Christmas Book Ideas

Of two things that are certain, one is that father is a really good man. A second certainty is that he never reads anything on the Internet, so I am safe in telling the following story. A few years back, he gave me a set of tools for my birthday, which follows right on the heels of Christmas. He meant well, but did not realize that I had taken a monk-like vow to deny myself of the ownership, use, or knowledge of tools. Besides, this set consisted of some blades for a power saw and a bunch of fittings for a socket wrench. They all came packaged together in a neat set, which I never opened. I sold them in a garage sale and used the money to buy a book.

I have tried to fathom how a house could be built with no interior walls, but rather double sided bookshelves separating the rooms. I have even contemplated the economics of having our kitchen torn out in order to make more room for books. Eating out is a good prelude to going book shopping. My wife has rejected both ideas, but she has learned to live with the incurable book collecting syndrome. I know she wishes I would take up other interests instead, like watching sports, hunting, building furniture, scuba diving, or Nascar racing. But patience is among her great virtues.

Part of my justification for incessant accumulation of printed materials is that it enables me to help others. So with Christmas nearly upon us, I think it is time for me to make some worthwhile Christmas suggestions. You may want to put some of the following books on your wish list or you may choose to buy themselves after you sell your other Christmas gifts in a garage sale.

(Notice, that this list is not to be confused with the upcoming traditional lists: Best Books of the Year and Best Unread Books of the Year. There may, however, be some overlap between those lists and this one.)

My first choice would be the two volumes of American history by William J. Bennett, former Secretary of Education. They are titled America: The Last Best Hope, Volume I: From the Age of Discovery to the World at War and Volume II: From a World at War to the Triumph of Freedom. This is a telling of America’s history from a conservative perspective. The story of America is such a powerful and moving story that it is difficult to tell it badly although many textbooks have tried. Bennett succeeds where many fail because he focuses on the key aspect of history: Story or narrative. There are parts of Bennett’s narrative that cause me to wince, in particular he loves Lincoln far more than I do. But the good narrative, the acknowledgment of Christian influences, and the conservative, upbeat tone outweigh all differences. This set is now available in a really attractive boxed set and can be purchased at most book stores or at http://www.bennettmornings.com/pg/jsp/billsbooks/billsbooks.jsp

More and more of the American story can be found in the many wonderful books on American foundations. American Vision, under the leadership of Gary Demar, has reprinted a massive work from the mid-1800s titled The Christian Life and Character of the Civil Institutions of the United States. This compendium of stories and documents was written and assembled by a Washington, D.C. minister and government worker named Benjamin F. Morris. It covers events from the colonial days through the War Between the States. Attempts to tell our nation’s history from a completely secular viewpoint have come under attack for several decades now. This 1000 page tome is a heavy scale tipper in any and all discussions about the influence of Christianity in our history.

Part of that same debate over the religious influences centers around the sometimes reticent George Washington. There have been a flurry of books recounting aspects of George Washington’s military leadership. Such books as David Hackett Fischer’s Washington’s Crossing and David McCullough’s 1776 have strongly supported the military gifts and contributions Washington made in the War for Independence. Other books have detailed Washington’s leadership as the first President under the Constitution of 1789. Up for debate has been Washington’s religious viewpoints. No doubt he used lots of religious language, but it tended to be such terms as "Providence" or "the Governor of the Universe." Peter Lillback, President of Westminster Theological Seminary, and Jerry Newcombe, a writer and producer of Christian documentaries, wrote George Washington’s Sacred Fire to affirmatively answer the question: Was George Washington a Christian? This too is a heavy book of over 1100 pages and is a good collection of source materials.


There are yet more books on American history that I can recommend. Big Chief Elizabeth by Giles Martin is a great telling of the story of the early settling of America. I bought the book at Roanoke Island in North Carolina because I wanted to know more about what happened to the Lost Colony. Martin answered my questions and also covered lots of the history of Jamestown. Joseph Ellis' new book American Creation: Triumphs and Tragedies at the Founding of the Republic stmbles due to Ellis' secular worldview, but excells in other respects. As he points out, in recent years 10 books on the Founding Fathers or founding era have been national bestsellers and this book makes that number 11. A book that deals with another early period of America and weaves our history into the events of the French Revolution is Jay Winik's The Great Upheaval: America and the Birth of the Modern World 1788-1800. I have only dipped into the opening pages of this book, but really liked what I read.

