What do you think?
Rate this book
Written Out of History: The Forgotten Founders Who Fought Big Government
Senator Mike Lee tells the story of the Founders whose warnings about the dangers of an all-powerful federal government helped shape our Constitution--but are being ignored today.
Today, most Americans are familiar only with the "big names" associated with the Founding - Washington, Adams, Madison, Hamilton and so on. Because we have forgotten so many of our lesser-known Founders, many of whom warned of the dangers of centralized federal power, we have also strayed from the system of limited government prescribed by our Constitution. The resulting imbalance of power, allowed to get worse over decades, has created the problems with executive overreach and the expansive federal bureaucracy that plague America today.
Senator Mike Lee, a champion of constitutionally limited government, now seeks to give these nearly forgotten but far-sighted early American thinkers their proper due. He will introduce readers to the influential, liberty-minded Americans who may not be household names but should be, including:
· Mercy Otis Warren, one of revolutionary America's most prominent female writers and protégé of John Adams who engaged in vigorous debate against the encroachment of federal power and broke with Adams over the Constitution
· Canasatego, an Iroquois chief who taught Benjamin Franklin the basic principles behind the separation of powers in government
· Aaron Burr, whose "trial of the century" in the early 1800s defined the limits of executive power and warned of its potential for abuse
· Elbridge Gerry, who championed individual rights and greater power for the states over the newly formed federal government - and without whom there would be no Bill of Rights.
Written Out of History is not simply a history lesson. By channeling voices from the past, this book will inject renewed passion into the debate over what the Constitution means to us today, and the limits it sets on a power-hungry federal government.
From the Hardcover edition.
Today, most Americans are familiar only with the "big names" associated with the Founding - Washington, Adams, Madison, Hamilton and so on. Because we have forgotten so many of our lesser-known Founders, many of whom warned of the dangers of centralized federal power, we have also strayed from the system of limited government prescribed by our Constitution. The resulting imbalance of power, allowed to get worse over decades, has created the problems with executive overreach and the expansive federal bureaucracy that plague America today.
Senator Mike Lee, a champion of constitutionally limited government, now seeks to give these nearly forgotten but far-sighted early American thinkers their proper due. He will introduce readers to the influential, liberty-minded Americans who may not be household names but should be, including:
· Mercy Otis Warren, one of revolutionary America's most prominent female writers and protégé of John Adams who engaged in vigorous debate against the encroachment of federal power and broke with Adams over the Constitution
· Canasatego, an Iroquois chief who taught Benjamin Franklin the basic principles behind the separation of powers in government
· Aaron Burr, whose "trial of the century" in the early 1800s defined the limits of executive power and warned of its potential for abuse
· Elbridge Gerry, who championed individual rights and greater power for the states over the newly formed federal government - and without whom there would be no Bill of Rights.
Written Out of History is not simply a history lesson. By channeling voices from the past, this book will inject renewed passion into the debate over what the Constitution means to us today, and the limits it sets on a power-hungry federal government.
From the Hardcover edition.
248 pages, Kindle Edition
First published April 18, 2017
304 people are currently reading
988 people want to read
About the author
Mike Lee
5 books47 followersLibrarian Note: There is more than one author in the Goodreads' database with this name.
Mike Lee is a United States Senator from Utah. A member of the Republican Party and an advocate for the founding constitutional principles. He has served in the U.S. Senate since 2011. Lee and his wife Sharon live in Alpine, Utah, with their three children.
Mike Lee is a United States Senator from Utah. A member of the Republican Party and an advocate for the founding constitutional principles. He has served in the U.S. Senate since 2011. Lee and his wife Sharon live in Alpine, Utah, with their three children.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 127 reviews
September 9, 2017
Almost giving this 5 stars for the core of the content, I downgraded by one star only because it is so succinct and pertinent to exact specifics that it can also read, at points, on the dry side. But these people! As far from dry as you can get.
Mike Lee has also written this at one of the most critical junctures in time, too, IMHO. The only one which would have been as intersected with this particular issue would have been the 1930's under FDR. Not even within the Civil War period were the sovereignty of states so decimated by humongous dictates of the massive central government.
The one, the USA government as it is operating now! Nearly all politico powers: individuals in Congress, Executive, AND Judicial branches- they hold cognition to dictating and legislating the exact distant central government minutia laws and regulations on everything from soup to nuts to all citizens while basically exempting themselves. Exactly what the founders feared. That's why the Constitution was voted AGAINST by more than a few founders in its present form. One which ALSO LIMITS BY LIST the specific areas of dictates to be considered of Federal jurisdiction. And which has basically been ignored and redefined endlessly during the last century to form the exact type of central omnipotence that the founders despised.
But to the copy! These individuals, their intriguing histories, biographies of their lives!! Just enthralling to what WAS and what has chosen to be taught about them since. If anything at all. Especially that section on the life of Mum Bett and the rights she claimed. And won. Hers and the stories of James Otis and George Mason. Those three especially!! Why are they not taught as Jefferson has been? Or Franklin? And the irony of all is that Hamilton has been taught as being the champion of large central government. Not only in the play. Taking one paragraph out of the Federalist Papers without any of the long copy of context. He was far, far from wanting a strong central government. Merely wanting identity as one entity and for holding a common money. He was A BANKER, and he and Madison were extremely concerned about the individual rights a gigantic dominating last word "power away" would (and has) diminished to pittance. So it slays me that he is depicted in song as a "BIG GOVERNMENT" fan. He was not.
