Hamilton's Curse: How Jefferson's Arch Enemy Betrayed the American Revolution--and What It Means for Americans Today

by Thomas J. DiLorenzo

Two of the most influential figures in American history. Two opposing political philosophies. Two radically different visions for America.

Thomas Jefferson and Alexander Hamilton were without question two of the most important Founding Fathers. They were also the fiercest of rivals. Of these two political titans, it is Jefferson—–the revered author of the Declaration of Independence and our third president—–who is better remembered today. But in fact it is Hamilton’s political legacy that has triumphed—–a legacy that has subverted the Constitution and transformed the federal government into the very leviathan state that our forefathers fought against in the American Revolution.

How did we go from the Jeffersonian ideal of limited government to the bloated imperialist system of Hamilton’s design? Acclaimed economic historian Thomas J. DiLorenzo provides the troubling answer in Hamilton’s Curse.

DiLorenzo reveals how Hamilton, first as a delegate to the Constitutional Convention and later as the nation’s first and most influential treasury secretary, masterfully promoted an agenda of nationalist glory and interventionist economics—–core beliefs that did not die with Hamilton in his fatal duel with Aaron Burr. Carried on through his political heirs, the Hamiltonian legacy:

• Wrested control into the hands of the federal government by inventing the myth of the Constitution’s “implied powers”
• Established the imperial presidency (Hamilton himself proposed a permanent president—–in other words, a king)
• Devised a national banking system that imposes boom-and-bust cycles on the American economy
• Saddled Americans with a massive national debt and oppressive taxation
• Inflated the role of the federal courts in order to eviscerate individual liberties and state sovereignty
• Pushed economic policies that lined the pockets of the wealthy and created a government system built on graft, spoils, and patronage
• Transformed state governments from Jeffersonian bulwarks of liberty to beggars for federal crumbs

By debunking the Hamiltonian myths perpetuated in recent admiring biographies, DiLorenzo exposes an uncomfortable truth: The American people are no longer the masters of their government but its servants. Only by restoring a system based on Jeffersonian ideals can Hamilton’s curse be lifted, at last.

Genres: History, Politics, American History, Biography, Economics, Nonfiction, American Revolution

245 pages, Hardcover

First published January 1, 2008

About the author

Thomas James DiLorenzo is an American economics professor at Loyola University Maryland. He identifies himself as an adherent of the Austrian School of economics. He is a senior fellow of the Ludwig von Mises Institute and an associated scholar of the Abbeville Institute. He holds a Ph.D. in Economics from Virginia Tech.

Reviews

[Amora · Rating 3 out of 5]

Alexander Hamilton is a very complicated character. His rivalry towards Thomas Jefferson made him very bitter and antagonistic towards commercial banking and limited debt and taxation. As a result, we now have the government he envisioned. DiLorenzo explains how his vision has created a cycle of boom-and-bust cycles and has also created an environment of cronyism in Washington by increasing the size of government. He even explains how Hamilton got many of his facts wrong in his report on manufacturing.

Not the best book from DiLorenzo, but it was quite interesting.

[Mike (the Paladin) · Rating 5 out of 5]

Thomas Jefferson:
"Government big enough to supply everything you need is big enough to take everything you have. The course of history shows us that as a government grows, liberty decreases."
— Thomas Jefferson

We as a society honor Thomas Jefferson, we laud his intelligence, name him as one of the greatest founding fathers and thinkers in American history. YET we have chained ourselves to a growing government that has now become so big and bloated it threatens to destroy the very America that Jefferson envisioned. We honor Jefferson, yet we adopted Hamilton's "plan" his "governmental world view". Did we do it knowingly? Can we undo the damage?

This is not a "light" or "easy" read, but I recommend it highly recommended.


Update: In light of things going on today, please consider reading this book.

[Sasha C. · Rating 1 out of 5]

It is rare, if not entirely atypical, for me give a book 1 star. But this one deserved just that.

In the first 30 pages of the book, there was more blunt, unjustified, and sometimes even flawed bias than any rational, historical argument.

Let’s look at page 31-32 for instance. You’ll see what I am talking about.
First, DiLorenzio informs us of our ignorance by saying that “Hamilton’s language is rather convoluted by modern standards but I’ll give you a vague example of what he said so you won’t understand a single freaking bit of it and let ME draw the conclusions."
Then he states: “in Hamilton’s opinion, the Commerce Clause allowed for government planning of every economic enterprise”. This is followed by “NO WONDER Jefferson, Madison, and other devotees of the constitution thought of Hamilton as a deadly enemy of the free society.” What is he IMPLYING? In theory, what does “corporate welfare” protected by government HAVE TO DO with FREEDOM and general security of the people of the United States? YES, he even said: “Hamilton advocated having the federal government grant […:] bounties to the manufacturers of certain items […:] known TODAY as “corporate welfare””.

