I think this really needs a deeper exposition. My basic impression of AGM's thesis as connected with my rather loose knowledge of early post-Revolutionary US:
> it’s pretty clear what conditions our democracy was born in: the most vicious, ribald, scabrous, offensive, and often violent tumult of the Founders’ era, which makes modern Twit…
I think this really needs a deeper exposition. My basic impression of AGM's thesis as connected with my rather loose knowledge of early post-Revolutionary US:
> it’s pretty clear what conditions our democracy was born in: the most vicious, ribald, scabrous, offensive, and often violent tumult of the Founders’ era, which makes modern Twitter look like a Mormon picnic by comparison.
is that his take is basically correct. But I'd love to read more in-depth academic texts regarding of that 1780-1812 timeframe of how politics happened locally->nationally in the US.....
I think this really needs a deeper exposition. My basic impression of AGM's thesis as connected with my rather loose knowledge of early post-Revolutionary US:
> it’s pretty clear what conditions our democracy was born in: the most vicious, ribald, scabrous, offensive, and often violent tumult of the Founders’ era, which makes modern Twitter look like a Mormon picnic by comparison.
is that his take is basically correct. But I'd love to read more in-depth academic texts regarding of that 1780-1812 timeframe of how politics happened locally->nationally in the US.....
I found this book really illuminating (and amusing):
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B06XCFST7W/