What do you think?
Rate this book
Taming Democracy: "The People," the Founders, and the Troubled Ending of the American Revolution
Americans are fond of reflecting upon the Founding Fathers, the noble group of men who came together to force out the tyranny of the British and bring democracy to the land. Unfortunately, as Terry Bouton shows in this highly provocative first book, the Revolutionary elite often seemed as determined to squash democracy after the war as they were to support it before.
Centering on Pennsylvania, the symbolic and logistical center of the Revolution, Bouton shows how this radical shift in ideology spelled tragedy for hundreds of common people. Leading up to the Revolution, Pennsylvanians were united in their opinion that "the people" (i.e. white men) should be given access to the political system, and that some degree of wealth equality (i.e. among white men) was required to ensure that political freedom prevailed. As the war ended, Pennsylvania's elites began brushing aside these ideas, using their political power to pass laws to enrich their own estates and hinder political organization by their opponents. By the 1780s, they had reenacted many of the same laws that they had gone to war to abolish, returning Pennsylvania to a state of economic depression and political hegemony. This unhappy situation led directly to the Whiskey and Fries rebellions, popular uprisings both put down by federal armies.
Bouton's work reveals a unique perspective, showing intimately how the war and the events that followed affected poor farmers and working people. Bouton introduces us to unsung heroes from this time--farmers, weavers, and tailors who put their lives on hold to fight to save democracy from the forces of "united avarice." We also get a starkly new look at some familiar characters from the Revolution, including Benjamin Franklin, Alexander Hamilton, and George Washington, who Bouton strives to make readers see as real, flawed people, blinded by their own sense of entitlement.
Taming Democracy represents a turning point in how we view the outcomes of the Revolutionary War and the motivations of the powerful men who led it. Its eye-opening revelations and insights make it an essential read for all readers with a passion for uncovering the true history of America.
Centering on Pennsylvania, the symbolic and logistical center of the Revolution, Bouton shows how this radical shift in ideology spelled tragedy for hundreds of common people. Leading up to the Revolution, Pennsylvanians were united in their opinion that "the people" (i.e. white men) should be given access to the political system, and that some degree of wealth equality (i.e. among white men) was required to ensure that political freedom prevailed. As the war ended, Pennsylvania's elites began brushing aside these ideas, using their political power to pass laws to enrich their own estates and hinder political organization by their opponents. By the 1780s, they had reenacted many of the same laws that they had gone to war to abolish, returning Pennsylvania to a state of economic depression and political hegemony. This unhappy situation led directly to the Whiskey and Fries rebellions, popular uprisings both put down by federal armies.
Bouton's work reveals a unique perspective, showing intimately how the war and the events that followed affected poor farmers and working people. Bouton introduces us to unsung heroes from this time--farmers, weavers, and tailors who put their lives on hold to fight to save democracy from the forces of "united avarice." We also get a starkly new look at some familiar characters from the Revolution, including Benjamin Franklin, Alexander Hamilton, and George Washington, who Bouton strives to make readers see as real, flawed people, blinded by their own sense of entitlement.
Taming Democracy represents a turning point in how we view the outcomes of the Revolutionary War and the motivations of the powerful men who led it. Its eye-opening revelations and insights make it an essential read for all readers with a passion for uncovering the true history of America.
344 pages, Hardcover
First published July 12, 2007
19 people are currently reading
284 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 18 of 18 reviews
i-swear-i-ll-finish-it-one-day
August 10, 2009I think it's going to be difficult for me to rate/review this book because I've actually had Dr. Bouton as a professor. So when I read this book I hear his voice and see him bouncing around the classroom and doing his accents and making jokes about Gouverneur Morris.
September 25, 2008
The author uses Pennsylvania as the lens through which to examine the causes of the Revolutionary War, the ideals that backed the move for independence, and how those ideals were subsequently limited and contained in the adoption of new state and national constitutions.
In years leading up to the revolution, both the gentry and the common people came to embrace a broad conviction that democracy is everyman’s right and that concentration of wealth was incompatible with democracy in the long run. Of course, by everyman’s right, they meant to exclude women. And everyman also excluded every man that wasn’t white. Still it was a powerful ideal, enough to inspire a successful revolution.
But something funny happened along the way. The gentry, seeing an active democracy up close, didn’t like what they saw. And officers of our army got used to luxury and privilege from hanging out with French officers.
The book points out the key role of debt, credit and availability of cash in leading up to the revolution. Much of the impetus of the war was driven by the effort by the British to raise funds through taxes in a time when circulating cash was very limited (due to poorly conceived policies limiting paper money) This lead to boatloads of bankruptcies, foreclosures and forced farm auctions.
