What do you think?
Rate this book
Last Call for Liberty
The hour is critical. The American republic is suffering its gravest crisis since the Civil War. Conflicts, hostility, and incivility now threaten to tear the country apart. Competing visions have led to a dangerous moment of cultural self-destruction. This is no longer politics as usual, but an era of political warfare where our enemies are not foreign adversaries, but our fellow citizens. Yet the roots of the crisis are deeper than many realize. Os Guinness argues that we face a fundamental crisis of freedom, as America's genius for freedom has become her Achilles' heel. Our society's conflicts are rooted in two rival views of freedom, one embodied in "1776" and the ideals of the American Revolution, and the other in "1789" and the ideals of the French Revolution. Once again America has become a house divided, and Americans must make up their minds as to which freedom to follow. Will the constitutional republic be restored or replaced? This grand treatment of history, civics, and ethics in the Jewish and Christian traditions represents Guinness's definitive exploration of the prospects for human freedom today. He calls for a national conversation on the nature of freedom, and poses key questions for concerned citizens to consider as we face a critical chapter in the American story. He offers readers a checklist by which they can assess the character and consequences of the freedoms they are choosing. In the tradition of Alexis de Tocqueville, Guinness provides a visitor's careful observation of the American experiment. Discover here a stirring vision for faithful citizenship and renewed responsibility for not only the nation but also the watching world.
336 pages, Hardcover
Published October 2, 2018
97 people are currently reading
1,069 people want to read
About the author
Os Guinness
77 books345 followersOs Guinness (D.Phil., Oxford) is the author or editor of more than twenty-five books, including The American Hour, Time for Truth and The Case for Civility. A frequent speaker and prominent social critic, he was the founder of the Trinity Forum and has been a visiting fellow at the Brookings Institution and a guest scholar at the Woodrow Wilson Center for International Studies. He lives near Washington, D.C.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 54 reviews
October 12, 2018
I’m not sure how Os Guinness pulled off writing the book of the hour while at the same time giving us one for many generations to come, but in Last Call for Liberty he has done that very thing. He says so much to our generation, yet it will be the words that will be needed in a hundred years. At least if there’s any liberty left to cultivate and protect at that point. What is equally amazing is how he did it. There’s only a little of Trump or Obama, and even less of Republican or Democrat. He would have us stop drowning in the latest election cycle, or even the latest 24-hr news cycle. Our problems are more fundamental than the latest round of lunacy. His perspective spans the horizon. He looks at where we are, how we got here (since the 1960s at least), and where we are going. He holds us accountable to what freedom is and what it is not. He calls on us to embrace anew the precious gift of freedom or our twisting of freedom will be our destruction.
Guinness paints his portrait with the colors of the American Revolution of 1776 and the French Revolution of 1789. That comparison explains so much. I’ve always loved reading about that time period, so I’m a little ashamed I never saw this dichotomy before. How freedom was both approached and defined is why one of those revolutions has held for 200 plus years while the other is a historical footnote. Still, he isn’t giving us a historical survey. No, the problem is that much of America today has switched from 1776 to 1789 in their guiding of our nation. Peril awaits.
That’s not to say that this book is depressing. It’s like a teacher who believes in your intellect and boldly makes a case that assumes your ability to comprehend. He never talks down but sounds like he speaks to peers who will see what he’s saying when they face the logic. He comes across as positive there’s hope and all that’s missing is for us to slow down and carefully analyze the facts.
You will, without doubt, get some of the most perceptive analysis of the trends and events that define us today. He never comes across as shouting “this is wrong” as much as “here’s what’s behind certain behaviors and why they will hurt us all”. He never yells at us for assaulting freedom. It’s more of a proclamation that freedom is one of the greatest things that God has given us and it’s worth hanging on to.
I’m not going to give a chapter-by-chapter overview in this review. Just jump in and you will see things that perhaps you’ve never thought before and that now you see as the natural, unanswerable explanation of our turbulent nation. This book, if ingested by our nation, would revolutionize us all, or at least take us back to the beautiful place we began. Labeling a book as a “must-read” is trite, but read it and see if that isn’t exactly what you’d say.
I received this book free from the publisher. I was not required to write a positive review. The opinions I have expressed are my own. I am disclosing this in accordance with the Federal Trade Commission’s 16 CFR, Part 255.
Guinness paints his portrait with the colors of the American Revolution of 1776 and the French Revolution of 1789. That comparison explains so much. I’ve always loved reading about that time period, so I’m a little ashamed I never saw this dichotomy before. How freedom was both approached and defined is why one of those revolutions has held for 200 plus years while the other is a historical footnote. Still, he isn’t giving us a historical survey. No, the problem is that much of America today has switched from 1776 to 1789 in their guiding of our nation. Peril awaits.
