kmatthe2's review against another edition

Go to review page

5.0

Smartly written and carefully researched. A recommended read to anyone -- particularly those who often invoke "what the Founders intended." As Goldstone proves, the Constitution isn't an infallible document sprung out of the founders' head, but instead a record of compromise and self-interest. Very very engaging.

nightwater32's review against another edition

Go to review page

3.0

Well written and a good example of what went on in the early days of our nation and how the institution of slavery shaded even one of our founding documents. The seeds of dissent and disagreement that would blossom into the Civil War are clearly already planted before Washington even took office as President.

raewood's review against another edition

Go to review page

3.0

Well that could've been a 30 page journal article. In fact, I think some brevity would've helped Goldstone's argument, because his connections are far too diffuse and obscured by clunky sentences and unnecessary dives into biographical information. This book has actually almost nothing to say about slavery and instead is a painfully slow and complicated rehashing of the constitutional convention, which it's clear the author really loves. Just very meh.

dj_yossarian's review against another edition

Go to review page

4.0

I think Goldstone's argument that slavery played a crucial role in the outcomes of the Constitutional Convention holds up well throughout this short book, and I learned an incredible amount about the participants and the circumstances of that seminal event in U.S. history. Still, there was something not quite rigorous enough about it that sort of nagged at me now and again. In any event, it's not going to stop me from delving into his "Inherently Unequal" when I get the chance.

dickh's review

Go to review page

4.0

The author makes a compelling argument that the creation of our constitution was the result of pragmatic agreements/concessions of representatives who generally had their own self-interest, rather than lofty ideals, in mind. Given the composition of the group, this should not be surprising but Goldstone makes a strong case. Well worth reading.
More...