During the war, the colonies financed the rebellion with borrowed money. Soldiers were paid with IOUs. Farmers provided grain and horses in exchange for IOUs. Then for over a decade the colonies refused to pay up on these IOUs. As the cash strapped farmers and soldiers were pressed to pay up on their own debts, they sold off their IOUs at deep discounts. Speculators bought up these IOUs for pennies on the dollar.
Then came the Constitution. Under the Constitution, the federal government assumed all the colonial war debt and then paid it off at face value, not the deeply discounted amounts that the speculators had picked them up at. They taxed the common people to raise the funds to pay off the speculators, and when they couldn’t pay up, there were boatloads of bankruptcies, foreclosures and forced farm auctions.
The federalists knew that the common man wouldn’t support this. So how to get it adopted? It makes for some eye-opening reading. Some of our founding fathers weren’t above a few dirty tricks. Bouton then chronicles how the common folk fought back. They were largely unsuccessful as measured by their aspirations. But their efforts did help to add a Bill of Rights to our constitution, so it wasn’t for nothing.
One thing I enjoyed about the book was that the author can clearly envision a different outcome. But the revolution inspired a level of local empowerment that was inconsistent with the modern notion that the government has a monopoly on the legitimate use of force. I suspect that much of the ‘dialing back’ of revolutionary ideals happens at the end of every successful revolution, or else the revolution moves on to break the polity into smaller parts. A good read. I recommend it.
In years leading up to the revolution, both the gentry and the common people came to embrace a broad conviction that democracy is everyman’s right and that concentration of wealth was incompatible with democracy in the long run. Of course, by everyman’s right, they meant to exclude women. And everyman also excluded every man that wasn’t white. Still it was a powerful ideal, enough to inspire a successful revolution.
But something funny happened along the way. The gentry, seeing an active democracy up close, didn’t like what they saw. And officers of our army got used to luxury and privilege from hanging out with French officers.
The book points out the key role of debt, credit and availability of cash in leading up to the revolution. Much of the impetus of the war was driven by the effort by the British to raise funds through taxes in a time when circulating cash was very limited (due to poorly conceived policies limiting paper money) This lead to boatloads of bankruptcies, foreclosures and forced farm auctions.
During the war, the colonies financed the rebellion with borrowed money. Soldiers were paid with IOUs. Farmers provided grain and horses in exchange for IOUs. Then for over a decade the colonies refused to pay up on these IOUs. As the cash strapped farmers and soldiers were pressed to pay up on their own debts, they sold off their IOUs at deep discounts. Speculators bought up these IOUs for pennies on the dollar.
Then came the Constitution. Under the Constitution, the federal government assumed all the colonial war debt and then paid it off at face value, not the deeply discounted amounts that the speculators had picked them up at. They taxed the common people to raise the funds to pay off the speculators, and when they couldn’t pay up, there were boatloads of bankruptcies, foreclosures and forced farm auctions.
The federalists knew that the common man wouldn’t support this. So how to get it adopted? It makes for some eye-opening reading. Some of our founding fathers weren’t above a few dirty tricks. Bouton then chronicles how the common folk fought back. They were largely unsuccessful as measured by their aspirations. But their efforts did help to add a Bill of Rights to our constitution, so it wasn’t for nothing.
One thing I enjoyed about the book was that the author can clearly envision a different outcome. But the revolution inspired a level of local empowerment that was inconsistent with the modern notion that the government has a monopoly on the legitimate use of force. I suspect that much of the ‘dialing back’ of revolutionary ideals happens at the end of every successful revolution, or else the revolution moves on to break the polity into smaller parts. A good read. I recommend it.
May 3, 2010
Bouton's book is a powerful, if sometimes overly simplified, attempt to update the progressive school of American history. Bouton underlines the centrality of the plebeian classes in the making of the revolution, even as he argues that so much of what we honor as "great"-- in terms of the "Founding Fathers" and their Constitutional settlement--was intended to counter the people and the rising tide of democracy during the 1780s. This history also restores the Whiskey Rebellion to the place of importance it deserves in any account of the early republic. Homegrown Jacobinism...and I mean that in a good way. Edit
November 28, 2013
I admit that I got excited reading this history. With a little distance from it, I can see some critiques, but looking of the political-economy of the second half of the eighteenth century is a powerful tool for understanding the rural unrest and particularly the "whiskey and frie's" rebellion and other Regulator movements and where they came from
January 2, 2019
This is an unusual and thought-provoking analysis of the post-Revolutionary period in the new United States. The author writes for both academic and non-academic audiences, and has presented a strong argument using a wealth of primary sources.