The characters covered in the book all gave us within the USA (CITIZENS)some essential differences to/from other governments prior to this founding period or observable on other continents in their nations. Why have they been obliterated (NOT TAUGHT) within study of the early USA history? Founders who were often lethal, viscous, domineering for central power in a much wider sense or who got the "approved" onus of good marketing HAVE been? Hmmm!
Strongly recommend this read. Especially and if you only have the patience for half (reading law is difficult and much is exactly that)- read Otis and his trial that gave us the Fourth Amendment. Or George Mason within Judiciary Powers changes and limits. Or Mum Bett with her "Equal, Free, and Independent" ruling for individuals who hold no or little power in their practical applications of work/life. And read how Burr was recorded for "teaching" example and what the actual story of his "after the duel" became.
These men and women covered in this book sacrificed their entire lives. Every method detailed in Alinsky techniques was used against them by multiples when they lived and in history accounts after they died. Death was a real possibility for their individual efforts. Continually. And every economic advantage forsaken in each case. Entire lives given for the causes of individual freedoms against governmental decrees of overreach. But they are basically unsung and only the negative aspects of their characters picked and chosen by our historical interpretations presently.
Many, many quotes I could list.
There are pages and pages of research, reference source materials -but just before they begin at the very end, there is the last paragraph of the book proper:
"America is at a crossroads. The time is coming when the people will need to decide whether to rededicate themselves to our country's founding principles, or to continue down a path of increased executive power and a permanent redefinition of the American Republic. To truly understand that choice, we must heed the words of the our forgotten founders- we must write them back into history."
As a side note, the Jefferson/Burr battles and some of the other despicable practices of these politicians against each other in the Republic's first 40 years were much WORSE than now.
Mike Lee has also written this at one of the most critical junctures in time, too, IMHO. The only one which would have been as intersected with this particular issue would have been the 1930's under FDR. Not even within the Civil War period were the sovereignty of states so decimated by humongous dictates of the massive central government.
The one, the USA government as it is operating now! Nearly all politico powers: individuals in Congress, Executive, AND Judicial branches- they hold cognition to dictating and legislating the exact distant central government minutia laws and regulations on everything from soup to nuts to all citizens while basically exempting themselves. Exactly what the founders feared. That's why the Constitution was voted AGAINST by more than a few founders in its present form. One which ALSO LIMITS BY LIST the specific areas of dictates to be considered of Federal jurisdiction. And which has basically been ignored and redefined endlessly during the last century to form the exact type of central omnipotence that the founders despised.
But to the copy! These individuals, their intriguing histories, biographies of their lives!! Just enthralling to what WAS and what has chosen to be taught about them since. If anything at all. Especially that section on the life of Mum Bett and the rights she claimed. And won. Hers and the stories of James Otis and George Mason. Those three especially!! Why are they not taught as Jefferson has been? Or Franklin? And the irony of all is that Hamilton has been taught as being the champion of large central government. Not only in the play. Taking one paragraph out of the Federalist Papers without any of the long copy of context. He was far, far from wanting a strong central government. Merely wanting identity as one entity and for holding a common money. He was A BANKER, and he and Madison were extremely concerned about the individual rights a gigantic dominating last word "power away" would (and has) diminished to pittance. So it slays me that he is depicted in song as a "BIG GOVERNMENT" fan. He was not.
The characters covered in the book all gave us within the USA (CITIZENS)some essential differences to/from other governments prior to this founding period or observable on other continents in their nations. Why have they been obliterated (NOT TAUGHT) within study of the early USA history? Founders who were often lethal, viscous, domineering for central power in a much wider sense or who got the "approved" onus of good marketing HAVE been? Hmmm!
Strongly recommend this read. Especially and if you only have the patience for half (reading law is difficult and much is exactly that)- read Otis and his trial that gave us the Fourth Amendment. Or George Mason within Judiciary Powers changes and limits. Or Mum Bett with her "Equal, Free, and Independent" ruling for individuals who hold no or little power in their practical applications of work/life. And read how Burr was recorded for "teaching" example and what the actual story of his "after the duel" became.
These men and women covered in this book sacrificed their entire lives. Every method detailed in Alinsky techniques was used against them by multiples when they lived and in history accounts after they died. Death was a real possibility for their individual efforts. Continually. And every economic advantage forsaken in each case. Entire lives given for the causes of individual freedoms against governmental decrees of overreach. But they are basically unsung and only the negative aspects of their characters picked and chosen by our historical interpretations presently.
Many, many quotes I could list.
There are pages and pages of research, reference source materials -but just before they begin at the very end, there is the last paragraph of the book proper:
"America is at a crossroads. The time is coming when the people will need to decide whether to rededicate themselves to our country's founding principles, or to continue down a path of increased executive power and a permanent redefinition of the American Republic. To truly understand that choice, we must heed the words of the our forgotten founders- we must write them back into history."
As a side note, the Jefferson/Burr battles and some of the other despicable practices of these politicians against each other in the Republic's first 40 years were much WORSE than now.
May 31, 2017
In college I was an American Studies major, and I earned a MA in English with a focus on American literature. Diversifying the canon and exploring alternatives to dominant historical and critical narratives was a pretty big deal at the time (still is from what I gather), so I spent a lot of time learning about figures, works, and stories that had been left out. Despite my background in what I consider to be a pretty comprehensive study of American history and culture, Mike Lee has managed to find a case of American Revolution period figures that I knew next to nothing about.
