What do you think?
Rate this book
The Founding Conservatives: How a Group of Unsung Heroes Saved the American Revolution
The untold story of a small group of founders who prevented radicalism at the dawn of the republic A nation at war. A real estate crash and financial meltdown. Bitter partisan disputes over taxation, the distribution of wealth, and the role of banks and corporations in society. Welcome to the world of the founding fathers. According to most narratives of the American Revolution, the founders were united in their vision. But according to historian David Lefer, political disagreements split the new nation in two. Had it not been for a few individuals who exercised a pragmatic conservatism that valued capitalism, a strong military, and the preservation of tradition, our country would be vastly different today. Drawing on years of archival research, Lefer tells the untold story of how these men not only saved the Revolution but also helped define American conservatism and create the foundations for our economy. America’s first banks and corporations would not have been possible without the bold and idealistic efforts of the first conservatives. This is more than just a fascinating story; it is also a new perspective on the birth of a free and prosperous nation.
416 pages, Hardcover
First published June 13, 2013
17 people are currently reading
124 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 21 of 21 reviews
August 17, 2014
This book addresses a fascinating subject--the differing perspectives of the Founding generation associated with the runup to the Revolutionary War and the war's aftermath. There were a variety of positions among that generation. This book focuses on one group, what the author calls "the founding conservatives." These conservatives were not what we refer to as conservatives in the USA today.
One important point is noted by the author, David Lefer, is the relationship between the thoughts of American founders and the English classical conservative thinker, Edmund Burke. In a real sense, many of the American leaders discussed here were closer to classical conservatives than to Lockean liberals. Burke's emphasis was on slow change in basic principles and institutions, distrust of leaders being able to make dramatic policy shifts without mischief being done, etc. I am not fully comfortable with this logic, but I understand it and think that Lefer does a solid job in addressing this linkage. James Wilson, for instance3, is somewhat more complex in his thinking, linking some Burkean elements with a more democratic perspective than some of the conservative founders.
Among the actors considered? John Dickinson, Alexander Hamilton, Gouverneur Morris, Robert Morris, Philip Schuyler, Wilson, etc. I would suggest that John Adams was closer to these people by the time of the Constitutional Convention than acknowledged by the author (e.g., see McCullough's biography of John Adams).
The book is quite readable and provides deeper discussion of this set of founders than one normally finds. Well worthwhile to read. . . .
One important point is noted by the author, David Lefer, is the relationship between the thoughts of American founders and the English classical conservative thinker, Edmund Burke. In a real sense, many of the American leaders discussed here were closer to classical conservatives than to Lockean liberals. Burke's emphasis was on slow change in basic principles and institutions, distrust of leaders being able to make dramatic policy shifts without mischief being done, etc. I am not fully comfortable with this logic, but I understand it and think that Lefer does a solid job in addressing this linkage. James Wilson, for instance3, is somewhat more complex in his thinking, linking some Burkean elements with a more democratic perspective than some of the conservative founders.
Among the actors considered? John Dickinson, Alexander Hamilton, Gouverneur Morris, Robert Morris, Philip Schuyler, Wilson, etc. I would suggest that John Adams was closer to these people by the time of the Constitutional Convention than acknowledged by the author (e.g., see McCullough's biography of John Adams).
The book is quite readable and provides deeper discussion of this set of founders than one normally finds. Well worthwhile to read. . . .
July 8, 2014
***Spoilers Alert***
So, I didn't finish this book. It was pretty-well written, but it was too long for me. Nonetheless, I think I got the gist of how the founding conservatives, lead by John Dickinson (according to the author), "saved the American Revolution". There were also juicy facts that I couldn't help not to note.
BTW, this book was written by a self-proclaimed Democrat who thought that the book would annoy all people on the political spectrum.
Basically, the founding conservatives were savvy enough to realize that all radical demands would ruin the chances to win the Revolutionary War against Britain. The radical demands, mostly from the New England Colonies lead by the Adams', were either subdued or quashed. The founding conservatives also made sure to procure supplies from the French that helped the war effort. The radicals did not want to have business arrangements that could benefit anyone personally. However, without any personal agreements, no supplies would be forthcoming from the French.
The few juicy parts have to do with Dickinson. He was raised Quaker. However, unlike today's Quakers, he was considered a conservative who originally wrote the Declaration of Independence to be based on the Protestant-Christian Bible, not on Locke's natural law theory as Jefferson did in the end (Jefferson was the founder of the Democratic party). Now, in the 21st century, Quakers are essentially Unitarian-Universalists (UUA) who are the most liberal members of society. They don't put too much faith in the Bible now-a-days. (FYI: I personally know Quakers and UUA's and was raised in a Quaker area of PA.)