An argument I’ve never really thought of before - after the Revolution, the American elite turned their back on Revolutionary principles and created a system that enriched themselves and the “moneyed men” at the expense of ordinary Americans. Ordinary Americans are not treated as rabble or scoundrels in this book, but regular people who felt betrayed by the about-face of the elite who had helped them get rid of the British. The author paints a grim picture of post-Revolutionary Pennsylvania engulfed in class warfare: rich war debt speculators vs poor farmers struggling to pay their taxes.
The book is well-structured and well-developed. Beginning with a traditional analysis of the causes of the Revolution (and how it was fought for the rights of white men), explaining very well how British policy crippled the American colonies, Bouton goes on to explain how the American ‘Gentry’ and the ‘moneyed men’ largely led by a wealthy industrialist named Robert Morris enacted new policies that caused a great cash scarcity in the colonies; new taxes in gold and silver, currency bans, privatisation of the economy, and war debt speculation through worthless IOUs that the government would then pay off highly to moneyed men. This caused a crisis in the 1780s leading to property foreclosures and ordinary Americans’ lives falling apart. They tried to fight back but, despite limited successes, were ultimately unsuccessful - with a last-ditched attempt to isolate themselves by closing off the roads.
The author also challenges traditional views of certain post-Revolutionary events. This is what I love about historiography - challenging long-held traditional views of history. He shows the 1789 Constitution as an instrument to curb democracy. He shows the ‘Whiskey Rebellion’ as actually not really a whiskey rebellion at all but an attempt to restore democratic elements in a government that the people perceived were a threat. He writes very convincingly with many primary sources showing the story as it unfolded.
His conclusion is somewhat strange. The elite who turned their backs on the Revolution, he says, hijacked the term “democracy” and rebranded the mass accumulation of wealth - rather than wealth equality - as true American democracy. The fact that white men lost so much at the hands of the elite moneyed men caused those men to also redefine democracy, which meant excluding others such as Native Americans and black people. “The crowd protests that had once been directed against haughty officials and tax collectors were redirected at black neighbourhoods and immigrant communities. Having lost so much, many white men clung to their identities of citizens, believing that if they had nothing else, that least could vote when others could not.”
He then concludes by saying that by the 1830s, a revolutionary vision of hope was transformed into a new democracy where men based their citizenship on patriarchy and white supremacy. Not to say this is wrong, but these are bold statements that really should be in another book. Other than one instance of burning an abolitionist meeting house, he offers no evidence to support this conclusion. I did not feel like this discussion belonged in this book. It was a shame that such a enriching history was finished off with a strained conclusion.
Other than that, an extremely compelling read and I am interested in what else this author has to offer.
An argument I’ve never really thought of before - after the Revolution, the American elite turned their back on Revolutionary principles and created a system that enriched themselves and the “moneyed men” at the expense of ordinary Americans. Ordinary Americans are not treated as rabble or scoundrels in this book, but regular people who felt betrayed by the about-face of the elite who had helped them get rid of the British. The author paints a grim picture of post-Revolutionary Pennsylvania engulfed in class warfare: rich war debt speculators vs poor farmers struggling to pay their taxes.
The book is well-structured and well-developed. Beginning with a traditional analysis of the causes of the Revolution (and how it was fought for the rights of white men), explaining very well how British policy crippled the American colonies, Bouton goes on to explain how the American ‘Gentry’ and the ‘moneyed men’ largely led by a wealthy industrialist named Robert Morris enacted new policies that caused a great cash scarcity in the colonies; new taxes in gold and silver, currency bans, privatisation of the economy, and war debt speculation through worthless IOUs that the government would then pay off highly to moneyed men. This caused a crisis in the 1780s leading to property foreclosures and ordinary Americans’ lives falling apart. They tried to fight back but, despite limited successes, were ultimately unsuccessful - with a last-ditched attempt to isolate themselves by closing off the roads.
The author also challenges traditional views of certain post-Revolutionary events. This is what I love about historiography - challenging long-held traditional views of history. He shows the 1789 Constitution as an instrument to curb democracy. He shows the ‘Whiskey Rebellion’ as actually not really a whiskey rebellion at all but an attempt to restore democratic elements in a government that the people perceived were a threat. He writes very convincingly with many primary sources showing the story as it unfolded.