While I had heard of some of the figures in this book (Aaron Burr, George Mason, and Canasatego) I still didn't know much about them. This book was my first introduction to Luther Martin, James Otis, Mercy Otis Warren, and Mum Betts. Lee ties all of their stories together by focusing on how each of these figures uniquely fought to limit government power in their time.
At this point, it should be noted that Mike Lee is a sitting U.S. Senator, and he is notoriously conservative. In this sense his choice in highlighting these stories in a book is a political choice, but this doesn't make them less important. But this hasn't stopped the real "historians" on Twitter to lament that others are publishing books in their field and [gasp] actually selling them:
It is true that this is "pop history," which means it's a book you could read in one or two sittings. It is written in an accessible style. It isn't too dry or dense. But, there are still over 40 pages of footnotes, so if it is pop history it is responsible and articulate pop history. And it is filling a gap, whether intentionally created or not, that isn't often filled by those who study our history, academically or otherwise.
With this acknowledgment, if you were to read the entire twitter conversation referenced above, you will see evidence of what many will claim is the more sensational or politically charged premise of this book: that progressives have intentionally written certain figures out of history to advance an agenda.
Where it's one thing to prove what these historical figures believed and to analyze their impact (they were prolific writers in an age where many were hypersensitive to how they would be perceived through the ages), it is more difficult to prove that they were intentionally left out .
In the Twitter conversation above, you find a community of self-proclaimed gatekeepers who have taken it upon themselves to decide who gets to tell the story of our history. They suggest creating a website where they critique works of "pop history" (read: works of history that people will actually buy and read) when these works depart from the orthodoxies of the field. While the motives of the twitterstorians are likely rooted in a sincere preservation of their own livelihood, that they seem to think active suppression of opposing viewpoints is a public good worth pursuing, maybe Mike Lee is on to something.
The first group of people who will buy, read, and enjoy this book and tell their friends and family about it are those who believe the academic study of history has become dominated by those who identify of left-leaning or progressive, and that this situation needs to be balanced out.
The second group of people who will like this book are those who have become fans of the "pop history" hit Broadway musical, Hamilton. The popularity of this musical, and the number of people who are going out and buying, then slogging through (e.g. yours truly) Ron Chernow's massive autobiography of Alexander Hamilton suggests there is a latent demand for revisiting the Revolutionary Period of American history.
Alexander Hamilton
The irony of Hamilton's popularity is that a figure who was right under our noses the whole time actually has a very interesting history in ways that are strikingly poignant today. Regardless of your politics, Mike Lee's book strikes the same chord. Lately, this is a genre of history that I have really enjoyed reading about, and this book was a worthwhile read.
While I had heard of some of the figures in this book (Aaron Burr, George Mason, and Canasatego) I still didn't know much about them. This book was my first introduction to Luther Martin, James Otis, Mercy Otis Warren, and Mum Betts. Lee ties all of their stories together by focusing on how each of these figures uniquely fought to limit government power in their time.
At this point, it should be noted that Mike Lee is a sitting U.S. Senator, and he is notoriously conservative. In this sense his choice in highlighting these stories in a book is a political choice, but this doesn't make them less important. But this hasn't stopped the real "historians" on Twitter to lament that others are publishing books in their field and [gasp] actually selling them:
Oh, dear heavens, #EarlyAm #twitterstorians: @SenMikeLee has a new book on "forgotten founders who fought big government." pic.twitter.com/d11bd2YwJB
— Christopher Jones (@ccjones13) May 24, 2017
It is true that this is "pop history," which means it's a book you could read in one or two sittings. It is written in an accessible style. It isn't too dry or dense. But, there are still over 40 pages of footnotes, so if it is pop history it is responsible and articulate pop history. And it is filling a gap, whether intentionally created or not, that isn't often filled by those who study our history, academically or otherwise.
With this acknowledgment, if you were to read the entire twitter conversation referenced above, you will see evidence of what many will claim is the more sensational or politically charged premise of this book: that progressives have intentionally written certain figures out of history to advance an agenda.
Where it's one thing to prove what these historical figures believed and to analyze their impact (they were prolific writers in an age where many were hypersensitive to how they would be perceived through the ages), it is more difficult to prove that they were intentionally left out .
In the Twitter conversation above, you find a community of self-proclaimed gatekeepers who have taken it upon themselves to decide who gets to tell the story of our history. They suggest creating a website where they critique works of "pop history" (read: works of history that people will actually buy and read) when these works depart from the orthodoxies of the field. While the motives of the twitterstorians are likely rooted in a sincere preservation of their own livelihood, that they seem to think active suppression of opposing viewpoints is a public good worth pursuing, maybe Mike Lee is on to something.
The first group of people who will buy, read, and enjoy this book and tell their friends and family about it are those who believe the academic study of history has become dominated by those who identify of left-leaning or progressive, and that this situation needs to be balanced out.
The second group of people who will like this book are those who have become fans of the "pop history" hit Broadway musical, Hamilton. The popularity of this musical, and the number of people who are going out and buying, then slogging through (e.g. yours truly) Ron Chernow's massive autobiography of Alexander Hamilton suggests there is a latent demand for revisiting the Revolutionary Period of American history.
