A Short History of the United States: From the Arrival of Native American Tribes to the Obama Presidency

by Robert V. Remini

“In 2008, Americans face war, terrorism, recession and the rising economies of China and India. Yet the author avers there is still reason to hope for good leadership. Astute assessments of an evolving nation and ideal reading for November voters.” —  Kirkus Reviews A much-needed, concise history of the United States of America by National Book Award winner Robert V. Remini. This accessible and lively volume contains the essential facts about the discovery, settlement, growth, and development of the American nation. Beginning with the earliest travelers to landing the Americas, A SHORT HISTORY OF THE UNITED STATES is a kind of highlight reel of U.S. history, including the migration of Native Americans, the founding of a republic under the Constitution, the emergence of the United States as a world power, the outbreak of terrorism here and abroad, all the way through the last years of George W. Bush’s presidency—the perfect read for those who are searching for an abbreviated version of our nation’s history, what shaped it, changed it, and what may be to come.

Genres: History, Nonfiction, American History, Politics, American, School, Read For School

416 pages, Paperback

First published September 24, 2008

Reviews

[Marc Lamot · Rating 1 out of 5]

Robert Remini is an expert on internal American politics of the early 19th Century, and it shows. I learned a lot about the interesting power struggle between president and Congress, shortly after the creation of the United States and well into the period before the Civil War. But that's it: the pre-US-period and especially the post-World-War 2 period are handled in a really superficial way (there's even nothing on the presidency of J.F. Kenndy!). And then the years from 1970 up until 2008 are again treated in detail. In short: an unbalanced book, also by its stress on institutional debates. And then Remini offers some pretty nasty comments on indian mentality, on president Jimmy Carter and on the moral permessivity of the sixties and seventies. Definitely not recommended.

[Brad · Rating 3 out of 5]

In reading this book, I was looking for a decent survey that I could recommend to those interested. I have mixed thoughts. Obviously, as an avid reader of American History, anything promoted as "short" will ultimately be unsatisfying. But that is not a fair judgment; short is simply this books point. It starts off very choppy and does not really hit its stride until the Jacksonian Era - of which Mr. Remini is a renowned scholar. From there, things pick up. The book ends, unfortunately, on a real downer, with the atrocities of the Bush Administration still to recent to look back on with the distance of time. The book, published prior to the 2008 election, wisely gives no thoughts on the future. It is a history only.

Those who read history will be disappointed; everything is brief, quick, short. There are, however, things worth revisiting: the Gilded Age, Prohibition, the New Deal. And the 20th century read well. All told, for those who don't read much history but are interested in a brief primer, you may indeed find what you're looking for here...400 years of American colonization/civilization in 300 short pages...

[Josh · Rating 4 out of 5]

I was looking for a book that briefly gave the history of the U.S. This book was just that. If you're looking for something that gets down into the details of particular eras though, this one isn't for you. More of a summary.

[Emerson Knapp · Rating 5 out of 5]

Strung together the major events and time periods of US history in a cohesive and compelling way. Great pace and easy to read.

[Tim · Rating 1 out of 5]

Remini is a well known historian of Andrew Jackson and he does have a higher opinion of our seventh president than I do. Still I was excited to read his one volume history of the United States. The excitement did not last long because this is a very badly written book. At times it feels like choppy lecture notes (that have not been updated in the last thirty years), while at other times the writing feels like lists with entire paragraphs tacked on for details, but without style or analysis.

Bad writing might be abided if some larger understanding of US history was provided, but there are no insights here. Remini's handling of the facts is also horrible, especially in periods outside the 19th century. Religion is handled woodenly, the Puritans would not recognize themselves in his description of their Calvinism and I am sure the Mormons are happy about being the centerpiece of a discussion of the Second Great Awakening. His chapter on colonial history is especially egregious - he mistakes the Aztec for the Incan emperor at one point in time.

The Revolution and the Civil War are deadened into battles (where is all the recent social history in general?) and Lincoln appears as a minor character in the drama of the Civil War. Jackson does loom large (as do Grant and Reagan's corruptions), a lion of the common man and democracy. Even though I follow a more Whiggish view of the "military chieftain," at least there the prose sparkles a little in Remini's account. Very disappointing overall.