His conclusion is somewhat strange. The elite who turned their backs on the Revolution, he says, hijacked the term “democracy” and rebranded the mass accumulation of wealth - rather than wealth equality - as true American democracy. The fact that white men lost so much at the hands of the elite moneyed men caused those men to also redefine democracy, which meant excluding others such as Native Americans and black people. “The crowd protests that had once been directed against haughty officials and tax collectors were redirected at black neighbourhoods and immigrant communities. Having lost so much, many white men clung to their identities of citizens, believing that if they had nothing else, that least could vote when others could not.”
He then concludes by saying that by the 1830s, a revolutionary vision of hope was transformed into a new democracy where men based their citizenship on patriarchy and white supremacy. Not to say this is wrong, but these are bold statements that really should be in another book. Other than one instance of burning an abolitionist meeting house, he offers no evidence to support this conclusion. I did not feel like this discussion belonged in this book. It was a shame that such a enriching history was finished off with a strained conclusion.
Other than that, an extremely compelling read and I am interested in what else this author has to offer.
December 23, 2021
A very interesting, very readable book. I breezed through it. Despite its broad title, it is almost exclusively about agrarian disobedience and revolt against tax collection in Pennsylvania.
It could have had more detail, as I would have liked more background information about the economic interests and social classes at the time, more information about the relationship between agrarian struggle and anti-Native American violence, more information about class struggle in the cities, etc.
It ended with a very interesting speculation - that once liberatory possibilities were foreclosed, the white men utilized the same methods of struggle in racist, nativist, and patriarchal ways. This was frequently on my mind while reading this book, as I was disturbed by some similarities in tactics between farmers and debtors in the 1780s, the racist city mobs of the 1830s-40s (eg. in Philadelphia, as discussed in Noel Ignatiev's HOW THE IRISH BECAME WHITE), and Klan tactics of the 1870s.
It could have had more detail, as I would have liked more background information about the economic interests and social classes at the time, more information about the relationship between agrarian struggle and anti-Native American violence, more information about class struggle in the cities, etc.
It ended with a very interesting speculation - that once liberatory possibilities were foreclosed, the white men utilized the same methods of struggle in racist, nativist, and patriarchal ways. This was frequently on my mind while reading this book, as I was disturbed by some similarities in tactics between farmers and debtors in the 1780s, the racist city mobs of the 1830s-40s (eg. in Philadelphia, as discussed in Noel Ignatiev's HOW THE IRISH BECAME WHITE), and Klan tactics of the 1870s.
December 21, 2020
If you think you know your American history, you don't. This book, along with American Nations: A History of the Eleven Rival Regional Cultures of North America entirely changed my viewpoint of early US history.
The author meticulously traces the origins of the American Revolution and the early ideology of the colonial militants who demanded both political and economic equality. Led by economic elites, these militiamen were eventually betrayed in a way reminiscent of Stalin's betrayal of the original Communist dreams in Russia. This betrayal culminated in the Whiskey Rebellion, a topic rarely touched upon in the modern American history classroom.
The author meticulously traces the origins of the American Revolution and the early ideology of the colonial militants who demanded both political and economic equality. Led by economic elites, these militiamen were eventually betrayed in a way reminiscent of Stalin's betrayal of the original Communist dreams in Russia. This betrayal culminated in the Whiskey Rebellion, a topic rarely touched upon in the modern American history classroom.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
March 6, 2017
How democratic was the revolution? Terry Bouton looks at Pennsylvania to answer this question. This account puts class front and center in understanding the Revolution. He divides the Revolution into 3 periods: 1760s-76; 76-87; 87-99. In the first period elites and "folk" united against British policy out of fear that it would concentrate wealth and erode democracy. In the second period, the "counter revolution," elites tried to limit democracy with the "gospel of moneyed men," which allowed unequal wealth accumulation, and limited democracy to elite men to create economic stability. Folk resisted, not as radicals, but for what they believed their vision of the revolution: society with little wealth disparity and radical/constant democratic participation. In the third era after the Constitution common folk resist the counter revolution most forcefully, in Pennsylvania through 2 rebellions against the Federal government in 1793 and 1799. The bill of rights and the most undemocratic measures in state constitutions are consequently curtailed. Still, the common folk in PA failed to organize effectively to win elections (look at last chapter). A more intense form of white patriarchal supremacy emerges after this period as frustrated common white men fiercely hold onto suffrage--the one clear victory they won in the revolution.
Great take on the Revolution, I find the conclusion about the early republic very convincing. I'm uncomfortable with his anachronistic treatment of "wealth equality". I think people conceived it as property rights, and personal independence. Wealth disparity was not even comparable to levels that would emerge in the mid-19th century, so I'm skeptical that was much of an issue--legal privileges of the elites I think were at issue. This is a great sympathetic book for understanding the prejudices long held elite Americans.