Alexander Hamilton
The irony of Hamilton's popularity is that a figure who was right under our noses the whole time actually has a very interesting history in ways that are strikingly poignant today. Regardless of your politics, Mike Lee's book strikes the same chord. Lately, this is a genre of history that I have really enjoyed reading about, and this book was a worthwhile read.
August 20, 2017
Easy read. Mike Lee is actually a good writer and a great Senator. He made these forgotten accounts in history come to life. He will make you question why such important people and events are not common knowledge and why the causes, which were so foundational to who we are as a nation, are relegated to the fringes of political thought today.
October 21, 2018
Lee seems to say that if only these few people had been remembered, American politics would not be screwed up today. But it’s much bigger than just remembering certain figures of the past. It’s about remembering ideas from the past. So Lee’s time devoted to describing the life stories and actions of these people seems like a waste of time, since he doesn’t connect it to the bigger “idea problems” going on today. He needed to spend less time on boring biographical details and more time on making connections from those actions to current events. He starts to do this in the conclusion chapter, but it’s not enough.
June 3, 2021
This book is not history. There are many instances where Lee makes up events, narratives, and thought processes that were not recorded, most notably, he claims to know what was going through the head of Elbridge Gerry as he was dying. Lee also has some very obvious factual errors, like listing Governor of NY as an office held by Aaron Burr, and representing John Adams as having attended the Constitutional Convention. The author also leaves out facts that don’t fit his view of the historical figures addressed and mischaracterizes the positions of many of the founders. Lee is clearly not equipped to be an even half-way decent historian and demonstrates a willingness to obscure and twist the truth to suit his purposes.
The book purports to discuss “founders” who were written out of history. However, my history courses covered most, if not all of the figures he claims have been forgotten. Some of the figures have multiple books written on them. (For example, Lee would have benefited by reading “American Emperor” before writing about Aaron Burr.)
Beyond the error ridden and factually suspect aspects of this book, Lee also excuses treason and makes it clear that had he been at the convention in 1787 he would not have signed the Constitution and that he would have fought against ratification in the states. These views were exceptionally surprising coming from someone who claims to love that founding document. I was also surprised by the types of attacks he makes on Washington, Adams, Jefferson, Hamilton, and Madison. All were flawed, but Lee attacks them for their strengths more than their weaknesses.
The only thing somewhat redeeming is that Lee attempts to reinsert women and minorities into a narrative that they are too often left out of. The existence of slavery and unequal treatment based on gender are blemishes on the founding generations extraordinary record and it is good to highlight that those degrading beliefs were not universal in that time period. However, any good done is overshadowed by the dishonest use of history.
The book purports to discuss “founders” who were written out of history. However, my history courses covered most, if not all of the figures he claims have been forgotten. Some of the figures have multiple books written on them. (For example, Lee would have benefited by reading “American Emperor” before writing about Aaron Burr.)
Beyond the error ridden and factually suspect aspects of this book, Lee also excuses treason and makes it clear that had he been at the convention in 1787 he would not have signed the Constitution and that he would have fought against ratification in the states. These views were exceptionally surprising coming from someone who claims to love that founding document. I was also surprised by the types of attacks he makes on Washington, Adams, Jefferson, Hamilton, and Madison. All were flawed, but Lee attacks them for their strengths more than their weaknesses.
The only thing somewhat redeeming is that Lee attempts to reinsert women and minorities into a narrative that they are too often left out of. The existence of slavery and unequal treatment based on gender are blemishes on the founding generations extraordinary record and it is good to highlight that those degrading beliefs were not universal in that time period. However, any good done is overshadowed by the dishonest use of history.
April 17, 2018
Useful information presented in a highly political manner. Senator Lee is (my definition) a tea party libertarian, opposed to an overreaching federal government. This stance is more the theme of the book as opposed to the historical figures discussed.
I find it difficult for me to focus on the book itself, given its propaganda bent and background of the author. According to Wikipedia, Lee was born upper income and upper class. He went from college to law school to a clerkship at a district court and thence up the legal career ladder. Also well known for representing the interests of Energy Solutions Inc., a company wishing to process and store Italian radioactive waste in his home state, Utah.
Given Lee’s history, I can certainly understand his desire to keep government flaccid. Maybe it’s just me, but I doubt the Senator has ever lived in a mobile home, been unable to afford health insurance, or worried about how he was going to feed his children. No wonder he feels the way he does.
I respect his opinion. I don’t agree with it.
I am always suspicious about propaganda presented as history. On several occasions, FDR and Barack Obama are used as examples of overreaching executives. (No Republicans apparently ever did). President Obama was described as “kingly” in his use of executive orders as a means of overreach. George W. Bush actually issued more executive orders than Obama, and Bill Clinton issued far more than either. Given that Obama is singled out for blame, might the word “kingly” actually mean “uppity”?
There is history in this book, but a winnowing is in order.
I find it difficult for me to focus on the book itself, given its propaganda bent and background of the author. According to Wikipedia, Lee was born upper income and upper class. He went from college to law school to a clerkship at a district court and thence up the legal career ladder. Also well known for representing the interests of Energy Solutions Inc., a company wishing to process and store Italian radioactive waste in his home state, Utah.
Given Lee’s history, I can certainly understand his desire to keep government flaccid. Maybe it’s just me, but I doubt the Senator has ever lived in a mobile home, been unable to afford health insurance, or worried about how he was going to feed his children. No wonder he feels the way he does.
I respect his opinion. I don’t agree with it.