[Colin · Rating 4 out of 5]

I am very much not a 'Murican. I've seen 'Murica on the news, and even visited there several times, but never really felt that I understood the country. In many ways, I've felt more at home in other European countries, despite the different languages. This book provided some really useful insights as to why America is the way it is today.

Remini's prose works hard to convey a lot of information. It frequently comes across as almost scientific, but is occasionally punctuated by sudden bursts of enthusiasm.

However, it isn't perfect. Whilst trying to produce a short an accessible history is a worthy goal, I felt that if the book were to be twice as long, it might have actually benefitted significantly. Many events could have borne a more nuanced analysis, rather than just being presented, before being brushed aside for in favour of the next big event.

Additionally, this a book by an American, for an American. Remini does a good job of remaining objective on some very contentious issues, but still comes across as being broadly in favour of the right to bear arms, for example. Although maybe that's just America. Additionally, the treatment of the natives by settlers is rather swept aside. This might be because the focus is on the States themselves, and also due to the length requirements, but this is an issue that I felt deserved more coverage.

Nevertheless, the is a fact-filled, and extremely readable summary of what is still probably the most powerful country in the world. It does a very good job of showing why America is the way it is, and I recommend it.

[Nathalie · Rating 5 out of 5]

I loved traveling through the US history without too many gory details lol, it was also the more fun as it got closer to the time frame I lived heh

[Michael · Rating 3 out of 5]

What I think makes a good history book, is one that transports you into what life was like during that period whilst also giving you the essential facts. This book does do both, but neither amazingly; more so the essential facts which makes it read like an well written Wikipedia article. In places, it was a page turner, especially as the author recounted the varied events of the 20th century, but then turned to pages of boredom elsewhere. It also misses out on geographical context, almost assuming everyone is an American - the diagrams and maps in the paperback edition are also pretty useless. No future outlook either.

[Wesley Clarkston · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book was clearly written and as someone only familiar with American history through high school classes and the occasional Youtube video I learned a lot from this book. I finally accomplished my goal of of memorizing all 46 US presidents to date in chronological order by election year and I hope that will provide a framework to put any US History facts I may learn in the future; because, now, I can put any event within the presidential administration that was active at the time. The Suez Crisis in 1957 that was during Eisenhower's second term. I'm realizing that, perhaps paradoxically, more information can make memorization easier. I could have attempted to memorize all 46 presidents in a vacuum rather than while reading this 300 some page book, and that would have have been many fewer words to read and objectively less information, but by learning the history and gaining context on each president, for example, I know that Andrew Jackson was the 7th president and was elected in 1828 and 1832. Now, maybe I can remember that because he's a particularly important president, but if I want to remember Martin Van Buren, how do I do that; I can try to remember that he's the 8th president and was elected in a vacuum or I can remember that he was Andrew Jackson's vice president and that he failed to win re-election due to a recession in 1837. This makes it easy for me to remember this relatively obscure president. I believe this book is just the right length to give a big picture understanding of US history. It's not so short that the facts feel too disconnected or fast-paced and not so long that you've forgotten the beginning by the time you reach the end. I give it three stars because the prose is not particularly beautiful and enjoyable to read though it is clear. It was a slog at times though perhaps that could be due to the summary nature of the book rather than a failure on the part of the author.

[Billie Pritchett · Rating 5 out of 5]

Robert Remini's Short History of the United States is a great story, retelling American history largely through the machinations of the executive and legislative branches (as they develop). Remini's history is quite opinionated, and it will not be difficult for the reader to discern some of his political allegiances. Nevertheless, this book is indispensable for the purpose of learning American history, and a great reference book.

Should the reader think that this book focuses too much on the executive and legislative branches, then perhaps A People's History of the United States by Howard Zinn would be a good supplement.

[Curtis · Rating 3 out of 5]

Overall a nice, succinct summary of the history of the US. A good place to start before studying more deeply. Only complaint is the author's biases really start to show towards the final couple chapters and, as such, the book would probably benefit by stopping a little earlier.