Of course, you cannot beat reading the classics. Last year while I was teaching my Humanities: the Modern World class, I thoroughly enjoyed being reacquainted with such authors as Dickens, Hugo, Tolstoy, Cooper, Faulkner, Dostoevsky, Tolkien, Harper Lee, and James Hilton, but I cannot speak with quite so much pleasure from reading Voltaire or Camus. This year, we are into Humanities: The Ancient World. The high point has been reading The Iliad of Homer. (We read Richmond Lattimore's translation.) Several years back on my third venture into Homer, I became a convert to the powerful spell of that great poet of the war in Ilion and the devastation wrought by Achilles' anger. A new book, From Achilles to Christ: Why Christians Should Read the Pagan Classics by Louis Markos, is an enjoyable and useful companion to Homer and other ancients, such as Hesiod, the writers of dramatic tragedies, and Virgil. Along with books and essays by Peter Leithart, Louise Cowan, and Glenn Arbery, Markos is a good companion to reading the ancients.

The history of the ancients also worth pursuing. I am over halfway through and thoroughly enjoying Ernle Bradford’s work of some years back, titled Thermopylae: Battle for the West. I have never met an Ernle Bradford book I did not like. Another and more recent book with the same basic title is Thermopylae: The Battle That Changed the World by Paul Cartledge. I notice that Bradford did not even make a bibliography listing in Cartledge’s more academic study. Despite that egregious error on Cartledge's part, I shall have to give his book a try.

Two more thorough studies of the ancient world are The Classical World: An Epic History from Homer to Hadrian by Robin Lane Fox and The Ancient World: From the Earliest Accounts to the Fall of Rome by Susan Wise Bauer. Up to now, these books have been kept close at hand for reference more than for thorough reading. Mrs. Bauer is well known for her books promoting classical education, with an emphasis especially geared toward home schoolers. Bauer’s work is more suited toward narrative reading, while Fox’ book would be the more scholarly resource.

Any study of the ancient world is enhanced by reading the Book of Daniel in the Old Testament. Like a miniature Bible in terms of history, Daniel contains history, interprets history, and points to the culmination of history. Along with the treasured stories of Daniel, there are difficult prophetic and eschatological topics in the book. James Jordan’s new commentary, titled The Handwriting on the Wall: A Commentary on the Book of Daniel, provides 700 pages of insights into the text of Daniel. This is a work filled with history, theology, and all those kinds of edifying, unusual, sometimes bizarre, and delightful Jordanesque insights his readers have grown to love and his detractors love to groan. Side note: I had the frightening experience recently of speaking at a conference where James Jordan was sitting at the back selling books. I spoke on the topic “Punic Wars and Culture Wars” and talked quite a bit about Hannibal. Afterwards, Dr. Jordan came up and said, “Did you know that Hannibal is in the Book of Daniel?” Get his book and find it.

Along with being a key text on history and eschatology, the Book of Daniel is chocked full of political issues. In the Bible, all political issues boil down to one central issue: Sovereignty, or the question: Who is in control? R. J. Rushdoony devoted his life’s teaching, writing, and ministry to that question. Along with the many books and essays published during his lifetime, many unpublished works are being printed by Ross House Books. The latest is titled Sovereignty. The issue of sovereignty is a familiar and well-emphasized theme among Calvinists who preach and teach the sovereignty of God in matters relating to salvation. But the Bible never limits Christ’s Lordship to church, Sunday school, and VBS. As is emphasized in the host of glorious advent hymns we hear in the stores this time of year, He comes to make His blessings known far as the curse is found. Sovereignty is written in the short essay style that became so very typical of Rushdoony. He would take a theme—sovereignty in this case—and address it from a seemingly unending number of angles. Like a composer with a musical motif, Rushdoony repeats the theme with a slightly different approach in each essay. This is a good introduction to Rushdoony’s thought or a good refresher course on his thinking.

I feel like I haven’t even scratched the surface on books for Christmas. So if there are particular people whose book need has not been matched here, you may have to contact me personally. If I can help just one person with a book buying need, all my labors, purchases, and acquisitions will not have been in vain.

Conservatives, Arkansas, and Conservatism in Arkansas

I hope to be able to get a good night’s sleep on January 20, 2009. Right now there are several candidates who have not yet won my support, but who I think could successfully and faithfully govern the United States. There are also several candidates who might very well cause me quite a few sleepless nights. Former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee is in the first category.

A bit of personal background: I voted for Mike Huckabee when he ran unsuccessfully against Dale Bumpers for the Senate. I voted for him when he ran successfully in a special election for Lieutenant Governor and every time he was on the ballot for governor. I attended a political gathering when he first announced his Senate run back many years ago. I live in Texarkana, Arkansas where he was a pastor of First Baptist Church and we have met several times, but he does not know me.

Questions arise about his conservatism or rather what is generally regarded as his lack of conservatism based on his record as governor of Arkansas. So I will first address the issue of conservatism and then the situation in Arkansas.

