Book Review - 1912

This book, 1912, is a recent book promoted in either Time or Newsweek. It is about the campaign of 1912. Someday I will post the author. I picked this book because it was on special, and I like history.

This is one of the most important presidential campaigns. Unfortunately, the author does not go into detail why. He concludes with how the League led to the UN - but the League was not pushed until 1918, and would not have occurred had their not been WWI - which broke out 1 1/2 years into Wilson's presidency. Hence, no WWI, no League.

Instead, the author details the campaigns of Roosevelt, Wilson, Taft, and, Eugene Debs. Why he matters, I do not know. Sure he got 6%, but the author does not provide any political arithmatic as to how he influenced the election. Did he take away enough votes from Wilson and Roosevelt so Taft could win Utah (one of two states he won)? That is possibly this bozo's only importance in this election.

Instead, the book focuses on the egos of Teddy and Woodrow. Everyone who knows anything about history knows that Teddy essentially had an ego bigger than God. But it is interesting to find out that Woodrow, who was a buttmunch, was also a backstabbing ingrate. Whether this character flaw comes thru any of his biographies, I do not know, for all liberals-leftists-progressives essentially love Woodrow. One commentator in Seattle has the best comment about his - he was "a legend in his own mind." I am not really interested in Woodrow, because, well, he sucked.

Now, regarding Taft, all that can be said is that he pursued the election, which he may not have wanted, out of spite for Teddy. He wanted John Roberts' position, instead (which he got in 1921). It is believed that he would have lost in a Wilson-Taft contest, but this is a matter of dispute. For example, Wilson won Massachussetts because so many Republicans in 1912 voted for him rather than either Teddy (or their preference, Taft) because they did not want to see Teddy win.

In my first college history class, on our exams, we were to explain the significance of each subject. For a history book to be worthwhile, either a micro-story has to be told with a whole bunch of new sources, or the author, who reveals nothing new, has to give his conclusions as to the importance of his subject matter. This author did neither.

It is noted that 1912 essentially established the Democrats on the left of the spectrum, and established the Republicans as the conservative party. While it took 75 years to complete this, Taft put his conservative buddies in party positions, so that when the "progressives" came waddling back into the party, there was much less influence they could have asserted as previously.

Maybe this was the roots of the conservative movement? For a long time, historians assumed that the conservative attempts at taking over the Republican party were some kind of reactionary trend. However, it was not until recently that they have realized that conservatives are here to stay, in the party, and they are now beginning to figure out their true origins.

While the Democrats had a left wing candidate thrice before Wilson (excepting 1904), after 1912, the Democratic candidate would always be to the left of the Republican candidate - despite the dreams of that airhead, Harold Stassen.

Unfortunately, the author does not spend much time spelling out either of these conclusions, or any other conclusions, for that matter. Since he is not introducing anything new, he certainly is entitled to spell out his conclusions, and let his bias into the mix - so as to complete the lesson of the tale.

Recommendation? Unless you are a history buff, or you really really like the progressive era, I do not necessarily recommend this book.