American Nations is a book that posits that America is actually an amalgamation of eleven (really, ten) different groups or "nations" that each have their own unique social character. Woodard's book is somewhat derivative, since it is based largely on an earlier book, Albion's Seed by David Hackett Fischer. In retrospect, I wish I had just read that book rather than Woodard's regurgitation.
The "ten nations" Woodard discusses in the book are an expansion on four groups identified by Fischer:
Yankeedom (Fischer identifies the English Puritans). New England was founded groups of religious fanatics who wanted to create a utopian Protestant society, characterized by a strong sense of community and an aversion to wealth, displays of wealth and status.
New Netherland (not in Fischer's book). New Netherland, an area confined to Greater New York, was characterized by tolerance of all religions and cultures with a very strong drive to make money and little interest in moral issues.
The Midlands (Fischer identifies the Quakers). The Midlands were started by Quakers and other pacifist Protestant groups who wanted to be allowed to freely practice their religion and spread their faith by example.
The Tidewater (Fischer identifies the Cavaliers). The Chesapeake Bay and its environs were founded by Cavaliers, royalists who wanted to transplant English country life into the New World.
The Deep South (not in Fischer's book). Woodard distinguishes the Deep South from the Tidewater by noting that the Deep South was founded by planters who left the Barbados colony and transplanted its notions of slave plantations into America.
Appalachia (Fischer identifies the Borderlanders). Scots-Irish and English settlers from the Border regions of England, Scotland and Ireland that were ravished by war sought to get away from violence as well as the authority that was responsible for creating it.
Woodard then adds four other nations that come into contact with these six as the colonies expand and grow:
New France. New France encompasses both Quebec and Louisiana, with its largely Catholic, French-speaking populations and respect for the American Indians among whom they lived.
El Norte. El Norte encompasses the American Southwest, where isolated missions spread Spanish religion, culture and language to the local Indians largely independent of any central authority thousands of miles to the south in Mexico City.
The Left Coast. The Left Coast of the nation represents an odd mixture of Yankee values and New Netherland attitudes on some counts due to the way it was settled.
The Far West. The Far West was settled by large corporations, railroads and the Federal government itself, and issues related to the extraction of natural resources remain of primary concern.
The book started out as a fairly honest and even-handed treatment of the groups outlined above. Woodard traces how they founded the United States and contributed to its independence and makeup. At times, I think he overstates the importance of the regional cultures, and I am almost certain that much of his material is drawn from Fisher. That he drew heavily on Fisher becomes apparent midway through the book, as the book becomes sloppier and less coherent.
By the time he reaches the Civil War, the methodical and well-written chapters give way to highly contentious and totally unsupported statements. The hundred years that passed between the Civil War and the Civil Rights movement get perhaps ten to fifteen pages, and then Woodard casts off any pretense at objectivity and proceeds to tendentiously make a political case in favor of radical progressives and the Far Left. He even goes so far at the very end as to make absurd utopian statements about how the "Eleventh Nation" (the "resurgent native cultures"), which he didn't discuss at all in his book prior to the epilogue, is bringing back tribal socialism in a wonderful gender-neutral society of sharing environmentalism that just may be a model for all of us.
While some readers may agree with his political stance, he destroys any pretense at objectivity and assumes his reader is either (a) enlightened enough to see the wisdom of the progressive agenda or (b) the political heir of the voices for slavery and ignorance (i.e., Republican). It was a highly patronizing and inartful end to what had started as a good book. The quality of the writing also declined as the book progressed, which leads me to believe that he was perhaps rushed to completion or asked by his publisher to wrap up what he had intended to be a longer book.
In either case, I will not buy another book by this author.
ἡ δὲ κἀκ τριῶν τρυπημάτων ἐργαζομένη ἐνεκάλει τῇ φύσει, δυσφορουμένη, ὅτι δὴ μὴ καὶ τοὺς τιτθοὺς αὐτῇ εὐρύτερον ἢ νῦν εἰσι τρυπώη, ὅπως καὶ ἄλλην ἐνταῦθα μίξιν ἐπιτεχνᾶσθαι δυνατὴ εἴη. – Procopius
Ummaka qinnassa nīk!
*MySmiley*