First, conservatism in 21st century America is a political perspective or an ideological viewpoint. We can make endless lists of essential beliefs of conservatives, but such thinkers as Russell Kirk, William F. Buckley, and others have successfully written on those issues for several decades now. Essentially, conservatism is based on the premise that less government is better than more government.

Conservatives can be placed into two camps. There are those conservatives who write books, discuss conservative political issues, and formulate ideas based upon bedrock conservative principles. Then there are conservatives who hold political office. You could call the first group theorists and the second, practitioners.

While we can discuss and define conservatism based on an ideological list of principles, we would find endless disagreements among conservatives. Historically, the feuds between libertarians and traditionalists have highlighted these differences. Any listing of the “Ten Basic Beliefs of Conservatives” might find harmony on points one, two, and three, with mild disagreement over point five, and then a major “finger pointing, red-in-the-face” shouting match over points seven and eight.

To a very large degree, the term conservative is a relative term. (In 19th century European political thought, those who favored limited governments and republican principles were called liberals.) The term conservative is like other relative terms, such as tall, short, rich, poor, happy, religious, Calvinistic, smelly, light, dark, and wormy. Some might say, “The center for the basketball team is tall.” Does that mean tall compared to other players on his 12-year old league? Or tall compared to college basketball players? Or tall compared to Hobbits? Or tall compared to twenty story buildings?

Similarly, one says, “That governor is conservative.” Does that mean conservative compared to his predecessor? Conservative compared to Dennis Kucinich? Conservative compared to Thomas Jefferson? Or conservative compared to Nero?

Most often the people we refer to—or label—today in political talk as conservatives are Republicans. Most often they are the heirs or beneficiaries of the legacy of Ronald Reagan. In most recent political races in America, the Republican candidates for office are more conservative than their Democrat political opponents. Many times, no doubt, the two opposing candidates’ positions make George Wallace’s political insight ring true: There’s not a dime’s worth of difference between them. At the same time, there may be nine cents worth of difference, for what that is worth.

Ronald Reagan was phenomenal. He was to a large degree an ideological conservative. His conservatism grew out of decades of reading, thinking, speaking, meeting people, and observing the world. Had every other person in America been favorable to détente, conciliation, and peaceful coexistence with the Soviet Union, Ronald Reagan would have still loathed Communism. Likewise, Reagan’s distaste for massive tax, spend, regulate, and control economic policies vexed his soul. His heart convictions were his Gallup Poll. At the same time, he governed a state—and not just any state, but California—and he governed the United States, with the Congress being in the hands of Democrats during most of his two terms.

Reagan is an icon of conservatism, but there is much about his record as the governor of California and as the President of the United States that does not fit well in a conservative ideological chart or graph.

Out of the Pulpit, Into the Political Ring

In 1992, Mike Huckabee left the ministry and threw his hat into the Senate race in Arkansas. He ran against Senator Dale Bumpers, whose political career hinged on his having been a giant slayer in politics. Bumpers defeated Republican Winthrop Rockefeller for governor in 1970 and Democrat J. William Fulbright for the Senate in 1974. Three powerful Democrats dominated Arkansas politics at that time. There was Bumpers and his Senate colleague David Pryor and Governor Bill Clinton. They were all bright, aggressive, politically charming New South Democrats.

Huckabee made a valiant, but futile effort against Bumpers. The ruthlessness of being a rookie running against a political pro and a bout with pneumonia brought Huckabee crashing down by the end of the campaign. Arkansas historically has been a Democrat one-party state. Historically, the Conway family controlled politics. The ruling families’ names changed, but the Democrat party control did not. So Bumpers won with 60% of the vote.

During that same election that saw Huckabee’s defeat, Gov. Clinton won the Presidency. He left the governor’s mansion in the middle of his term and was succeeded by Lieutenant Governor Jim Guy Tucker. Jim Guy was yet another of that generation of bright, handsome, skilled political leaders in the New South tradition. His succession to the governor’s office left the lieutenant governor’s post vacant. A special election was called for the summer of 1993. Mike Huckabee had become a familiar face and a popular figure. Voter turnout in a special election is usually a bit shy, and so Huckabee squeezed into the office of lieutenant governor.

At the national level, Arkansas Democrats reigned supreme with a man in the White House and two powerful Senators. But the bench proved weak back home. Governor Tucker resigned his office and barely escaped prison in matters relating to the Whitewater Scandal. By his resignation, Arkansas now had a Republican governor, Mike Huckabee.