I am always suspicious about propaganda presented as history. On several occasions, FDR and Barack Obama are used as examples of overreaching executives. (No Republicans apparently ever did). President Obama was described as “kingly” in his use of executive orders as a means of overreach. George W. Bush actually issued more executive orders than Obama, and Bill Clinton issued far more than either. Given that Obama is singled out for blame, might the word “kingly” actually mean “uppity”?
There is history in this book, but a winnowing is in order.
November 12, 2021
Found this book at a thrift store and figured it was worth reading. In the end, it was definitely an eye-opener as I haven't heard of such people as: Mercy Otis Warren and Mum Bett. The subject matter was a great reminder to remain active and diligent in maintaining our freedom. Over the course of time, those very freedoms have slowly eroded to create the very environment in which we now find ourselves. Please read for a brief survey in American history. You won't regret doing so!
May 27, 2020
I started this book hopeful. I was looking forward to knowing more about Aaron Burr and Elizabeth Freeman and the Otis siblings. Though I was never a great fan of George Mason or James Otis I was curious. And I knew next to nothing about Canassatego or Elbridge Gerry and was eager to hear their stories.
I knew that the author was a conservative politician. But hey, I do often listen to/watch/read things I know that I’m likely to disagree with. And I like to read essays with tightly defended theses, thoughtfully argued and carefully cited. Those are, in my experience, often written by conservatives. It’s good for my brain and sometimes—not often but sometimes—I change my mind.
This book was not that.
And I like historic fiction. This collection of essays purported to be a collection of essays but walked a fine line with historic fiction, often—with the careful use of adjectives and adverbs and imagined conversations—with landing on the fiction side.
Two examples:
Aaron Burr, within a year of killing Alexander Hamilton in a dual while Vice President, and while there are murder indictments out for him in both New York and New Jersey, Lee touts his work at a trial of a Supreme Court Justice by saying he studiously resisted Jefferson because of his “respect for the rule of law.” Did he think no one would wonder if this concern for rule of law might include murder? I know I raised an eyebrow.
He describes Canassatego, a sophisticated thinker who has been in contact with European culture his entire life in words that might have been found in a 1950s western…that he knew white men had “wood and metal sticks that made loud nosies” and that “he had never wandered to the great river…or the shining sea even farther to the West.” At best it’s naive….at best. And it’s certainly inaccurate about Native people’s understanding.
When I start a book, I feel some obligation so even with all that I was shouldering though. But then his description of Jefferson’s political machinations (and I’m no huge fan of Jefferson and I must say, even if I was, that I can take it when someone dumps on historic figures) is not necessary wrong—many of those “founding fathers" did not play well with others after the Revolution—if exaggerated. But everything he accuses Jefferson of the current administration has done two fold. Then this morning I read he was a Trump supporter of the current president. And I just could not reconcile those two things.
Absolutely not recommended.
I knew that the author was a conservative politician. But hey, I do often listen to/watch/read things I know that I’m likely to disagree with. And I like to read essays with tightly defended theses, thoughtfully argued and carefully cited. Those are, in my experience, often written by conservatives. It’s good for my brain and sometimes—not often but sometimes—I change my mind.
This book was not that.
And I like historic fiction. This collection of essays purported to be a collection of essays but walked a fine line with historic fiction, often—with the careful use of adjectives and adverbs and imagined conversations—with landing on the fiction side.
Two examples:
Aaron Burr, within a year of killing Alexander Hamilton in a dual while Vice President, and while there are murder indictments out for him in both New York and New Jersey, Lee touts his work at a trial of a Supreme Court Justice by saying he studiously resisted Jefferson because of his “respect for the rule of law.” Did he think no one would wonder if this concern for rule of law might include murder? I know I raised an eyebrow.
He describes Canassatego, a sophisticated thinker who has been in contact with European culture his entire life in words that might have been found in a 1950s western…that he knew white men had “wood and metal sticks that made loud nosies” and that “he had never wandered to the great river…or the shining sea even farther to the West.” At best it’s naive….at best. And it’s certainly inaccurate about Native people’s understanding.
When I start a book, I feel some obligation so even with all that I was shouldering though. But then his description of Jefferson’s political machinations (and I’m no huge fan of Jefferson and I must say, even if I was, that I can take it when someone dumps on historic figures) is not necessary wrong—many of those “founding fathers" did not play well with others after the Revolution—if exaggerated. But everything he accuses Jefferson of the current administration has done two fold. Then this morning I read he was a Trump supporter of the current president. And I just could not reconcile those two things.
Absolutely not recommended.
June 27, 2018
A very interesting and well written educational book. The Founders really had a far seeing understanding of government and human nature. Thank God for the persistent debate and arguments of these forgotten men and women to ensure the Bill of Rights was included into the Constitution.
August 9, 2018
This well researched book tells about little known men and women involved in the formation of our country. Aaron Burr, who's generally portrayed as a villain, had a long and illustrious career in public service. I particularly liked the story of Mum Bet, an illiterate Massachusetts slave who overheard her master discussing the pre-Revolutionary War Massachusetts constitution that stated that everyone was born free. She got a lawyer to take her case to the Massachusetts Supreme Court and won freedom for herself and a fellow slave - even with reparations! There was never another slave in Massachusetts! Others who have been ignored by history fought hard against a strong central government and for individual rights. Fortunately they were able to get the first ten amendments made part of the Constitution. The author, Senator Mike Lee, is a proponent of individual liberties and a smaller central government and these stories illustrate the basis of his beliefs. Well written and very interesting!
