they were doing. Scary. If you don't recognize you own organization in this book you just aren't paying attention... and you are ripe to be flipped.
I'd love to read this book again. Great stuff.
February 23, 2026
Anyone who pays even the slightest attention to politics these days will note that each side of the aisle appears to be growing more extreme and that the growing anger of left and right increasingly results in rhetoric and action that would have been completely unacceptable twenty years ago. Now, unfortunately, people shrug because that's just the way things are. And with the growing extremism is a coinciding desire to stop the other side from even making its arguments. It's dangerous for the future of our republic and now Jonathan Turley has brilliantly documented that this explosion of rage is not new, and he promises that there is still hope.
Turley begins with a look at the American and French Revolutions and effectively makes the case that there were tensions and interests pushing both revolutions toward extremism and violence. But the American Revolution avoided its own Reign of Terror and devolution into Democratic Despotism precisely because the founders strove to create a system of government that countered the impulse toward a tyranny of the majority. These checks and balances serve to protect the rights of minority political factions. These rights are not protected in unicameral systems so, ironically, those systems whose proponents argue are most democratic and sensitive to the will of the people historically became the most authoritarian and violent.
The last half of the book explores the current state of affairs in the United States and the challenges of the next few decades. The nation is facing very hard times and the confidence in critical institutions such as the branches of our government, our political parties, and our press are all at all-time lows. The willingness to talk about today's problems with people who do not agree with us is diminishing. While the number of people who believe that politically-motivated violence is justified continues to grow. And all the while, political leaders across the aisle stoke the fires of their constituents' rage for short term gain. Yet Turley has not given up hope and neither should we.
Turley begins with a look at the American and French Revolutions and effectively makes the case that there were tensions and interests pushing both revolutions toward extremism and violence. But the American Revolution avoided its own Reign of Terror and devolution into Democratic Despotism precisely because the founders strove to create a system of government that countered the impulse toward a tyranny of the majority. These checks and balances serve to protect the rights of minority political factions. These rights are not protected in unicameral systems so, ironically, those systems whose proponents argue are most democratic and sensitive to the will of the people historically became the most authoritarian and violent.
The last half of the book explores the current state of affairs in the United States and the challenges of the next few decades. The nation is facing very hard times and the confidence in critical institutions such as the branches of our government, our political parties, and our press are all at all-time lows. The willingness to talk about today's problems with people who do not agree with us is diminishing. While the number of people who believe that politically-motivated violence is justified continues to grow. And all the while, political leaders across the aisle stoke the fires of their constituents' rage for short term gain. Yet Turley has not given up hope and neither should we.
February 20, 2026
Professor Turley has rendered a great service to American history and political philosophy buffs and a warning of what lies ahead if we do not correct course on our downward spiral to political decay. The book is divided into two parts. First, Turley provides a lively history of both the French and American revolutions, the latter with an emphasis on the writings and life of Thomas Paine, a man more prolific for his literary works than the moral probity of his lifestyle. Turley delves deeply into the principles underlying the American constitution: free speech and balance of power with a heavy dose of limitations on democracy. What America built into its constitutional order the French rejected and the consequences were bloody. Pure democracy will inevitably lead to anarchy and then authoritarianism. That postulate is as certain as the laws of physics. The second half of the book is an examination of the current state of American political thought and actions and the degeneration of that thought into something akin to the French Revolution. Turley provides a litany of examples of the intellectual rot that has infested our universities, media, and corporate culture. Call it the woke revolution. By whatever name one calls it, it is not healthy. There is a concerted effort by intellectual elites to monopolize the channels of communication and to punish and ostracize people who do not toe the line. Rather than adhere to principles memorialized in our founding documents, rage and emotion have become the guiding principles of our so called betters and the Constitution be damned. In other words, the same poison that infected French society in the 1790's is percolating in the Untied States now. Every American concerned about the drift towards the "warmth of collectivism" should read this book. It serves as a warning of what will happen if our adherence to constitutional principles is abandoned for some fleeting love affair with the principles of anarchy.
March 8, 2026
I got this book for free at Mr. Turley's Commonwealth Club appearance. I was intrigued to hear him and read this because I'd just finished a few books related to the French Revolution, which my US education left me quite ignorant of, and Mr. Turley does tease an exploration of the commonalities and differences of that episode and the one Americans know much more about.
Despite the first word in the title, it's not quite the exploration of "rage" it seems to be. Yes, there was some rage driving the forces in both 18th century America and, perhaps much more so, in France. But the connection to rage in the current era he seems to draw back from, in large part because he somehow manages to glide past most of the rage on the right. He is best talking about the tension between our right of free expression and the dangers of recent calls to somehow throttle it in the name of equity and harmony. But his credibility and power of his discussion loses power as he sidesteps many examples that come from the right. In the end he comes no closer to bridging the gulf between our polarized leaders and media than anyone else. I was hoping for more. I finish it still impressed by the breakthrough that was the Declaration of Independence and the durability of the checks and balances of our Constitution, and newly appreciative of the role of Thomas Paine. But I'm disappointed he just avoided the glaring lack of respect for those principles demonstrated time and again by our current President and his closest allies.
Despite the first word in the title, it's not quite the exploration of "rage" it seems to be. Yes, there was some rage driving the forces in both 18th century America and, perhaps much more so, in France. But the connection to rage in the current era he seems to draw back from, in large part because he somehow manages to glide past most of the rage on the right. He is best talking about the tension between our right of free expression and the dangers of recent calls to somehow throttle it in the name of equity and harmony. But his credibility and power of his discussion loses power as he sidesteps many examples that come from the right. In the end he comes no closer to bridging the gulf between our polarized leaders and media than anyone else. I was hoping for more. I finish it still impressed by the breakthrough that was the Declaration of Independence and the durability of the checks and balances of our Constitution, and newly appreciative of the role of Thomas Paine. But I'm disappointed he just avoided the glaring lack of respect for those principles demonstrated time and again by our current President and his closest allies.
February 12, 2026
Rage and the Republic is one of those rare history books that feels urgent without feeling sensational.
Jonathan Turley doesn’t just retell the American Revolution — he reframes it. His central idea that the Founders were trying to protect "liberty", not simply celebrate democracy, gave me a completely new lens on 1776 and the Constitution.
The discussion of “democratic despotism” and Madison’s fear of concentrated power feels surprisingly relevant today.
What I appreciated most is how Turley connects Athens, Paris, and Philadelphia to modern pressures like political polarization and technological disruption. It never feels like forced comparison; it feels like historical continuity.
This isn’t a dry academic text, but it’s also not shallow commentary. It’s thoughtful, well-argued, and provocative in the best way.
If you enjoy political history that challenges your assumptions and makes you think about the present, this is absolutely worth your time.
I have more say at https://www.probinism.com/rage-and-th...
Jonathan Turley doesn’t just retell the American Revolution — he reframes it. His central idea that the Founders were trying to protect "liberty", not simply celebrate democracy, gave me a completely new lens on 1776 and the Constitution.
The discussion of “democratic despotism” and Madison’s fear of concentrated power feels surprisingly relevant today.
What I appreciated most is how Turley connects Athens, Paris, and Philadelphia to modern pressures like political polarization and technological disruption. It never feels like forced comparison; it feels like historical continuity.
This isn’t a dry academic text, but it’s also not shallow commentary. It’s thoughtful, well-argued, and provocative in the best way.
If you enjoy political history that challenges your assumptions and makes you think about the present, this is absolutely worth your time.
I have more say at https://www.probinism.com/rage-and-th...
Displaying 1 - 7 of 7 reviews