So, I didn't finish this book. It was pretty-well written, but it was too long for me. Nonetheless, I think I got the gist of how the founding conservatives, lead by John Dickinson (according to the author), "saved the American Revolution". There were also juicy facts that I couldn't help not to note.
BTW, this book was written by a self-proclaimed Democrat who thought that the book would annoy all people on the political spectrum.
Basically, the founding conservatives were savvy enough to realize that all radical demands would ruin the chances to win the Revolutionary War against Britain. The radical demands, mostly from the New England Colonies lead by the Adams', were either subdued or quashed. The founding conservatives also made sure to procure supplies from the French that helped the war effort. The radicals did not want to have business arrangements that could benefit anyone personally. However, without any personal agreements, no supplies would be forthcoming from the French.
The few juicy parts have to do with Dickinson. He was raised Quaker. However, unlike today's Quakers, he was considered a conservative who originally wrote the Declaration of Independence to be based on the Protestant-Christian Bible, not on Locke's natural law theory as Jefferson did in the end (Jefferson was the founder of the Democratic party). Now, in the 21st century, Quakers are essentially Unitarian-Universalists (UUA) who are the most liberal members of society. They don't put too much faith in the Bible now-a-days. (FYI: I personally know Quakers and UUA's and was raised in a Quaker area of PA.)
February 9, 2014
The whole story of the conservatives and the radicals before, during, and after the American Revolution is 1000x more interesting than high school history class had me believe.
March 6, 2017
I was given this book by a friend of mine who said the book made him feel rather frustrated, but I'm not sure why that is the case upon reading it. To be sure, the people in this book are mostly obscure, but I was familiar with most of them because of my fondness for history about the American Revolution [1], and the story itself was sufficiently clear to make it easy to understand who was being talked about. In many ways, this book deserves to be a companion volume to Russell Kirk's The Conservative Mind, which has a mostly anglophile appreciation of the origins of Conservatism and mindset, while this book demonstrates that the Americans struck upon the blend between reason and tradition first. I must admit that I am a temperamental conservative myself, and have tended to greatly dislike being considered to be a radical person because while I am a person with a strong interest in reform, I have no interest whatsoever in the sort of rabble rousing that is associated with radicalism of any kind and have a great dislike of any sort of mob scene or disorder. Suffice it to say, I'm a reasonably good audience for a book like this one.
In about 340 pages or so, the author discusses a group of American conservative revolutionaries who managed to hit upon the precise amalgam that allowed for the lasting survival of conservatism as a power in the United States despite continual preaching from the left that demographics or social change will totally swamp any sort of conservative traditions into that famous dustbin of history where so many left-wing causes reside. A series of chapters look at people such as John Dickinson, James Wilson, John and Samuel Adams (whom the author does not consider genuine conservatives), Silas Deane, Robert Morris, Gouverneur Morris, John Jay, John Rutledge, Philip Schuyler (most famous for being Alexander Hamilton's father-in-law), and Alexander Hamilton [2] and their friends and enemies over the course of the late colonial period, American Revolution, and early republic. The author examines in particular forgotten incidents with massive importance, like an encounter at "Fort Mifflin" where America's conservatives held off a Philadelphia mob by force of arms, demonstrating the mixture of firmness and pragmatic flexibility, a respect for both reason and tradition, and a strong capitalist streak have helped define America's conservatism from the late 1700's to today.
All in all, this book is certainly a persuasive one, and it manages to tell such an engaging story about the dramatic experiences of America's mostly obscure founding conservatives that one can usually forget it is written by someone who does not consider himself particularly fond of contemporary conservatives. Yet at times one can get a sense that the author has a somewhat muddled description, in that the people are sometimes described as conservatives and yet often as moderates. Indeed, in the colonial order the gentlemen here would have been generally considered to be moderates, but as American Tories were greatly discredited after the winning of independence and then the fall of the Federalist party, these people were about as far right as one could get having supported the American Revolution wholeheartedly. One can only go so far to the right and concede the right of rebellion against tyranny, after all. Among the more important insights of this book is the ominous conclusion that the author draws about slavery serving as the cause of division between the conservatives of the North and the South, an immensely fateful divide that prefigured so many more divides as the Civil War would approach. This book is a worthwhile read.