Yes, DiLorenzio, you just contradicted yourself, for Hamilton’s policy DOES exist today and nowhere do I see it limit our PERSONAL freedom. In fact, why would Hamilton OPPRESS people, as these “devotees” claimed, if he NEEDED their faith in federal government?

True, this is also quite subjective, but let’s look on the logical side. Hamilton aimed for support of the rich, and HE GOT IT, and was able to create the BASIS for the AMERICA we know today. Meanwhile, Jefferson DREAMED of “equality” for all—yes, he DREAMED. Well, keep dreaming Jefferson, for your COERCIVE, HATED Embargo Act was not quite up to par with your fantasies of a perfect majority rule government, and the Louisiana Purchase was an elephant of a showcase for FEDERAL government.

Devotees! Ha! Some devotees! That did not even WANT a constitution in the first place!

See, nice philosophies of a passive central government don’t quite work out. Hamilton did what he had to. DiLorenzio creates a veil around this to blur the circumstances of the time, leaving the reader with a one-sided, dry approach to the era where there was no right and wrong, where humanity prevailed and history lives on with us.

This is not a biography, as DiLorenzio warned us in the beginning, but it is not a diplomatic approach to history either. It is a sarcastic, misleading commentary of only the actions of Hamilton. The author’s aim was to show in what ways they flawed or aimed to flaw personal liberty. Hazy bits of phrases from Hamilton are thrown in there in an attempt to convince the reader into believing extremely controversial assertions…in fact, half of the book is primary or historian quotes.
Nice, job, DiLorenzio. You may have fooled some, but you can’t fool history.

Don't read this nonsense. Read The Federalist Papers, the Aurora, letters and documents, diplomatic history books and anything you can find, just don't base your approach to history on one man's personal conclusions.

[Jeanette · Rating 3 out of 5]

2.5 stars rounded up for the information that you won't get in other Hamilton biographies and non-fiction. Others I have read are bias driven. So is this one. And I didn't think this was an intriguing read at all either. It was hard to stick to, as DiLorenzo has so much slant toward the Federalism expanded re Hamilton's "desired/perfect" ideal and example.

His desired for power expansion (visible in our present government) of heavy handed top down controls against the states- common as dirt during the last 200 plus years. That was covered to a 4 star level. Hamilton's posited outplays far more realized in today's USA government that Jefferson's are.

But like the abolitionist information and much else about Hamilton's personality and actual politics in the early days of government- he tends, just like Chernow does but in the opposite direction. He will tell of all the bio stats that will slant to "form" a Hamilton conceptional "eyes" or onus that isn't truly of that period but what has become. Nor are either authors self-kept strictly into the frames of the depths of those particular late 18th century times.

Truly though, Hamilton would have been quite happy with a king and a elite ruling class controlling most of the power and all of the money. And also holding all kinds of strings over commerce in which the government and banks were the puppeteer.

This book was just about a 3 star read considering its deficits. I'm not a fan of the writing style either.

But you sure aren't going to get all the present day Leftist pap here either about this supposed liberal cored hero. He was rather a poor tempered autocrat if anything and not at all some open minded free spirit. And yet he was a Founder that probably has most visibility in the HUGE government controls and forms of present day USA government. Most of it is Hamilton on steroids with far, far less individual freedoms or voice as the Founders comprised in the Constitutional forms.

[Stephen · Rating 4 out of 5]

4.0 stars. I thought this was a terrific book that made some very good arguments as well as being easy to read. While I can't say I agree with everything the author said (being more favorably disposed to a strong foreign policy than the author), I think he makes a compelling argument for how the implementation of Hamilton's vision of the U.S. has led to our government being bloated, top heavy and detrimentally centralized, in direct conflict with the ideals of the founding fathers and the drafters of the U.S. Constitution.

Particularly interesting to me were the following Chapters:

- Chapter 4 on the expansion of governmental powers by the Supreme Court through Judicial Review;
- Chapter 5 on the evils of tariffs, corporate welfare and protectionism; and
- Chapter 7 on how the passing of the 16th and 17th Amendment to the Constitution (authorizing the income tax and the direct election of Senators respectively) basically sounded the death knell for Jeffersonian federalism and States' rights.