January 26, 2020
A sermon disguised as a history book, this book is a celebration of every person Lee could cherry pick out of history who preferred small government. The central thesis in this hackstory is that these brave patriots were erased from history for the audacity to demand individual rights. At one point he goes so far as to wonder why more tourists go to the home of George Washington than George Mason. Clearly there has been a conspiracy in his mind to forget these individuals! Now if this thesis was provable, he could demonstrate how they were mentioned fewer and fewer times by historians who clearly have all supported big government. Instead of evidence to prove his thesis, Lee just sprinkles in fiction. We are treated to completely invented narratives where we are privileged to individuals thoughts. He finished with the moral to his tale, “big government bad and I don’t like Obama or his healthcare plan.”
July 15, 2017
A good book that was interestingly written but the title was an overstatement. The people were not written out of history, they were not of the caliber of the Founding Fathers and mostly were famous for a few things. The people written about in the book were not erased from history like in the novel 1984 or people in Soviet Russia.
June 22, 2017
I really enjoyed this book. My only complaint is that I wish it was longer.
I will definitely try to read more about the many of these founding men and women. I also want to read more about the debates and disagreements about the Constitution and the inclusion of the Bill of Rights.
I will definitely try to read more about the many of these founding men and women. I also want to read more about the debates and disagreements about the Constitution and the inclusion of the Bill of Rights.
April 8, 2018
Very good mini-biographical portraits of lesser known and possibly unknown founders, framers and citizens who stood in defense of liberty and how their efforts and concerns are relevant in today’s political climate.
July 15, 2017
A great book about the forgotten faces of our quest for independence. Vital part of "civic education"--so necessary today.
March 6, 2018
This is a must read for every American citizen and voter. It is time that "We the people"; become "We the people" once again.
August 21, 2020
The author writes about people in history you may have read about in a little blip in a history book or perhaps not at all.
Aaron Burr experienced some falsified slander (Wilkinson) and abuse of executive power via Thomas Jefferson.
Luther Martin was a brilliant mind, though rarely sober. I can only imagine how intelligent this man must have been while sober.
Mercy otis Warren was friends with John and Abigail Adams and wasn't afraid to cross John when he was crossing the line, so to speak. She believed in protecting the rights of individuals.
Canasatego and the Iroqois Confederation. Ben Franklin borrowed some wisdom from that.
Elbridge Gerry signed the preamble to the Declaration of Independence (1776), but refused to trust the Constitution because it didn't include a bill of rights.
Mum Bett was a slave, who sued her "master", after his wife, her original "owner" tried to abuse/strike Mum's sister. She won, but her "master" had appealed, but retracted and she was free. She changed her name.
James Otis was brother to Mercy and a catalyst for the fourth amendment, being concerned with the abuse of (British) custom officials breaking into someone's premises and rifle through his papers, etc.
George Mason was a defender of individual and economic freedom. If the rest of the founding fathers had listened to his intelligence, the civil war most likely never would have happened.
One, I didn't know the colonists had requested to abolish slavery, but the British parliament had denied this request.
Two, once the colony's had become independent, they should have abolished slavery. It's not as cut and dry as south bad, north good. But George Mason was a very insightful man.
Three, the U.S. education system is failing to teach students about civics and of course, because the more naive a citizen is, the more their rights can be taken away.
Four, I recommend this book.
Aaron Burr experienced some falsified slander (Wilkinson) and abuse of executive power via Thomas Jefferson.
Luther Martin was a brilliant mind, though rarely sober. I can only imagine how intelligent this man must have been while sober.
Mercy otis Warren was friends with John and Abigail Adams and wasn't afraid to cross John when he was crossing the line, so to speak. She believed in protecting the rights of individuals.
Canasatego and the Iroqois Confederation. Ben Franklin borrowed some wisdom from that.
Elbridge Gerry signed the preamble to the Declaration of Independence (1776), but refused to trust the Constitution because it didn't include a bill of rights.
Mum Bett was a slave, who sued her "master", after his wife, her original "owner" tried to abuse/strike Mum's sister. She won, but her "master" had appealed, but retracted and she was free. She changed her name.
James Otis was brother to Mercy and a catalyst for the fourth amendment, being concerned with the abuse of (British) custom officials breaking into someone's premises and rifle through his papers, etc.
George Mason was a defender of individual and economic freedom. If the rest of the founding fathers had listened to his intelligence, the civil war most likely never would have happened.
One, I didn't know the colonists had requested to abolish slavery, but the British parliament had denied this request.
Two, once the colony's had become independent, they should have abolished slavery. It's not as cut and dry as south bad, north good. But George Mason was a very insightful man.
Three, the U.S. education system is failing to teach students about civics and of course, because the more naive a citizen is, the more their rights can be taken away.
Four, I recommend this book.
July 30, 2022
Senator Lee give you a chapter on eight principled people from the 1700s, but whom most people know nothing about, including:
Canasatego, the Iroquois chief who explained his confederation of tribes and inspired Franklin's concept of a federated nation ("Join or Die").
Elbridge Gerry, who refused to sign the Constitution for lacking a Bill of Rights.
Mum Bett, an enslaved woman from Massachusetts who sued for her freedom, and won! She changed her name to Elizabeth Freeman.
James Otis, whose fierce criticism of British writs of assistance (unlimited search warrants), led to our Fourth Amendment.