That’s not to say that this book is depressing. It’s like a teacher who believes in your intellect and boldly makes a case that assumes your ability to comprehend. He never talks down but sounds like he speaks to peers who will see what he’s saying when they face the logic. He comes across as positive there’s hope and all that’s missing is for us to slow down and carefully analyze the facts.
You will, without doubt, get some of the most perceptive analysis of the trends and events that define us today. He never comes across as shouting “this is wrong” as much as “here’s what’s behind certain behaviors and why they will hurt us all”. He never yells at us for assaulting freedom. It’s more of a proclamation that freedom is one of the greatest things that God has given us and it’s worth hanging on to.
I’m not going to give a chapter-by-chapter overview in this review. Just jump in and you will see things that perhaps you’ve never thought before and that now you see as the natural, unanswerable explanation of our turbulent nation. This book, if ingested by our nation, would revolutionize us all, or at least take us back to the beautiful place we began. Labeling a book as a “must-read” is trite, but read it and see if that isn’t exactly what you’d say.
I received this book free from the publisher. I was not required to write a positive review. The opinions I have expressed are my own. I am disclosing this in accordance with the Federal Trade Commission’s 16 CFR, Part 255.
October 17, 2018
Os Guinness issues a call to question ourselves and what we mean by “freedom” and “liberty” in the United States in his book Last Call for Liberty. He argues that the United States must work to restore its faith in the “covenant” of the Constitution and help preserve liberty through its republican system.
Perhaps the most prominent theme throughout the book is that of 1776 vs. 1789. The dates refer to the American Revolution and the French Revolution. Guinness never really delves into defining this alleged conflict, though he does stick with the definition of “classical liberal” vs. “left/liberal.” The pervasiveness of this theme would lead readers to think that there would be some elucidation of the specifics of this distinction, but those readers are left wanting. Guinness simply refers to those dates throughout the book as though readers will just know and agree how horrible the French Revolution was for “liberty” (however defined) and how wonderful and perfect the American Revolution was for liberty. That is supposed to be obvious to anyone reading the book, apparently, because there is no point at which Guinness argues the point. In the introduction, for example, when he first introduces the theme, he writes:
Either the classical liberalism of the republic will prevail and 1776 will defeat 1789, or the Left/liberalism of 1789 will defeat 1776, and the republic will fail and become a republic in name only. (4)
Those are some dire words. Probably they should have some basis in argument, definition, and reality. But readers will never know if this distinction has a reality from the arguments presented in the book, because Guinness blithely assumes readers will go with his argument, despite never actually having made it.
The 1776/89 theme is pervasive throughout the book, and is continually used either as the point of an argument or as a way to hammer opposing views. For example, at one point Guinness states that “There can be no truce between 1776 and 1780. The clash of freedoms has to be settled in favor of one way or another, for they lead in entirely different directions” (179). Readers won’t really have a firm idea of what those directions are beyond 1776 is good and 1789 bad; but beyond that point is the absurdity of the actual statement made. “No truce” between the two can exist? How about the fact that, historically, the United States did, in fact have a truce with the Revolutionaries of 1789 and ultimately even an alliance? Sure, the relationship between the two countries soured to the point of a pseudo war, but it healed again shortly thereafter. Why? Because the United States was more favorably inclined towards a French country that had thrown off its monarchy than other countries that were dedicated to preserving theirs (eg. Britain). I admit I have simplified things historically, but even this analysis provides more historical background to the two years than Guinness does in close to 300 pages of text! Not only that, but Guinness had, at an earlier point, argued that history is the test for different systems to work, citing, of course, the worst possible examples of political systems that are different from a republic in his argument. But if history is the test for truth claims, his absurd claim that there can be no truce between 1776/1789 has been tested and is false.
Much of the rest of the book is filled with vague or explicit notions of American exceptionalism. The United States has the best system because it does, right? For example, only pages after Guinness condemns Athenian democracy for its limits on freedom because it only gave certain men the right to vote and Athens didn’t give in to reasoned arguments against slavery (77-78), he goes on to praise the United States for its own wonderful adherence to liberty. I don’t know whether to be amused by the irony or saddened by the apparent intentional ironing out of history’s wrinkles. After all, the 1776 liberty and freedom-loving republic Guinness wants us to all to hearken back to as the best example itself only allowed certain men the right to vote and endorsed and made laws for slavery. I cannot emphasize enough how deeply conflicted Guinness’s words are with his own thesis throughout the book. Whose liberty and freedom is Guinness really concerned with here? I can’t help but ask the question, because his ignoring of the wrongs of slavery and limited votes in the earliest days of the republic are set alongside nearly worshipful praise of the wisdom of the Founders demands that we ask whose power Guinness is concerned with.