Definitely geared toward the libertarian minded, but a fantastic read and one I highly recommend.

[SpyroNinja · Rating 1 out of 5]

Utterly biased borderline propaganda.

[John · Rating 1 out of 5]

DO NOT WASTE YOUR TIME!!

Absolute utter dribble. DiLorenzo may be the most unabashedly biased author I have ever read, short of the hardcore Fox News or MSNBC writers. I truly hope he is trying to just make some political statement, because if he is as poor of an historian as appears based on his misunderstanding of history, it is truly frightening.

I have read 3 or 4 books on Hamilton, and yes, including the Ron Chernow one, AND about 4 or 5 on Jefferson, yes, including the Jon Meacham one. I think I know the actual history from mostly unbiased, and at the very least, very disciplined historians and writers (Chernow & Meacham). DiLorenzo's miscarriage of history and absolute "empty cupboard" of historical fact is truly awful. The very scary aspect of this book is that I don't think it is trying to be an uber-political writing; I think he has an idea in his head and looks to blame one person for all the ills of the country.

Just shows, you can have all that education (PhD - in economics - Austrian School - which has so many of its own flaws), and still be ridiculously dis-enlightened!

DO NOT WASTE YOUR TIME!!

[J.A.A. Purves · Rating 1 out of 5]

Only a fringe libertarian crackpot would write something with this selective of a view of history arguing that the mainstream Federalist point of view is responsible for the modern liberal misinterpretation of the Federalist point of view. A dumb book that no one active in the public square would ever take seriously.

[Glen · Rating 4 out of 5]

"Hamilton's Curse" continues the welcome revisionist history tradition of the scholars of the Mises Institute and the Lew Rockwell circle. With this book, Prof. DiLorenzo goes back earlier in American history to expand on the thesis he presented in his two prior works on Abraham Lincoln ("The Real Lincoln" and "Lincoln Unmasked"), i.e. the lamentable victory of the empire-builders, strong central government advocates, and mercantilists of the Federalist Party tradition over the Jeffersonian limited-government faction. With this book, DiLorenzo convincingly buttresses his earlier argument that the Lincoln administration and the War Between the States dealt the fatal blow to States Rights, federalism, and for all intents and purposes, the American Constitution in its original conception.

The author uses direct quotations from Hamilton's hagriographers, as well as his detractors, to prove his case. All of them view Hamilton as the father of the type of government we have today, and all agree that Jefferson's vision effectively died with the defeat of the South and the States Rights doctrine. The disagreements between the two camps are many and profound, of course, as they are based on profound differences in political philosophy. The reader will bring his own prejudices to bear as to whether Hamiltonian America is the way the country should have gone, but an honest reader will not easily dismiss the evidence of political chicanery, double-dealing, and corruption at the highest levels of government that the Hamiltonians used to win their fight. True, politics ain't beanbag, but I will leave it up to the interested reader to judge whether the Hamiltonians were the good or bad guys. Tax and spend liberals and conservative imperialists will doubtless disagree with my answer.

If I have one criticism of this book, it's the final chapter's prescription on how to roll back the damage caused by the Hamiltonians. Prof. DiLorenzo is a minarchist and believes that if we repealed the 16th (income tax) and 17th (popular election of Senators) Amendments, abolished the Federal Reserve, restored the doctrine of States Rights, repealed all the laws that perverted the meaning of the Commerce Clause, and so on, we would be back to the Jeffersonian vision and, presumably, on the right track for good and all. I'm just a bit more cynical about the prospects for "good government", no matter what its size. I say, why not permantly castrate the central government and go all the way back to the Articles of Confederation - as a first step. After that, why not convene an Anarchy Convention to figure out how to eliminate the scourge of government from our lives and our country, forever.

But that's just me. What do you think?

[Colt · Rating 1 out of 5]

A difficult book to read, one that's rife with bias, lack of context, and intentional omissions. Alexander Hamilton was a nuanced complex character in American history. Like any human he was fallible, though the author seems to frame everything within his book as black and white and a battle of good vs. evil in the guise of Jefferson vs. Hamilton.