[1] See, for example:
https://edgeinducedcohesion.blog/2015...
https://edgeinducedcohesion.blog/2015...
https://edgeinducedcohesion.blog/2014...
https://edgeinducedcohesion.blog/2014...
https://edgeinducedcohesion.blog/2014...
https://edgeinducedcohesion.blog/2016...
https://edgeinducedcohesion.blog/2014...
https://edgeinducedcohesion.blog/2012...
[2] See, for example:
https://edgeinducedcohesion.blog/2016...
https://edgeinducedcohesion.blog/2013...
In about 340 pages or so, the author discusses a group of American conservative revolutionaries who managed to hit upon the precise amalgam that allowed for the lasting survival of conservatism as a power in the United States despite continual preaching from the left that demographics or social change will totally swamp any sort of conservative traditions into that famous dustbin of history where so many left-wing causes reside. A series of chapters look at people such as John Dickinson, James Wilson, John and Samuel Adams (whom the author does not consider genuine conservatives), Silas Deane, Robert Morris, Gouverneur Morris, John Jay, John Rutledge, Philip Schuyler (most famous for being Alexander Hamilton's father-in-law), and Alexander Hamilton [2] and their friends and enemies over the course of the late colonial period, American Revolution, and early republic. The author examines in particular forgotten incidents with massive importance, like an encounter at "Fort Mifflin" where America's conservatives held off a Philadelphia mob by force of arms, demonstrating the mixture of firmness and pragmatic flexibility, a respect for both reason and tradition, and a strong capitalist streak have helped define America's conservatism from the late 1700's to today.
All in all, this book is certainly a persuasive one, and it manages to tell such an engaging story about the dramatic experiences of America's mostly obscure founding conservatives that one can usually forget it is written by someone who does not consider himself particularly fond of contemporary conservatives. Yet at times one can get a sense that the author has a somewhat muddled description, in that the people are sometimes described as conservatives and yet often as moderates. Indeed, in the colonial order the gentlemen here would have been generally considered to be moderates, but as American Tories were greatly discredited after the winning of independence and then the fall of the Federalist party, these people were about as far right as one could get having supported the American Revolution wholeheartedly. One can only go so far to the right and concede the right of rebellion against tyranny, after all. Among the more important insights of this book is the ominous conclusion that the author draws about slavery serving as the cause of division between the conservatives of the North and the South, an immensely fateful divide that prefigured so many more divides as the Civil War would approach. This book is a worthwhile read.
[1] See, for example:
https://edgeinducedcohesion.blog/2015...
https://edgeinducedcohesion.blog/2015...
https://edgeinducedcohesion.blog/2014...
https://edgeinducedcohesion.blog/2014...
https://edgeinducedcohesion.blog/2014...
https://edgeinducedcohesion.blog/2016...
https://edgeinducedcohesion.blog/2014...
https://edgeinducedcohesion.blog/2012...
[2] See, for example:
https://edgeinducedcohesion.blog/2016...
https://edgeinducedcohesion.blog/2013...
January 4, 2017
It was interesting seeing many of the founders we know and love being referred to as "radicles". I have never seen any other books that go strait to that classification. But, while reading the book the author is pretty good in justifying his words at he start. Then telling the story from this different point of view.
While we focus parts of this story from one person's history we have so many other people who come in and out of the political spectrum of the day and we get a pretty good and broad sense of many issues, fights, and conflicts. And guess what? History books in school gloss over so much of this stuff it takes some deep reading to find out this happened. This book is a great start
While we focus parts of this story from one person's history we have so many other people who come in and out of the political spectrum of the day and we get a pretty good and broad sense of many issues, fights, and conflicts. And guess what? History books in school gloss over so much of this stuff it takes some deep reading to find out this happened. This book is a great start
April 20, 2018
The book details the procession of events surrounding the American Revolution in a point of view that I’d never heard before. Seeing iconic events from a totally different perspective is largely rewarding, and the detail that the author was able to put into his descriptions is impressive.
The one criticism I have for this book is the relative one-sidedness. Lefer paints his subjects as either unquestionable heroes or dastardly villains. There isn’t much ambiguity to be found, which, at times, makes Lefer’s arguments less than believable.
The one criticism I have for this book is the relative one-sidedness. Lefer paints his subjects as either unquestionable heroes or dastardly villains. There isn’t much ambiguity to be found, which, at times, makes Lefer’s arguments less than believable.
