BOOK REVIEW
A STRUGGLE FOR POWER: IN THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION, THEODORE DRAPER, VINTAGE BOOKS, NEW YORK, 1997
In my study of revolutions I have always been interested in two basic questions- what were the ideas swirling around prior to the revolution that brought people to see the need for revolution and the related question of how those ideas played out in the struggle for power. I recently reviewed Professor Gordon Wood’s Radicalism in the American Revolution. That book centrally posed the first of these questions, which is the influence of ideas about the nature of individual freedom, about the creation of the frame of government and about who should govern- the patricians or the plebes?
In the present review of Theodore Draper’s book the second question of how those played out in the revolutionary process is dealt with at length. Although Mr. Draper has many insightful thoughts about the duration and intensity of the American revolutionary struggle against dear old mother England one must recognize that this is not a major historical contribution to the study of the American revolutionary experience. Draper’s major historical work, his definitive two-volume study of the formation and later Stalinization of the American Communist Party, for which he will be well remembered, is qualitatively better in every way. Not the least of which was that Mr. Draper was tapping new veins of previously unavailable material on the subject and had been personally involved in some aspects of the Communist Party’s history.
That said, as mentioned above one of the most interesting of Mr. Draper’s insights is the rather long period of struggle by groupings in virtually every individual colonial government against the rule (or better, rules since they were not uniformly applied) imposed by England. Previous study had led me to assume that these struggles had a relatively recent origin only a few decades prior to the revolution. What is apparent is that a ‘cold’ dual power situation existed between England and some of the administrations in the colonies for a fairly long time before ‘hot’ dual power occurred with the creation of the Continental Congress and the formation of militias and then the establishment of a full-blown army. Part of this tension stemmed from the distance from the mother country and the relatively looseness of the ties between colony and metropolis. Part of it also came from a need to deal with political, social and economic questions faster than edicts from England would permit and partly also by the structure of many of the colonial governments that acted to check the Imperial power by controlling the purse strings of the local power elite.
An overriding question that hovers over Mr. Draper’s theme is whether a revolution in America was necessary (or wise) given the relatively narrow issues that pulled the parties apart for most of the pre-revolutionary period. His answer is that the whole long pre-history of struggle between indigenous elements of colonial society and the haughtiness and unresponsiveness of officialdom under imperial rule dictated the need for revolution. That is certainly not an unreasonable conclusion. However, to this reviewer’s mind the question itself is rather fruitless. Revolutions occur; whatever reasons underlie any particular revolution because the parties (or at least one of the parties) see no other way out. Post-hoc analysis, while interesting, does not explain why this occurs and perhaps this why post-hoc knowledge does not make one wiser about how to avoid revolution. In modern sociology that, in any case, is the general intent of such analysis. Mr. Draper has, nevertheless, presented an interesting thesis about the sources of conflict in the American setting and the role of national consciousness in the pre- revolutionary period. Read on.
REVISED: NOVEMBER 4, 2006
A STRUGGLE FOR POWER: IN THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION, THEODORE DRAPER, VINTAGE BOOKS, NEW YORK, 1997
In my study of revolutions I have always been interested in two basic questions- what were the ideas swirling around prior to the revolution that brought people to see the need for revolution and the related question of how those ideas played out in the struggle for power. I recently reviewed Professor Gordon Wood’s Radicalism in the American Revolution. That book centrally posed the first of these questions, which is the influence of ideas about the nature of individual freedom, about the creation of the frame of government and about who should govern- the patricians or the plebes?
In the present review of Theodore Draper’s book the second question of how those played out in the revolutionary process is dealt with at length. Although Mr. Draper has many insightful thoughts about the duration and intensity of the American revolutionary struggle against dear old mother England one must recognize that this is not a major historical contribution to the study of the American revolutionary experience. Draper’s major historical work, his definitive two-volume study of the formation and later Stalinization of the American Communist Party, for which he will be well remembered, is qualitatively better in every way. Not the least of which was that Mr. Draper was tapping new veins of previously unavailable material on the subject and had been personally involved in some aspects of the Communist Party’s history.
That said, as mentioned above one of the most interesting of Mr. Draper’s insights is the rather long period of struggle by groupings in virtually every individual colonial government against the rule (or better, rules since they were not uniformly applied) imposed by England. Previous study had led me to assume that these struggles had a relatively recent origin only a few decades prior to the revolution. What is apparent is that a ‘cold’ dual power situation existed between England and some of the administrations in the colonies for a fairly long time before ‘hot’ dual power occurred with the creation of the Continental Congress and the formation of militias and then the establishment of a full-blown army. Part of this tension stemmed from the distance from the mother country and the relatively looseness of the ties between colony and metropolis. Part of it also came from a need to deal with political, social and economic questions faster than edicts from England would permit and partly also by the structure of many of the colonial governments that acted to check the Imperial power by controlling the purse strings of the local power elite.
An overriding question that hovers over Mr. Draper’s theme is whether a revolution in America was necessary (or wise) given the relatively narrow issues that pulled the parties apart for most of the pre-revolutionary period. His answer is that the whole long pre-history of struggle between indigenous elements of colonial society and the haughtiness and unresponsiveness of officialdom under imperial rule dictated the need for revolution. That is certainly not an unreasonable conclusion. However, to this reviewer’s mind the question itself is rather fruitless. Revolutions occur; whatever reasons underlie any particular revolution because the parties (or at least one of the parties) see no other way out. Post-hoc analysis, while interesting, does not explain why this occurs and perhaps this why post-hoc knowledge does not make one wiser about how to avoid revolution. In modern sociology that, in any case, is the general intent of such analysis. Mr. Draper has, nevertheless, presented an interesting thesis about the sources of conflict in the American setting and the role of national consciousness in the pre- revolutionary period. Read on.
REVISED: NOVEMBER 4, 2006
Interesting review.
ReplyDeleteI liked the point, about the inefficientcy of British rule, and difficulty to make quick decisions.