[Mitri Laatvala · Rating 5 out of 5]

Про перше відкриття Америк є багато здогадок , але тут все розпочинається як і каже офіційна історія з подорожей Колумба , Амеріго Веспуччі та інших тогочасних першовідкривачів . Саме іспанці дали поштовх для регулярних експедицій в ці краї , і початок XV ст. відзначається їхньою постійною регулярністю. Після іспанців свої погляди на нові землі кинули англійці , французи та голанці. Описано утворення багатьох східних та південних штатів в 17-18 століттях. Корінні народи також ще відіграють солідну роль , часто долучаючись до битв за владу на стороні  європейських колонізаторів. В ХІХ ст починається справжнє політичне життя. Нові амбітні президенти намагаються розширити території різними способами. Купується Флорида і відбувається розширення на Захід від Міссурі. Дуже цікавим і насиченим було ХІХ ст , де вмістилась і громадянська війна північної і південної Америк , і промислова революція , відміна рабства та інші важливі події. США починає набувати своїх виразних рис, але світове домінування прийде вже в ХХ ст. Хоч і тоді в суспільстві панував настрій ізоляціонізму , тобто не втручання в спр��ви Європи та світу , а концентрування на власних проблемах, всерівно з здобуттям ваги Америка починає шукати монстрів з якими потрібно боротися. Також мене вразило те скількох президентів ціїє країни було вбито і крім того скільки замахів відбулось невдало. Отже в США постійно були вороги які мали причини для агресивних актів. Загалом книга мені дуже сподобалась , все подано розмірено для загального розуміння еволюції Америки .

[Luke Miller · Rating 4 out of 5]

Remini does an excellent job of dividing the history of the U.S. into eleven eras that are easy to digest. He avoids the common pitfall of dismissing the generations that came before us as morally inferior, but frames the history of the republic as a struggle for progress and fulfillment of the promises of the Declaration of Independence and values of the Constitution. He holds a positive view of the Jacksonian era relative to other historians, but for the most part is able to present both sides of numerous political arguments that divided Americans throughout the decades. At times, the summaries seemed rushed but that comes with the territory of being “A Short History.”

[Rachele Bruccoleri · Rating 1 out of 5]

Ho studiato questo libro in vista di un esame universitario e sinceramente ancora mi chiedo come sia possibile che la professoressa non sia riuscita ad adottare un libro migliore.
Alcuni argomenti sono trattati in maniera molto superficiale, a mio parere dando troppo spazio a aneddoti di contorno che possono essere molto interessanti e sfiziosi, ma che lasciano ben poco.
Tutto il contesto extra statunitense non è quasi preso in considerazione nel corso di tutto il libro e quindi della storia degli Stati Uniti, cosa non da poco visto che quando si parla di storia si parla di interdipendenza e non è possibile capire bene le politiche estere americane, l'isolazionismo, la guerra in Vietnam ecc.. senza fare un excursus su ciò che accade nel resto del mondo.
Mi sono trovata innumerevoli volte a dover integrare il libro con altre fonti per cercare di avere una visione più chiara e completa in vista dell'esame.
Lo consiglio solamente a chi vuole avere una visione generale della storia americana, ma senza troppe pretese. Assolutamente lo sconsiglio a chiunque debba compiere uno studio più approfondito della materia.

[Albert · Rating 4 out of 5]

Gearing up for my naturalization next year -- even though I've known US history for a while now. This book is a nice helping in a short time, plus with insights about our present situation -- for example, on just how bad the Dubya administration was when you look at it in the context of previous administrations and previous wars we had fought. This book should be required reading for those idiots on "Jaywalking".

[Jay Crawford · Rating 5 out of 5]

I loved this book!! Very interesting! It does not bore you with needless statistics. It gives a great overview of the history of the US and in pretty much chronological order that really made it easy to follow!!

[Scott · Rating 5 out of 5]

A fantastic 350 pg history of our great country. Truly an amazing story.

[Helen Damnation · Rating 4 out of 5]

A good starting place for those who don't know much about US history beyond the obvious.

[Alex Salo · Rating 4 out of 5]

It's obviously super hard to write a concise and unbiased history of the superpower that is the United States in 300 pages, but this book does a decent job of it. It focuses on the facts and doesn't dwell on minute details. Reads easily, and is highly entertaining. My main complaint is that it's a bit sloppy: in some places a sentence directly contradicts the previous one, as if it was not carefully proofread.

Overall, I'd highly recommend this to anyone as an intro which then allows the reader to pick which period they want to learn more details about.

Note: you'll definitely be offended by one take or another because even though the author tried to withhold judgement, when it comes to politics things are so charged that people will inevitably be upset that someone is not presented in a better or worse light. I think Remini did as good of a job as anyone in trying to stay neutral.