Another major problem with the book is the style of writing Guinness has. At very few points was I able to draw out a thread of an argument. Rather, throughout the work, waxing eloquently is taken in the place of argument. It’s the kind of writing style that will pump up an audience already firmly in agreement with the thesis, but it doesn’t advance the argument or really even state it in any way. Alongside these vague statements that nevertheless provide good quote-mining is the notion that the United States somehow, in 1776, did something akin to making a proper covenant with God by being “under God” in the formation of the nation. I am still not sure I understand Guinness’s point here, but neither do accept fault for not understanding it. Like most other points in the book, this covenant/constitution/under God unity is never explained but merely assumed and orated upon.
Guinness apparently also felt the need to jump on the bandwagon of at least referencing the concept of calling younger people “snowflakes” and restating some of the mockery directed towards those who were upset by results of an election. For a man who literally wrote a book about how we must work to preserve freedom and liberty, it is deeply ironic to read condemnations of people feeling passionately about the results of efforts to do so. Sure, Guinness probably disagrees with how these others are voting, but for him to complain about the passion people felt about elections is asinine. How can Guinness seriously place this complaint having just written a book trying to put forward a passionate cry for liberty? Oh, and don’t forget to blame 1789 for people not conforming to Guiness’s standards of how people should react to elections, as well. Not content to stop with that self-condemning thought, Guinness also equivocates between the notion of political correctness and “newspeak” from the book 1984. It’s not a sick take down of the “Left” (or the Right, really) unless we bring up some of our favorite dystopic novels, right? This equivalency is stunning, because it seems to imply that Guinness actually believes that calls to, say, use accurate language for people groups is the same as literally changing truth to falsehood. Maybe he does believe that, in which case his own position seems much more dangerous to liberty than those he condemns.
Really, the entire book reads like someone who is having to face the fact that his position–that of an elder white male–is no longer valued simply by virtue of being an elder white male. Liberty is easily defined into power for his own position, and this definition is made almost explicit when he, as noted above, praises the United States’ republican system that excluded all non-white people, females, and non-land owners from voting in the glorious year of 1776. It’s hard to take seriously a man who can make such a heartless statement in praise of that system who then turns around and complains about others not liking his viewpoint.
Last Call for Liberty is the kind of alarmist and elitist work that Guinness purports to condemn in the book itself. By aligning himself so closely with the notion that the United States is under (or should be under) some kind of divine mandate and “covenant,” Guinness preaches to the choir of American exceptionalism. By sweeping the faults of our form of “liberty” under the rug, he engages in the very immunization against facts that he criticizes the “left/liberal” of doing. It is at times baffling to see such contradictory sentiments contained in the same book. Unfortunately, I believe that its primary audience will find it as faultless as they find our country.
Disclaimer: I was provided with a copy of the book for review by the publisher. I was not required to give any specific kind of feedback whatsoever.
Perhaps the most prominent theme throughout the book is that of 1776 vs. 1789. The dates refer to the American Revolution and the French Revolution. Guinness never really delves into defining this alleged conflict, though he does stick with the definition of “classical liberal” vs. “left/liberal.” The pervasiveness of this theme would lead readers to think that there would be some elucidation of the specifics of this distinction, but those readers are left wanting. Guinness simply refers to those dates throughout the book as though readers will just know and agree how horrible the French Revolution was for “liberty” (however defined) and how wonderful and perfect the American Revolution was for liberty. That is supposed to be obvious to anyone reading the book, apparently, because there is no point at which Guinness argues the point. In the introduction, for example, when he first introduces the theme, he writes:
Either the classical liberalism of the republic will prevail and 1776 will defeat 1789, or the Left/liberalism of 1789 will defeat 1776, and the republic will fail and become a republic in name only. (4)
Those are some dire words. Probably they should have some basis in argument, definition, and reality. But readers will never know if this distinction has a reality from the arguments presented in the book, because Guinness blithely assumes readers will go with his argument, despite never actually having made it.