This wouldn't be so bad if it was done by an amateur author or amateur student of history. But to be done by one that is a college professor does cause one to pause at a book littered with such intellectual dishonesty, So much so that there are many contemporaries such as conservative columnist Rich Lowery wrote in the daily beast describing DiLorenzo's "technique", the context of this quote is in response to one of his books on Lincoln: "His scholarship, such as it is, consists of rummaging through the record for anything he can find to damn Lincoln, stripping it of any nuance or context, and piling on pejorative adjectives. In DiLorenzo, the Lincoln-haters have found a champion with the judiciousness and the temperament they deserve." I feel that all one would need to do is replace the name Lincoln, with Hamilton, and there is the perfect definition of this piece of trash of a book.

[Nathan · Rating 4 out of 5]

Many worship Hamilton blindly. What they don't realize is that Hamilton spent his political life trying to turn us into England. Hamilton and his buddy's (mostly his buddies) got rich off his banking and government bond schemes. He disregarded the constitution, he called it a "frail and worthless piece of fabric" and is responsible for implicit interpretation. He turned the "general welfare" clause into a blank check. It's also interesting that he had slaves. When history books praise him for being anti-slavery I guess they omit that part.

This book is about Hamilton vs Jefferson. Hamilton constantly pushed for a strong central government. He argued that the states never had sovereignty. He wanted a standing army of tax collectors. He tried to have the tax evaders in the Whiskey Rebellion executed. He was a nut. He was a protectionist and a mercantilist. His party was dissolved because his ideas were so unpopular. His ideas were later revived when the Federal Government became stronger, and they came back with a fury. "We honor Jefferson, but live in Hamilton's country."

[David Robins · Rating 4 out of 5]

I learn a lot from each of DiLorenzo's books. His books on Lincoln were excellent; but this provides more of the story. While not at all excusing Lincoln for his heinous and tyrannical acts, Hamilton's founding of crony capitalism, and plan for powerful, centralized government able to use and threaten arbitrary violence and confiscate land and property at will is shown to be the root of so many of the failures of American liberty. Jefferson did what he could; but the system ultimately yielded to Hamilton in 1913 with the three coups of the income tax, federal reserve, and popular election of senators, throwing the corruption into fast-forward into a helter-skelter of depressions, blatant taxpayer mulcting, anti-liberty regulation (non-monetary taxation), an imperial state, and massive and continual infringement on individual liberty. It must be rolled back: nullified line by line; the states must assert themselves over unaccountable federal judges, and individual liberty again allowed to breathe free with the goal of all trade and interactions being voluntary and uncoerced.

[Michael’ · Rating 3 out of 5]

The first half of the book is easily worth 4 stars, as DiLorenzo destroys the crazed maniac Hamilton. The second half becomes increasingly more about DiLorenzo’s own views, which he fails to support with any evidence other than a few quotes from Von Mises and Rothbard. Apparently, if you know the scripture, you don’t have to make an argument. One of the views is that “leftist historians” “invariably celebrate” Hamilton’s subversion of the American constitution, so I looked up “Marx Hamilton” (Marxists are generally accepted to be left wing) and found that the entire first page of results (except one about the play) involved negative appraisals of Hamilton by Marxists. There are multiple other obviously false claims in the later part of the book, which is why I knocked my rating down from 4 or perhaps 5 stars to 3.

[Chris · Rating 5 out of 5]

Outstanding book! Every high school student should read this book. More than that, every American should read this book! DiLorenzo does an outstanding job of demonstrating the course that our nation has took since the Constitution was ratified. Hamilton did not leave us a blessing. For those who are tired of the status quo, you must read book this to understand the issues deeper. I have often been frustrated that people are tired of big government and yet still support people such as Mitt Romney, etc. That is far too shallow of an understanding of what is going in this country. This book is a great primer on the real issues we are facing.

[John · Rating 3 out of 5]

DiLorenzo looks at the legacy of Alexander Hamilton and determines that this founding father did more to undermine the victory of the American Revolution by modeling our system of government on the very model which we rejected in the British Empire. He also follows Hamilton's followers to the modern day and shows the debt most modern politicians owe to Hamilton.

Hamilton favored a mercantilist system of government, meaning that he wanted to see government and business working together through public subsidies, high taxes, a large central government, government monopoly over money, and so on. DiLorenzo contrasts Hamilton's ideas to those of Thomas Jefferson throughout the book showing how the two ideologies were in conflict for most of our history, but how Hamilton finally won the day.

[Reagan Bon · Rating 5 out of 5]

"It is ... high time that Americans stopped believing in the fantastic myths about the American founding that were invented by Alexander Hamilton, Daniel Webester, Joseph Story, and Abraham Lincoln, 'proven' at gunpoint during the War between the States, and solidified in the minds of Americans by generations of public school propaganda."