One thing that was a revelation to me after reading this book is just how rich the history of the government is in the United States. Literally everything has happened before. Everything that is happening in Congress, Supreme Court, and White House has already happened in the past, and the Founders explicitly thought about it at length (which is unbelievable, really). I didn't quite grasp how dynamic and flexible the American System under the constitution really is until I read all the different permutations happened over the last 250 years. Powerful congress and toothless congress, active executive and a passive one, impartial Supreme Court and an activist Supreme Court. Plus how each branch has a way of restricting the other if enough support can be garnered. For example, President can veto congress lawmaking, but congress can override veto with 2/3s vote. Supreme Court can declare a law unconstitutional, but congress can impeach justices, or amend the constitution. It's really incredible, and it did work its magic at various sketchy times in the past.

It was fascinating to observe how the party politics drifted back and forth. Federalist vs Republican at first, then Federalists disintegrating, but in absence of competition Republican party splits. Whigs and Republicans. Then democrats branch off. Democrats support slavery throughout 19th and segregation through early 20th century, then Republics find a coalition in Christian south and orientation kind of flips. And now another flip happening in real time. Another aspect is mercantilism which is making the comeback now, but it was much on the forefront of the better half of 19th and 20th century debates between parties.

Overall, I feel like like this short history gave me a much needed depth in looking at the current political developments, so I highly recommend this page-turner to all!

[Shane Plassenthal · Rating 5 out of 5]

I will preface this review by stating that I have a BA in History and I am a current graduate student in an American History program. I am pointing this out because my academic training has led me to approach books like this one with skepticism but also with an understanding of what type of history writing this is (popular). This book would be appropriate for the lay reader seeking an overview of America from colonial days to the near present but it is not a monograph. If you look at it for what it is this book does a good job at its objective which is providing an overview of U.S. history from colonial times to the modern day.

However, I will relent on one thing and say that this should have been titled "A Short Political History of the United States" because that is where the focus lies. I speculate that this is because Remini was the official historian for the House of Representatives at one point in his career and was known for his expertise on former President Jackson. Some reviewers seem frustrated with Remini's take on social history or lack thereof in this text but I would argue that the point of this book is to be brief and the best way to do that is to tell the story of the nation highlighting the major players and events, if you are looking for a more nuanced yet not overly academic take on U.S. history I recommend These Truths by Jill Lepore which explores much of the social and cultural history of the nation.

This book, though, accomplishes what it needs to. Remini succinctly shows how the Presidency and Congress have evolved from the nation's early days to the later Bush administration showcasing how throughout U.S. history the Presidency has been at considerable odds with Congress and the courts. He also shows how both the executive and legislative branch have been shaped by the individuals who held various offices and how those individuals have often strayed far from the constitutional intent of many of those offices as time has gone on. The later bit of the book from Nixon's Presidency to the Bush administration takes a cynical and depressing tone and it is here that Remini really makes the case that American government might be in a long standing period of decline. His final pages offer no grand insight or argument as to how the nation might move forward but instead he concludes the text with the events surrounding the Iraq and Afghanistan wars on terror without a concluding chapter providing a reflection on any of the events in the book.


In short, a well written book if you are looking for a more traditional political history. Social historians this will probably not work for you.

[Siamak Attarian · Rating 3 out of 5]

The title is "a short history of the United States" which limits you from criticizing the book in many ways.

The first two chapters (15th to the end of 18th century) are stuffed with information one after another. It starts good but after a few pages the writer loses the ability to tell a story and starts to just report the events. I mean usually when you read about a historical event, the writer tries to make you feel momentarily present at the scene. It didn't make me feel so.

chapters 3 through 7 (mostly 19th century) is all about what happened in the congress and sometimes in executive branch. There are lots of names of senators and congressmen and their speeches, debates, fights, the bills they passed, ...

chapters 8 to 11 (WWII to 2008) is well written and more like history.

Except for the first chapters, there are no mentions of Native Americans.
I think I didn't see the word "Dakota" at all.
Also I wanted to know the chronology of statehood of different parts of America but the book is not complete on this matter. Like it says they bought Louisiana from France (which was a big territory) but it's not obvious why and when it divided into several states.
There are not much information about the culture of Americans during these 200 and so years.

I felt that the writer was impartial about matters. I didn't notice any bias towards any party or ideology.

