And while there were some informative parts, there were some parts I found to be downright biological determinist and reactionary. The first issue I had with it was it seems to want to almost bring back the myth of Teutonism and Anglo Saxonism. it talks about how essential America's British past was and how it was what made America, not the broken backs of minorities and poor people . The second issue I had with it was the chapter on the "borderers" people from the north of England and lowland Scotland as well as Northern Ireland who settled in Appalachia and the Ozarks and are what people call "white trash" today. He basically implies these people were dirtier, dumber and more promiscuous than the rest of the British colonial stock, I won't say it feels racist because these people were largely of white ancestry, but this part of the book feels very classist and elitist.
I'm selling it short i'm sure. I'm not the brightest guy around, but in my gut I could feel why some on the right say this is one of the best books on American history. Because it appeals to that myth of "Anglo Saxon white America" they've got constantly playing in their heads.
Anyone else read this? What did you think?
Appalachian scots irish are fascinating. I can't say that they didn't ultimately perform some of the same acts as the other settler groups, but there's something to be said for running off to the uncolonized appalachians to do zero impact subsistence farming. The reason that the miners were more willing to fight capitalists than other groups is because they had the same material trajectory essentially as most other colonized producers of raw materials, despite being white.