I think Bouton lumps "common folk" together too easily as democratic radicals. There was a lot of mobility during this time, financial and otherwise, that allowed people to move up and down class lines, or move west and try to secure a fortune or personal competency. I think his point about the aristocratic leanings of provincial elite is well taken, however to some extent should they be blamed for creating the conditions to make money. The founding fathers, elite as they might have been, did not start the Revolution to create a new Zion, rather preserve their notion of British liberty. Basically I think Boulton's point is overstated, still useful though.
Great take on the Revolution, I find the conclusion about the early republic very convincing. I'm uncomfortable with his anachronistic treatment of "wealth equality". I think people conceived it as property rights, and personal independence. Wealth disparity was not even comparable to levels that would emerge in the mid-19th century, so I'm skeptical that was much of an issue--legal privileges of the elites I think were at issue. This is a great sympathetic book for understanding the prejudices long held elite Americans.
I think Bouton lumps "common folk" together too easily as democratic radicals. There was a lot of mobility during this time, financial and otherwise, that allowed people to move up and down class lines, or move west and try to secure a fortune or personal competency. I think his point about the aristocratic leanings of provincial elite is well taken, however to some extent should they be blamed for creating the conditions to make money. The founding fathers, elite as they might have been, did not start the Revolution to create a new Zion, rather preserve their notion of British liberty. Basically I think Boulton's point is overstated, still useful though.
July 12, 2022
Why many Americans who fought in the Revolution felt betrayed by elites, who they thought limited democracy with the Constitution and perverted the whole project to put money in their pockets. Focuses on Pennsylvania. Fascinating research. Makes the "Whiskey rebellion" central to understanding democracy in America. Unfortunately the author is not a story teller and cannot summon anything like a narrative
November 11, 2022
It’s a very interesting perspective on the American Revolution and provides some valuable context for more typical petspectives (and made me heavily side-eye Lin-Manuel Miranda), but he doesn’t engage with other academic perspectives nearly enough. He makes strong claims and doesn’t debate any counterarguments, and that makes me more skeptical of his views. I’d give it 3.5 stars if that was an option.
December 24, 2017
interesting book that looks at every day people in PA and how they experienced the revolution, as well as pre and post revolution. it was viewpoints I had not read, but the author also seemed to write from and put his political viewpoint into the book
August 12, 2022
Another excellent addition to the long list of things not taught in any American History class. The Spirit of 76 was subverted into protecting the monied men & their interests while paying lip service to the ideals of the American Revolution. The process continues to this day.
September 30, 2023
Read for HONR192- history of democracy in America. Super informational and definitely challenged many things I was taught about the revolution!
January 28, 2025
Read for school, but honestly very interesting! I feel like rural economics aren’t that focused on so that was cool, but either explains niche things too much or briefly describes things.
November 30, 2025
The conclusion in this is incredible. It is resonant and piercing in its clarity.
October 11, 2015
This is an exceptional social and political history of Pennsylvania from the period before the Revolution through Fries' Rebellion. It's accessible to non-academic audiences, although the sort who would benefit the most from it (flag-waving 'Muricans), will sadly never read it.
Disclaimer: I'm descended from the Millers of Whiskey Rebellion (in)fame.
There's a howler of an error in describing John Barry as a future admiral. (The US didn't have admirals until 1862, although Pennsylvanian Stephen Decatur, Sr. was hoping to be one of the first before he died in the early 19th century.)
Disclaimer: I'm descended from the Millers of Whiskey Rebellion (in)fame.
There's a howler of an error in describing John Barry as a future admiral. (The US didn't have admirals until 1862, although Pennsylvanian Stephen Decatur, Sr. was hoping to be one of the first before he died in the early 19th century.)
April 12, 2021
Although I do not agree with the author's thesis concerning which side practiced 'real democracy', how he viewed the Founders, 'the elites', or his speculations, this does provide a good debate over America's founding and first 20 years after 1776. He does focus on Pennsylvania with allusions to other states, so one might ask: Is Pennsylvania the rule or the exception?
Again, I do not agree with everything, but makes one think and want to research more. Good debates can come from this. Does end in a clunky, unfinished way, I thought however.
Again, I do not agree with everything, but makes one think and want to research more. Good debates can come from this. Does end in a clunky, unfinished way, I thought however.
August 12, 2021
“... fears of sparking popular revolts had convinced the men who sat in the 1787 convention to back off from the more extreme checks on the people called for by serious antidemocratic crusaders like Alexander Hamilton.”
Displaying 1 - 18 of 18 reviews