I learned a good deal of things by reading this book but honestly I didn't enjoy the reading as much as I expected. It's more like political history of US, which could be enjoyable in its own turn, but if you want to see the history of the US from other perspectives, this is not the best book.

[Mark King · Rating 1 out of 5]

Very disappointed in this book.
A one-star rating is something I don’t give lightly, but I really can’t give it higher ratings due to the complete imbalance and heavily skewed views from the author.
While I managed to learn a few things, there was a great deal wrong with this book.
It’s often jingoistic. Focused on ‘our great nation’, critical of other nations while skipping much of the more difficult periods of American history.
It’s quick to pronounce how ‘we’ trounced other nations and how these conquests had a long-lasting impact, yet it skips defeats and barely highlights the errors of foreign policy.
It’s heavy on early history.
It’s almost entirely focused on the politics and the presidents. If you want to know the popular vote for each president, then this book is for you.
Not much about the people, especially the native communities or what the birth of the nation did to them. Likewise, it doesn’t focus on lingering social injustice or the growing disparity between the rich and the poor.
There is not much in here to recognise the struggles of minorities nor the way the political system might have led to some of these troubles.
Hilariously/embarrassingly he uses the terms British and English interchangeably, clearly not understanding the difference. It’s basic, basic stuff.
It only skims (at best) some of the greatest achievements in American history. The amazing feats of engineering. Leadership in sports and entertainment. The astonishing world-wide influence of film, television and literature. IT and the transformation caused by the digital age and how this has made the world a smaller and more accessible place.
All of this diminishes the rich history of America and that’s a very sad thing.

[Stephen Gallup · Rating 1 out of 5]

A more appropriate title, especially of the audio version, would be A HASTY History of the United States, because the reading proceeds at a breakneck pace--on top of the summary and rather selective treatment of the subject matter. As other readers have noted, by "United States" the author really means the establishment and implementation of the country's governing principles. His Washington-centric focus can be justified, as that realm had a lot to do with forming America's national identity. But of course it means ignoring material that may be important to some readers. As an example, I heard no mention of the war with Mexico, or the Alamo, or anything related thereto.

I confess to approaching books on the subject of US history with caution, because I don't want interpretations that are skewed to justify someone's opinion. That's why I was drawn to one that would probably mostly stick to the facts. But maybe this goes a bit too far in that direction. It's scarcely more than a timeline. Great political disputes and rivalries of the past are mentioned, but insufficient information is provided to permit the reader to begin forming an opinion about them.

At some points the author does at least say why certain developments were important. For example, he notes a new national pride that emerged following the War of 1812, when people began to call themselves Americans, rather than, say, Virginians or New Yorkers. Now that this new upstart of a country had shown it could defeat Britain, being a part of it must be pretty special. He traces the appearance of competing political parties, and the tension between those in favor of a strong central government run by "elites" vs those advocating for more self-government. He shows that adamant refusals to consider compromise on the issues that come up has been a feature of life in the US government since its earliest days. He notes that the executive and legislative branches have likewise been tussling over who's in charge since the beginning.

I would venture to suggest that non-Americans, who often seem mystified by our ongoing drama and unique points of view, consider these issues as being fundamental to the mind set that has evolved here.

He makes it clear enough that every generation sends its share of fools off to Congress, and even now and then to the White House.

Folks today who are in despair over the ceaseless acrimony and idiocy coming out of the capital may find comfort in the idea that, to some degree at least, it's business as usual. In that regard the book makes a contribution that's helpful or even comforting, although again with the rushed delivery it says very little about peripheral matters like news media. The amplification and intentional distortion they provide today may well be something new.

When we can see history touching us, opinions about it come more easily. The author was in his 20s during Truman's presidency, and no doubt had begun following daily events. His prior summary suggests Buchanan and Harding weren't the sharpest tools in the shed, but he avoids specifically evaluating anybody until arriving at Truman, whom he calls "excellent—almost great." He does acknowledge that many contemporaries had another view, but then when describing LBJ and the so-called Great Society it's as if there is no dissenting view. This despite the radical change it brought, not merely in targeting specific groups for taxpayer assistance but also in supplanting the traditional Protestant work ethic with a new concept of entitlement (while also increasing opportunities for fraud and graft and creating a vast federal workforce that would henceforth be motivated largely by its own interests).