I learned far more from this book about America's history, government, economy, and founding fathers than from all my college history/government classes combined. It was a lot more interesting than I thought it would be!

[Michael Newton · Rating 2 out of 5]

Loved parts of it, hated other parts. Great presentation of the increasing centralization of power within the federal government, but goes overboard in his vilification of Hamilton. Worth reading, but you must pair it was a less biased book or even a favorable book on Hamilton (I suggest Ron Chernow's).

UPDATE: Rereading this book and downgraded my rating from 3 stars to 2 stars. DiLorenzo really misunderstand Hamilton and the debate that existed in the founding period.

[Clinton · Rating 5 out of 5]

Thomas Jefferson is my new hero. Where is America's modern day Jefferson who can once again help restore the sovereignty back to the people?

[Thomas Mick · Rating 4 out of 5]

A very revealing look at the motives and actions of Alexander Hamilton, that set into motion the destruction of the republic under the bankers he promoted.

[Patrick Martin · Rating 5 out of 5]

What a fantastic book. Alexander Hamilton is the new favorite of many people learning about the founding fathers because of the Broadway play and Chernof's outstanding biography. And of course everyone knows the name of Thomas Jefferson. What many novice history fans don't realize is how much at odds they were in their time with one hundred and eighty degree polar opposite thoughts on government.

Hamilton wanted a strong central (Federal) government and Jefferson was for states rights. What this book does is break down the thought process's and the repercussions of what came to be. It explains how, once the Constitution passed Hamilton argued for something called "implied powers" and other founding fathers were against those because they were not listed in the Constitution. It covers the great men's thought process's and their need to court George Washington to their side. It explains how Supreme Court Chief Justice Marshall, with Hamilton support, came up with and began the process of Judicial Review of laws which at the time was considered an abuse of Judicial Branch powers.

It explains how Jefferson's followers kept the Central government's power to a minimum until the Civil War when Abraham Lincoln expanded, unconstitutionally, powers by following Hamilton's thoughts of 80 years before.

It talks about President Wilson and his expansion, about the income tax and amendments that expanded federal power and how the direct election of Senators truly left the flood gates open. And how we ended up where we are today with such a powerful Federal Government that the states are forced to bow down to. Hamilton's dream, or as the book title says, Hamilton's curse upon todays citizens.

I found this book very interesting and with all the information it was still concise and an easy read. It didn't get too technical nor did it pull any punches. Although it does read like the author prefers Jefferson's states rights form of government that would be understandable when reviewing the founding fathers and the Constitution because that is the way it was written.

[Pastor Greg · Rating 5 out of 5]

As a student of history, I get tired of the lopsided stuff put out by propagandists. I like history written by someone who simply wants to paint a real picture, not history "written by the victor" who simply wants to elevate their side of story. But that's nearly impossible to find and doesn't sell as well.

So, I see DeLorenzo as bringing balance to the discussion. He's got his agenda, as well. But after reading one extreme, I'm glad to find material leaning to the other extreme. Together, I get the whole picture and can eat the meat and spit out the bones.

And I admit to being Jeffersonian (politically speaking) for the most part, so a book like this was an amazingly FUN read. I know most people won't find it as engrossing as I did, but I do believe that anyone with a love for history with a special interest in the founding fathers will really enjoy this and DeLorenzo's books on Lincoln (reviewed elsewhere).

I HIGHLY recommend this to my history loving friends and hope you enjoy it as much as I did. I don't give many 5 star ratings, btw.

[Tyler L. · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book has what I call an "attention grabber" title. It is not really about Alexander Hamilton as much as it is a critique of mercantilism.

The author does a fine job in exposing the many failures of the economic system known as mercantilism. It is a system that prevailed in England for a long time and has influenced much of America since its founding. This book documents actual laws that were passed and policies that were carried out by the federal government and how they failed. Because of this, this book succeeds.