January 1, 2019
Great overview of the American Revolution from a different perspective than usual. By “conservatives” he doesn’t mean equivalents of modern-day Republicans (though they certainly share values), but the founders who saw value in relationship with Britain and resisted breaking ties without first seeking reconciliation — and how their measured approach led to a better future for the fledgling nation.
May 10, 2021
Required reading for all; right and left.
February 20, 2023
The perception conservatives have is interesting while also being intellectually disappointing. They love theory even when that theory is burning around them.
December 4, 2016
I dawdled with this book for a long time and in retrospect I'm not sure why. It really turned my head around about our Founding Fathers and I made a rush to finish just before starting 'Democracy in America.' Glad that I did because I feel like I have a better sense regarding the debates over the Declaration, the Articles of Confederation, and the Constitution.
Also, I must say that from our vantage point some 240 years after the fact, our FF's were perhaps more intent upon backing our troops, and ensuring their well-being. Apparently that was a big argument as the radicals did not want a standing army and caused all types of problems with our agents attempting to obtain gunpowder, weapons, clothing, and other necessities.
Our hero's in this book, the conservatives are a varied bunch that like me you probably have little knowledge of their stories except for perhaps one.
John Jay (NY) contributed to the Federalist Papers.
Silas Deane (CT)
John Dickinson (DE) writer of 'Letters from a Farmer in Pennsylvania.'
Robert Livingston (NY)
Robert Morris (PA)
Gouvernor Morris (NY)
John & Edward Rutledge (SC)
James Wilson (PA)
The book begins with a story of a riot directed eventually against the house of James Wilson, the source of anger was the price of bread, and Wilson being a free-market guy was an easy target of radicals who wanted price controls. Nothing new under the sun there except Wilson and family could have been harmed or killed for his political stand.
Three arguments buy the author. 1. conservatives saved the revolution. 2. conservatives brought modern capitalism to America, and 3. American conservatism was ahead of British conservatism, which is where many have always viewed as the origins of American thought. (p. 6).
After my read of 'Democracy in America' I plan to go back and re-read this and focus especially on Silas Deane and John Dickinson, my new favorite Founding Fathers.
Also, I must say that from our vantage point some 240 years after the fact, our FF's were perhaps more intent upon backing our troops, and ensuring their well-being. Apparently that was a big argument as the radicals did not want a standing army and caused all types of problems with our agents attempting to obtain gunpowder, weapons, clothing, and other necessities.
Our hero's in this book, the conservatives are a varied bunch that like me you probably have little knowledge of their stories except for perhaps one.
John Jay (NY) contributed to the Federalist Papers.
Silas Deane (CT)
John Dickinson (DE) writer of 'Letters from a Farmer in Pennsylvania.'
Robert Livingston (NY)
Robert Morris (PA)
Gouvernor Morris (NY)
John & Edward Rutledge (SC)
James Wilson (PA)
The book begins with a story of a riot directed eventually against the house of James Wilson, the source of anger was the price of bread, and Wilson being a free-market guy was an easy target of radicals who wanted price controls. Nothing new under the sun there except Wilson and family could have been harmed or killed for his political stand.
Three arguments buy the author. 1. conservatives saved the revolution. 2. conservatives brought modern capitalism to America, and 3. American conservatism was ahead of British conservatism, which is where many have always viewed as the origins of American thought. (p. 6).
After my read of 'Democracy in America' I plan to go back and re-read this and focus especially on Silas Deane and John Dickinson, my new favorite Founding Fathers.
September 22, 2014
Terrific book. I've highlighted bunches of stuff in it.
It tells the story of the conservatives at the time of the revolution, who wanted independence but were not willing to toss everything they knew and had to get it. They were quite willing to fight for it and most of them did. These conservatives kept the American Revolution from turning into a revolution in the style of the French revolution years later. Several times their hold on the government slipped and the specter of overthrow and death within the new nation loomed large and ominously. There were a few mob incidents - such as in Pennsylvania when some of the radicals began capturing and hanging Quakers because they did not believe in fighting. The radicals accused them of not wanting independence and trying to hang on to the status quo and their money. Many of the conservatives went broke, or nearly so, trying to shore up the new government which could not raise money from the states. One conservative went to General Washington with the pay for his troops from his own pocket to keep them from rebelling. The Continental Congress radicals felt like the soldiers should be willing to fight for the honor of the thing - they shouldn't be paid.
The author looks at these conservatives and their background and ideas from shortly before the revolution to the constitutional convention and beyond. Some of them managed to hang on to what they had, but many lost everything in the speculation.