Remini's accounts of other elections identify all the candidates and their arguments and even give their vote totals, but Goldwater and his objection to what was happening isn't even mentioned, nor is the watershed "Daisy" ad and its implications for future campaigns. There's only limited room for retrospective in a book like this, but the author loses credibility by suddenly restricting his presentation to one side. He seems at that point at least to have forgotten America's perennial debate regarding how much authority the central government should have. To be fair, he notes that debate's resurgence when Reagan comes along.

Given Remini's fixation on competition between the branches of government, and occasionally underhanded attempts to steal a base (e.g., Iran-Contra under Reagan, covered in detail), it's odd that the book totally skips over FDR's ill-fated attempt to pack the Supreme Court with extra justices in order to prevent further rulings unfavorable to his policies.

If I was in doubt regarding the presence of bias in the latter part of this presentation, that was cleared up by the author's indignation over the 2000 election debacle. According to this telling, the rightful winner was Gore, and a partisan Supreme Court erred in throwing the election to Bush. He omits mentioning that a full recounting of disputed Florida ballots did occur, and Bush won that count, albeit narrowly. I'm okay with saying Bush then pretty much made a mess of things (although blaming Katrina on him is hardly fair). I wish the country had wiser leadership during the latter years covered here, but it's patently stupid to be crying still over Gore (seriously, Gore?).

The writing itself appears to have received little editorial attention, what with sentences like this: "Not unsurprisingly, Coolidge won a stunning victory." I'd call most of this book (the superficial summary) a good preliminary draft. The partisan diatribe beginning at least with LBJ is just self-indulgence on the author's part, and is exactly what I'd hoped to avoid. A reader's next step would probably be to investigate further into areas of personal interest. If you care about Jefferson's era, for example, I can recommend Twilight at Monticello, by Alan Pell Crawford. A starting point for discussion of the administrative state is here. For some encouraging context regarding the country's polarization, here's a recent article by Victor Davis Hanson.

[Don · Rating 4 out of 5]

Distinguished historian, the late Robert Remini, has given us his take on the flow of American history in a succinct, informative volume that starts from the first human settlement on the continent, leaps quickly to the entry of the Europeans and the ownership claims of the English, Spanish, and French, and launches into a fuller treatment of colonialism in the context of continuing Euro-struggles. Comes the Revolution as settlers separate from the English, and “U.S. History” becomes our focal point from there. Remini’s focus is primarily on the political history of the nation, with a strong infusion of consideration of its changing economy and the impacts of changing technology, communications, transportation infrastructure. Remini adds a light dusting of consideration of an emerging American literature (e.g., post-1812 authors Irving and Cooper, and Jacksonian-era writers such as Hawthorne, Melville, Longfellow, and others) discussing their contributions to a growing national identity and cultural unity. The book takes us through the 19th and 20th centuries, and unloads us back onto the 21st century platform as the country anticipates the end of the second George W. Bush administration and another election cycle.

A 330 page treatment of the entirety of U.S. history is inevitably selective. That Remini has managed to give us such a succinct and effective summary is a marvel. His chronology provides a structure to organize our further readings. His well-organized Suggested Readings give us fine starting points for plunging deeper, his index is extensive, enabling us to relocate quickly any topics we wish.

Remini’s A Short History of the United States is a good read and a fine reference for your shelves!

[Donald Powell · Rating 5 out of 5]

Franklin Pierce was not even mentioned in this book.
It is a great history book because while it is quite inclusive it is very concise. It was a very unbiased view of the events. A history writer must necessarily try to connect events with events and this requires judgments. It was a very balanced presentation. There are always many lessons from history. A profound one is the need for the electorate to be more informed, more aware of how events are connected to events (study history) and to be less focused on personality and more on principles/policy. No human endeavor will be perfect or result in its intended effect. That is proven by this book. If people in governance could share their perspectives (listening and understanding are a part of that), find solutions, educate the public about the compromises necessary for solutions, and then enact them in that same spirit of common purpose, everything would work better. Governance never works when it empowers the few at the expense of the many. It was on this basis that this experiment in government was created from the 1760's to the 1790's. The battle to progress to more freedom, more justice, more fairness continues and history tells us there is always greed, selfishness, and fear to overcome before overcoming the next hurdle.

[Laraine · Rating 5 out of 5]

I’m surprised I gave my own countries history a 5 star. But, I have realized something very important while reading this book.