Many people erroneously criticize the author for his conclusions about Alexander Hamilton. I am aware of his controversial views on Lincoln but will save my judgment of those books until after I read them. The author is indeed guilty of frequent conjecture and exaggerations. The idea that Hamilton would have approved of every federal government expansion the past two centuries and that he is "smiling down from the heavens" seeing "his" economic model alive today is a bit absurd. But what the author thinks about Hamilton is irrelevant here. No one knows what he would think and since he is dead we will never know. But is looking at the man's words and actions wrong? I don't think so. Hamilton did indeed support many ideas that are similar to what still goes on today: protectionism, corporate welfare and central banking. The objective truth is that these things have hurt our country and the lesson I took from it is that we should not repeat these mistakes again in the future. I know that capitalism wasn't fully formulated in the late 18th century and that its easy to criticize ideas in hindsight, but unlike the author I am not morally condemning Hamilton. I am seeking objective truth about the demonstrable ill-effects of mercantilist ideas on the economy.

The author praises Hamilton's positive contributions to America (fighting in the Revolutionary War, arguing to ratify the Constitution). I happen to disagree with the author that Hamilton had malicious forethought to cause all the damage that has been done to America by the mercantilist economic system, but again that is not the point. My advice is to approach this book as an economic history of America and to expect to learn how these economic ideas have harmed America. Alexander Hamilton and his "curse" are mere red herrings.

[J. Jones · Rating 5 out of 5]

Most people's understanding of when and how the political divide began has a very shallow scope. Some when asked would pick a point within their own lifetimes, most others would draw it to a particular administration or period within the last hundred years. The most common answers would likely be Johnson's War on Poverty or Roosevelt's New Deal. Some more astute might reach back to the Lincoln administration and the misnamed American Civil War. While those would be getting warmer, they are still several decades away from the origins of the two most significant dissenting schools of American political and economic thought.

In Hamilton's Curse Dr. Thomas DiLorenzo starkly illustrates how we first began on the long road away from the strict constructionist view of the U.S. Constitution that most of its framers strongly backed to where we are today.

Keith Jones
Author of In Due Time
Boys of Diamond Hill: The Lives and Civil War Letters of the Boyd Family of Abbeville County, South Carolina

[Jeffrey Howard · Rating 4 out of 5]

Albeit a bit sensational, DiLorenzo convincingly connects the dots between Hamilton's vision of America and the disastrous mess that has been made of the United States. I wish the book expanded more upon the ideas contained so as to help people less-initiated in economics to more fully understand it.

It breaks my heart to see the vision of Thomas Jefferson cast aside. Despite sounding more like a smear piece of Hamilton at times than an academic treatise, DiLorenzo demonstrates how Hamilton is a representation of all that is wrong with American government and politics today. He is the idol image and father of corporate welfarism, corruption, interventionism, imperialism, and the devastation of noble or less than fortunate people at the hands of the wealthy and powerful few.

[Michael Scharen · Rating 5 out of 5]

DiLorenzo holds nothing back in his straightforward analysis of what we thought was our history. As an economist, he knows what drives history. It is seldom great men and usually the money people behind them. War is extremely expensive and most sane people would not engage in it if they had to pay for it themselves. Hamliton wanted to bring British money manipulation to the newly formed United States. The ink on the Articles of Confederation was barely dry before he was lobbying for a Central Bank. The Bank of North America -- which failed. Then the first Bank of the United States also failed. Delay in chartering the 2nd Bank was the true cause of the War of 1812 -- not the impressment of sailors. DiLorenzo's books are well researched and eye-opening.

[Greg · Rating 3 out of 5]

Interesting analysis of the impact of Alexander Hamilton's policies on our current governmental issues and problems. I was a little doubtful, particularly when the author extended his criticisms of Hamilton to include Abraham Lincoln. By the end of the book, I think that, while I did not agree with the author on all of his theories, his points made me think about our current governmental institutions and how they impact our individual freedoms.

[Rick]

An extraordinary account of how two hundred years ago, Alexander Hamilton set in motion the absolute economic mess that we have today. He believed in big government, subjugation of the people, corporate welfare and a central bank that excessively controls the money supply as dictated by politics, not sound fiscal policy. Should be required reading for all of us. Highly recommend.

[Brian · Rating 5 out of 5]

Absolutely amazing and worth reading. This scathing critique of Alexander Hamilton and his policies will make you think about current issues and the direction of the nation. While I may have some minor disagreements with some of the author's conclusions, he is on point on many of the challenges we face today.

[Lisa]

Why didn't they teach us this kind of history in our public education system? Big government vs individual rights. Lots of juicy fights and great citations for further research. Also an easy read because our history is so interesting and relevant to what is happening today.

[jeannie yingling · Rating 5 out of 5]

Thoroughly enjoyed Hamilton’s Curse.

This book should be required reading for all high school juniors and seniors as well as college freshmen.

I hope one day America returns to more Jeffersonian principles.