Republican governors in Arkansas are rare, but not non-existent. Following the War Between the States, several Republicans held office. When Reconstruction faded away, Arkansas became a solid Yellow Dog Democrat state. In 1966, Winthrop Rockefeller had his fortune and home in Arkansas. He was something of the black sheep of the Rockefeller family, and so he lived in exile in Arkansas. He was one of the few Republicans in the state who had the money, the name, and the social and political skills to run for office and win. Twenty-six Democrat governors had preceded him. First time out, he lost. Two years later he won. He won in part because he ran against Orval Faubus, who represented the last legs of the old segregationalist wing of the Democrat party. To a large degree winning in Arkansas as a Republican was easier than governing.

In 1970, the smooth, confident Dale Bumpers ended Rockefeller’s stormy two terms in office. Bumpers served two terms (governor’s terms were two years long at that point); then Pryor served two terms, and then young Bill Clinton served one term. In 1980, another Republican, Frank White, upset the political table by being elected governor. In Clinton’s first term, he had raised car tags fees exorbitantly, released a death row inmate, and allowed the Federal Government to house Cuban rift-raft in Arkansas. Frank White, basically a political novice and incompetent, was given a two year lease on the governor’s mansion between Clinton regimes.

Clinton gained a monopolistic hold on the governor’s office in 1982. Huckabee became governor only because Gov. Clinton went to the White House and Gov. Tucker almost went to prison. The political climate and demographics in Arkansas remained Democratic throughout Huckabee’s completion of Tucker’s term and his own two four-year terms (a change made during the Clinton years).

Conservative New Deal

Arkansas, like much of the South, is a conservative society and has a conservative local culture, but it is not a conservative political entity. In Arkansas, laissez-faire economics, limited government, and strict construction principles mean dirt roads, no electricity, poor schools, no colleges, segregation, little or no health care facilities, and corrupt local sheriffs. Free enterprise was making bootleg whiskey. The stock market crash of 1929 was not as noticeable as hog stealing. The Great Depression was simply as new name for a long-term economic plight that existed long before Herbert Hoover.

One of the key legislative figures in the New Deal was Senate majority leader, Joe T. Robinson, a Senator from Arkansas. One of the key political events of that time was the campaign swing that Lousiana Senator Huey P. Long made on behalf of Hattie Carraway’s successful campaign for her late husband’s Senate seat. Sen. Long was the epitome of Southern populism, which was politically to the far left of even Sen. Clinton or Sen. Obama.

Arkansas was a Bible-belt New Deal state. In its conservatism, it tried to block the Federal government from interfering with segregation, but it also welcomed government programs to assist the many areas of poverty and backwardness. Arkansas people supported gun ownership, hated foreign influences, distrusted Washington experts, believed in the local community, the country church, old timey music, God’s Holy Word, the hometown football team, hunting and fishing, and that mixed, sometimes hypocritically adhered-to code of conduct among men and women. In its socially conservative political populism, it cast its electoral votes in 1968 for independent George Wallace. Four years later, it went for Republican Richard Nixon because it could not stomach liberal George McGovern.

Nationally, Arkansas has voted for several Republicans (Nixon in ’72, Reagan both times, George H. W. Bush in ’88, and George W. Bush in 2000 and ’04), but beyond the national level, Arkansas still adheres to the party of Jefferson-Jackson-FDR. When Arkansawyers go to the polls, many of them still vote for the Conway family, the Confederacy, the Southerners who got rid of the Carpetbaggers, Harry Truman, JFK, Lyndon Johnson, and above all Franklin D. Roosevelt. Many would no more vote Republican than they would spit on their granddaddy’s grave. All that was true, except for the northwest corner of the state, which was anti-secession in 1861, pro-Union during the War Between the States, and Republican ever since. But the bulk of the state and the majority of the population was and is Democrat. The contentions between the northwest corner and the rest of the state date back to economic and political feuds before statehood in 1836.

When the Democratic Party began imploding throughout the other Southern states in the past twenty years, Arkansas held out. For a brief period, it looked as though Arkansas might develop into a true two party state. For a time, Arkansas had a Republican governor, lieutenant governor, Senator, and two Republicans out of four members in the House of Representatives. A few years later, the Democrats had recaptured most of those positions. The death of Lieutenant Governor Win Rockefeller, Jr. in the summer of 2006 and the completion of Gov. Huckabee’s last term in January of 2007 opened the door for an almost complete Democrat sweep of the state.

So, is Huckabee a conservative? He was a tax and spend, pro-public school, pro-government program governor. He kept many, many Clinton appointees in office. Personally highly moral, vocally very committed as a Christian magistrate, and socially, very conservative on his general approach to cultural issues, Huckabee managed what no other Republican governor in Arkansas was able to do: Govern.