Lee's common thread is that each of these people took a principled stand against the abusive consentration of power, but history tends to remember those who wield power rather than those who warn against it. A constitutional republic is built on the assumption that government must be limited. These eight individuals staked their reputations on this belief.
Canasatego, the Iroquois chief who explained his confederation of tribes and inspired Franklin's concept of a federated nation ("Join or Die").
Elbridge Gerry, who refused to sign the Constitution for lacking a Bill of Rights.
Mum Bett, an enslaved woman from Massachusetts who sued for her freedom, and won! She changed her name to Elizabeth Freeman.
James Otis, whose fierce criticism of British writs of assistance (unlimited search warrants), led to our Fourth Amendment.
Lee's common thread is that each of these people took a principled stand against the abusive consentration of power, but history tends to remember those who wield power rather than those who warn against it. A constitutional republic is built on the assumption that government must be limited. These eight individuals staked their reputations on this belief.
June 4, 2018
Interesting portraits of various 'forgotten founders' and how their lives or points of view demonstrated a concern for an overreaching, centralized government: Aaron Burr (!), Luther Martin, Mercy Otis Warren, Canastego, Elbridge Gerry, Mum Bett, James Otis, and George Mason. The various stories are a bit uneven in quality, but not in interest. Still, this popular history is riddled with inaccuracies (Aaron Burr, for example, never served as Governor of New York), odd repetitions, and slightly misplaced emphases. The final chapter is an extended -- and unnecessary -- rant by the author against former President Obama and his policies, accompanied by a swipe or two at FDR. For me, this partisanship rather marred the effect of all that had preceded. (Some of Senator Lee's comments contra Alexander Hamilton, while perhaps topical, also seem misplaced.)
December 9, 2018
A good informative look at several persons not remembered from early efforts to create our Constitution.
August 9, 2019
A great companion to studying the Federalist and Anti-Federalist papers.
July 4, 2019
As many have pointed out, the content of the book is fantastic and needs to be taught in public schools. We need to know our history. But Lee isn't a great writer; he just kind of moves from fact to fact without adding any connective tissue to it.
After every chapter I ended up finding short 10-15 minute videos on YouTube for that connective tissue.
Still, the message of the book is way too important to pass over it just because of Lee's lack of writing talent. Just be prepared to take a chapter at a time with a few days break in between each.
After every chapter I ended up finding short 10-15 minute videos on YouTube for that connective tissue.
Still, the message of the book is way too important to pass over it just because of Lee's lack of writing talent. Just be prepared to take a chapter at a time with a few days break in between each.
January 10, 2022
Written Out of History:
The book is written on the premise that the victor writes history, leaving some very heroic stories untold…or under emphasized.
I enjoyed learning more about some of the founding generation which is not normally included in other histories.
I do not agree with all of the points (I still don’t like Aaron Burr) but the information was compelling. And I do agree we are losing our individual rights.
The book is written on the premise that the victor writes history, leaving some very heroic stories untold…or under emphasized.
I enjoyed learning more about some of the founding generation which is not normally included in other histories.
I do not agree with all of the points (I still don’t like Aaron Burr) but the information was compelling. And I do agree we are losing our individual rights.
June 23, 2017
Well written and important book
Senator Lee's recent effort is an easy and interesting read. But this is an important work that should be required in high school curricula. Lee provides an immeasurable service of documenting various Americans who influenced the thought processes and vision in the development of the US Constitution.
Lee does not engage in legalese. Rather he delivers heartwarming stories of males and females, including a slave, in their journey to secure rights, or defend against an oppressive central government. The research behind the book is impressive and of high quality.
Lee clearly demonstrates Americans of all types were engaged with how the government protected basic liberties. The concerns they held in the 18th Century resonate in the 21st Century. Lee is bipartisan in the condemnation of officials who allow too much power to the Feds. Whether under Republican or Democrat control, the Federal Government practices an over reach that would offend these common, but intelligent, ancestors.
Yes, the Senator editorializes. But Americans who are shocked by federal regulations that hurt small businesses, with the activities of the NSA, FBI wiretapping of journalists, and too many Executive Orders (especially those that target religious minorities), will sympathize with his comments.
As Lee documents, our Constitution is not the product of a bunch old white guys in a cramped room in Philadelphia. Rather, this remarkable institution was a reflection of an organic set of beliefs held by millions-rich, poor, male, female, white, people of color, enslaved, free, illiterate and educated.
I am grateful for this expansion of my knowledge of the Constitution, and recommend the book with enthusiasm.
Senator Lee's recent effort is an easy and interesting read. But this is an important work that should be required in high school curricula. Lee provides an immeasurable service of documenting various Americans who influenced the thought processes and vision in the development of the US Constitution.
Lee does not engage in legalese. Rather he delivers heartwarming stories of males and females, including a slave, in their journey to secure rights, or defend against an oppressive central government. The research behind the book is impressive and of high quality.
Lee clearly demonstrates Americans of all types were engaged with how the government protected basic liberties. The concerns they held in the 18th Century resonate in the 21st Century. Lee is bipartisan in the condemnation of officials who allow too much power to the Feds. Whether under Republican or Democrat control, the Federal Government practices an over reach that would offend these common, but intelligent, ancestors.
Yes, the Senator editorializes. But Americans who are shocked by federal regulations that hurt small businesses, with the activities of the NSA, FBI wiretapping of journalists, and too many Executive Orders (especially those that target religious minorities), will sympathize with his comments.