History repeats itself.

The voting discrepancies, political evilness for personal gain, the worst presidents and the best military presidents, reasons for War, non allies turned allies, distrust between nations, broken alliances and agreements between nations, pandemics, slaughter whether in the new exploration or on our streets today, religion and the government differences, State rights, State vs. Federal, our Judicial system and the judges that have held office, Democrats vs Republicans vs Independent parties, parties against themselves,

it’s all a repeat.

I read our history and think we’re doing this again, or that quote applies even today. I think our educational system has failed in teaching us the strength of knowledge in our history. Like storytellers who tell of the generations past our students should be learning more about our Founding Fathers and how the Constitution and Amendments have changed through time. Especially, if our students will be running our country in the future. Why wait until a college class? There’s a-lot to learn about our history and it’s application in real time dates.

[Lorna Meinke · Rating 3 out of 5]

🎧 this was a good quick listen for the turmoil that the US has experienced. unfortunately Remini did not do justice to the native populations in this land before settlers arrived. I think it's fair to add that the information pre-colonialism is probably extremely limited, but England got more screen time than natives which is so wrong given the context of the book! I also think it's unbalanced, as other comments stated, and that it's biased. certain time periods are given a lot of context and information while others are basically skimmed over. most of the book focuses specifically on constitutional amendment and major laws, which are important, but more information about historical context would have been better to really know the history. I also think it was rather biased - be touted the PATRIOT Act as an incredible use of political power and mentions it only in favorable light, which a lot of people would disagree with. I think his personal opinions come out at times, so it's hard to know how much of the book is contextually true and how much is shaded (or jaded) with his opinions and bias. it was a good book, could have been better, but I definitely learned a lot in a short amount of time so I think the book achieved its primary goal in that.

[Kiersten · Rating 4 out of 5]

An excellent read for anyone who’s interested in an overview of American history. I appreciated the expansive time range, which truly covers much of the nations recorded history at a high level.

The only reason why I gave this book a 4/5 stars is that it’s definitely a history as told by “the winners”, meaning a strongly white male political perspective. To be fair, this is what has consumed much of America’s recorded history, and almost all of what’s dominated its historical political power. However, it does leave me yearning for the missing pieces that’s shaped America’s history - Native American history, black history, women’s suffrage, etc. While mentioned, these subjects aren’t given as much detail, but again (to be fair) there haven’t been any female or non-white presidents up until Obama (who was not included in the time range of the book).

I also think I would enjoy a more in depth historical read on a much more specific time period of subject. I like to get into the nitty gritty of the details!

All of that being said, I don’t want to snub this book. It was still a very good read.

[Maan · Rating 3 out of 5]

Remini or the book publishers mistakenly named it A Short History Of United States when in fact it was A Short Political History of United States!

The book was all about Bills and Amendments and Senate and Elections! It is a history of American politics not the History of United States i was looking for! Now someone suggested me Paul Johnson and i hope he writes all of American history not just political boredom!

Is Politics boring? Yes yes yes! Is there any rational way to defend if its not boring? No no no!

There were lot of lot of great chapters too in book! I like how Remini makes less judgments from his own thoughts but whatever he makes, its worth reading. I like how US politics is mix of bad and evil things not just how lot of people imagine it as FOUNDING FATHERLY type! Thats not! Theres also Filth, Jackson, Henry Clay and than the king of juggernauts, Mr Junior Bush! Internets!

I am not a very eclectic type of reviewer just a ordinary Indian reading US history. So i am sorry if i do not stand up on your page! But it is what it is. When you are right you are right

[John]

Succinct yet comprehensive account if how America came about running through the huge variety of presidents, from the inspirational, the mediocre and the outright crooked. A basic contradiction underlies the USA: fundamentalist Christianity going back to the Founding Fathers, and again from the outsell laissez faire capitalism of a new anything goes kind going back to the settlement of the West. The succession varies between these two pole. Carter at one end, probably the best ever, highly intelligent, and kind, but he was blamed for the failure of the hostages rescue from Iran and for ruthless capitalism creating high inflation. At the other extreme is Trump who Watson deals with thoroughly noting that Trump didn’t appear from nowhere, the very contradictions in the USA breed Trumps, he just happenesot be the worst in kiving memory. The writing is tight and lucid as it needs to be for a shortest history of such a complex country.