It tells the story of the conservatives at the time of the revolution, who wanted independence but were not willing to toss everything they knew and had to get it. They were quite willing to fight for it and most of them did. These conservatives kept the American Revolution from turning into a revolution in the style of the French revolution years later. Several times their hold on the government slipped and the specter of overthrow and death within the new nation loomed large and ominously. There were a few mob incidents - such as in Pennsylvania when some of the radicals began capturing and hanging Quakers because they did not believe in fighting. The radicals accused them of not wanting independence and trying to hang on to the status quo and their money. Many of the conservatives went broke, or nearly so, trying to shore up the new government which could not raise money from the states. One conservative went to General Washington with the pay for his troops from his own pocket to keep them from rebelling. The Continental Congress radicals felt like the soldiers should be willing to fight for the honor of the thing - they shouldn't be paid.
The author looks at these conservatives and their background and ideas from shortly before the revolution to the constitutional convention and beyond. Some of them managed to hang on to what they had, but many lost everything in the speculation.
April 15, 2014
This book is an excellent corrective to the politically correct romance of the American Revolution spewing from Right and Left. To those who comfortably relate the tale of how our Founders would already be shooting, Lefer's book should teach that while some of the Founders may have reacted that way, it was the unsung moderates of the tale--men like John Dickinson, James Wilson, and Robert Morris who are often described in the polemics as pro-British--who helped ensure the American Revolution didn't run off the rails the way the later French Revolution did. The Founding Conservatives put in strict rules to protect minorities, and the right to property, and allowed for innovation within a framework of respect for tradition. It is these men, and not the much ballyhooed Adamses, Lees, Jefferson and Patrick Henry who are the true heroes of the story.
August 5, 2013
Riveting and Powerful!
This book is easy to read and is well written. David Lefer writes the book in a way that makes you ponder and dare to compare the patriots of our past to current day zealots. This book is written for both conservative and liberals because we all share one passion – this great country and wanting it to thrive! This is not a dry history book that merely recites facts; instead there is a rich story to be shared. You will learn a lot about our historical past as well as question current day happenings. Enjoy! NetGalley provided an advanced review copy of this book in exchange for an honest review.
This book is easy to read and is well written. David Lefer writes the book in a way that makes you ponder and dare to compare the patriots of our past to current day zealots. This book is written for both conservative and liberals because we all share one passion – this great country and wanting it to thrive! This is not a dry history book that merely recites facts; instead there is a rich story to be shared. You will learn a lot about our historical past as well as question current day happenings. Enjoy! NetGalley provided an advanced review copy of this book in exchange for an honest review.
June 30, 2013
Fascinating, well-researched and well-written history of some heroes of the American Revolution who have become lost or footnotes in the popular histories -- perhaps because none of them went on to become President. Well worth reading. After I'd finished the book, I actually missed living with these interesting characters who were so important to our nation's founding.
August 29, 2013
Deals mostly with the politics and political theory during the American Revolution and the leading individuals from the "conservative" side. John Dickinson who wrote "Letters from a Farmer" one of the the most influential pamphlets before the revolution is a main character in the story. I never had pictured John Adams as a radical politician before!
December 5, 2013
This book was a joke. This study is a revisionist history that attempts to give credit where no credit is due. If conservatism had won out in the years leading up to the American Revolution, and during the war itself, we'd still be under the Crown's rule.
October 27, 2016
A discussion of the values of the American Revolution and background of several men who helped shaped the republican character of America. While written in an academic mode, The Founding Conservatives is a good read for those interested in the founding of American political thought.
February 27, 2014
A very good book once I got into it. It gave me some new insights into the personalities and debates that shaped us as a nation.
July 7, 2014
Absolutely loved it. Filled with great stories, political and economic theory. Very little filler in here. Just read the book. You'll be glad you did.
April 23, 2017
Great analysis of where/how the conservative movement originated in the founding era.
May 16, 2019
This was a very original approach, I thought, to a treatment of the founding fathers. Apparently they were not all radical revolutionaries. Some favored a more restrained approach to getting what they wanted from the Mother Country. John Dickinson, for example was a delegate to the Continental Congress that issued the Declaration of Independence in 1776, but did not sign the document because he opposed independence until after more negotoations with Great Britain had been conducted.
The book itself was an excellent scholarly treatment of the subject with lots of notes and references.
The book itself was an excellent scholarly treatment of the subject with lots of notes and references.
Displaying 1 - 21 of 21 reviews