As Lee documents, our Constitution is not the product of a bunch old white guys in a cramped room in Philadelphia. Rather, this remarkable institution was a reflection of an organic set of beliefs held by millions-rich, poor, male, female, white, people of color, enslaved, free, illiterate and educated.
I am grateful for this expansion of my knowledge of the Constitution, and recommend the book with enthusiasm.
July 8, 2017
It is unfortunate that many historical figures in American History have been forgotten or "written out of history" like Senator Lee says. American History is something that we must know if we are to defend the Constitution of the United States. We must know the true and complete story of our nations founding. This was a fascinating easy read about some of those founders, who contributed immensely to the Republic even though they aren't household names compared to other founders. I enjoyed reading about these founders and I'm glad Senator Lee told their stories.
The debate between the Federalists and Anti-Federalists during the ratification of the Constitution is an interesting debate that I have enjoyed studying. A bill of rights was necessary and I'm glad we have it. On this point I agree with those who were wary of the Constitution. But overall I would consider myself a Federalist and I believe in Federalism. Even though history favors the Federalists I believe there should be a balanced view and that's one reason I'm grateful for this book. However I believe the view in this book could have been more balanced and I feel like the Federalist position was discounted. I think the Senator could have made it more clear that both sides of the debate were heroes and they helped form the greatest republic on earth. Overall I think this was a great book but while telling these stories the author could have been more balanced. Senator Lee is my former U.S. Senator and he is one of the greatest statesmen in the Senate right now. Read his stuff!
The debate between the Federalists and Anti-Federalists during the ratification of the Constitution is an interesting debate that I have enjoyed studying. A bill of rights was necessary and I'm glad we have it. On this point I agree with those who were wary of the Constitution. But overall I would consider myself a Federalist and I believe in Federalism. Even though history favors the Federalists I believe there should be a balanced view and that's one reason I'm grateful for this book. However I believe the view in this book could have been more balanced and I feel like the Federalist position was discounted. I think the Senator could have made it more clear that both sides of the debate were heroes and they helped form the greatest republic on earth. Overall I think this was a great book but while telling these stories the author could have been more balanced. Senator Lee is my former U.S. Senator and he is one of the greatest statesmen in the Senate right now. Read his stuff!
September 16, 2017
Lee shares real stories of people from the Revolution times who are forgotten in our history. Highlighted individuals include Aaron Burr, Jefferson as it relates to him succumbing to tyrannical Executive power, Luther Martin, Mercy Otis Warren, Iroquois Nation leader Canasatego, Eldridge Gerry, Mum Bett a.k.a. Elizabeth Freeman, James Otis, and George Mason. We are not taught much about them, as he argues, because they are "on the wrong side of history" and challenged the idea of a strong, central government. The Constitution, as remarkable as any achievement in human history, erroneously did not explicitly specify certain restrictions on the federal government to keep it from becoming an overreaching, oppressive Leviathan. These forgotten founders fought AGAINST the idea of a big government, as the subtitle says, and fought FOR rights of states and citizens with specific reasons for doing so. Ultimately, because of their relentless efforts, we did receive the promise and ratification of the Bill of Rights in the first Congress. I opine this book is essential to any citizen with a conservative subscription to government and undying appreciation for FEDERALISM, individual freedom, natural law, and private property rights. Additionally, anyone interested in the Bill of Rights would enjoy the read.
August 28, 2017
Senator Mike Lee did two books fairly closely together - this one has some great information about people important to our Constitutional history but whom you may not know much about. For example, you know something about Aaron Burr but probably not a lot about Mum Best (Elizabeth Freeman), or Luther Martin or even George Mason.
Lee has some good history here although the book dramatizes some of what must have been the discussions at the time. Mercy Otis Warren, Canastego, and James Otis are three that I did not know much about.
Luther Martin was the long time AG of Maryland and was an active participant in the Constitutional debates - according to Lee he was a heavy imbiber and a contentious sort. The book also highlights the roles of people like Eldridge Gerry and Benjamin Franklin.
The book is a good reminder of the breadth of contributions to the development of our American system. This is light reading but very informative.
Lee has some good history here although the book dramatizes some of what must have been the discussions at the time. Mercy Otis Warren, Canastego, and James Otis are three that I did not know much about.
Luther Martin was the long time AG of Maryland and was an active participant in the Constitutional debates - according to Lee he was a heavy imbiber and a contentious sort. The book also highlights the roles of people like Eldridge Gerry and Benjamin Franklin.
The book is a good reminder of the breadth of contributions to the development of our American system. This is light reading but very informative.
January 22, 2018
Fascinating historical read by Senator Mike Lee. Most politicians avoid historical books because they have to do research and not just write about their own ideals. This book was well written and shared new insights on these forgotten historical figures. I was not familiar with many of the names provided in this book. The main theme focuses on the fight against an ever increasing federal government.
August 3, 2017
Fascinating read! The author really made you feel like you were living in the 18th century. It was great learning about some of the characters that were written out of history and I'm glad I read the book!
August 22, 2017
Wow! A LessonAbout Freedom
Senator Lee has provided all Americans with an important restating of the principles of freedom. This book should be read by every citizen, especially those that have sold out to Progressive thought.
Senator Lee has provided all Americans with an important restating of the principles of freedom. This book should be read by every citizen, especially those that have sold out to Progressive thought.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 127 reviews