The 1776/89 theme is pervasive throughout the book, and is continually used either as the point of an argument or as a way to hammer opposing views. For example, at one point Guinness states that “There can be no truce between 1776 and 1780. The clash of freedoms has to be settled in favor of one way or another, for they lead in entirely different directions” (179). Readers won’t really have a firm idea of what those directions are beyond 1776 is good and 1789 bad; but beyond that point is the absurdity of the actual statement made. “No truce” between the two can exist? How about the fact that, historically, the United States did, in fact have a truce with the Revolutionaries of 1789 and ultimately even an alliance? Sure, the relationship between the two countries soured to the point of a pseudo war, but it healed again shortly thereafter. Why? Because the United States was more favorably inclined towards a French country that had thrown off its monarchy than other countries that were dedicated to preserving theirs (eg. Britain). I admit I have simplified things historically, but even this analysis provides more historical background to the two years than Guinness does in close to 300 pages of text! Not only that, but Guinness had, at an earlier point, argued that history is the test for different systems to work, citing, of course, the worst possible examples of political systems that are different from a republic in his argument. But if history is the test for truth claims, his absurd claim that there can be no truce between 1776/1789 has been tested and is false.
Much of the rest of the book is filled with vague or explicit notions of American exceptionalism. The United States has the best system because it does, right? For example, only pages after Guinness condemns Athenian democracy for its limits on freedom because it only gave certain men the right to vote and Athens didn’t give in to reasoned arguments against slavery (77-78), he goes on to praise the United States for its own wonderful adherence to liberty. I don’t know whether to be amused by the irony or saddened by the apparent intentional ironing out of history’s wrinkles. After all, the 1776 liberty and freedom-loving republic Guinness wants us to all to hearken back to as the best example itself only allowed certain men the right to vote and endorsed and made laws for slavery. I cannot emphasize enough how deeply conflicted Guinness’s words are with his own thesis throughout the book. Whose liberty and freedom is Guinness really concerned with here? I can’t help but ask the question, because his ignoring of the wrongs of slavery and limited votes in the earliest days of the republic are set alongside nearly worshipful praise of the wisdom of the Founders demands that we ask whose power Guinness is concerned with.
Another major problem with the book is the style of writing Guinness has. At very few points was I able to draw out a thread of an argument. Rather, throughout the work, waxing eloquently is taken in the place of argument. It’s the kind of writing style that will pump up an audience already firmly in agreement with the thesis, but it doesn’t advance the argument or really even state it in any way. Alongside these vague statements that nevertheless provide good quote-mining is the notion that the United States somehow, in 1776, did something akin to making a proper covenant with God by being “under God” in the formation of the nation. I am still not sure I understand Guinness’s point here, but neither do accept fault for not understanding it. Like most other points in the book, this covenant/constitution/under God unity is never explained but merely assumed and orated upon.
Guinness apparently also felt the need to jump on the bandwagon of at least referencing the concept of calling younger people “snowflakes” and restating some of the mockery directed towards those who were upset by results of an election. For a man who literally wrote a book about how we must work to preserve freedom and liberty, it is deeply ironic to read condemnations of people feeling passionately about the results of efforts to do so. Sure, Guinness probably disagrees with how these others are voting, but for him to complain about the passion people felt about elections is asinine. How can Guinness seriously place this complaint having just written a book trying to put forward a passionate cry for liberty? Oh, and don’t forget to blame 1789 for people not conforming to Guiness’s standards of how people should react to elections, as well. Not content to stop with that self-condemning thought, Guinness also equivocates between the notion of political correctness and “newspeak” from the book 1984. It’s not a sick take down of the “Left” (or the Right, really) unless we bring up some of our favorite dystopic novels, right? This equivalency is stunning, because it seems to imply that Guinness actually believes that calls to, say, use accurate language for people groups is the same as literally changing truth to falsehood. Maybe he does believe that, in which case his own position seems much more dangerous to liberty than those he condemns.
Really, the entire book reads like someone who is having to face the fact that his position–that of an elder white male–is no longer valued simply by virtue of being an elder white male. Liberty is easily defined into power for his own position, and this definition is made almost explicit when he, as noted above, praises the United States’ republican system that excluded all non-white people, females, and non-land owners from voting in the glorious year of 1776. It’s hard to take seriously a man who can make such a heartless statement in praise of that system who then turns around and complains about others not liking his viewpoint.
Last Call for Liberty is the kind of alarmist and elitist work that Guinness purports to condemn in the book itself. By aligning himself so closely with the notion that the United States is under (or should be under) some kind of divine mandate and “covenant,” Guinness preaches to the choir of American exceptionalism. By sweeping the faults of our form of “liberty” under the rug, he engages in the very immunization against facts that he criticizes the “left/liberal” of doing. It is at times baffling to see such contradictory sentiments contained in the same book. Unfortunately, I believe that its primary audience will find it as faultless as they find our country.
Disclaimer: I was provided with a copy of the book for review by the publisher. I was not required to give any specific kind of feedback whatsoever.
September 11, 2020
A sharp and insightful analysis of the American Experiment and the liberty that we have enjoyed for over two hundred years. Broadly, Guinness contrasts the American Revolution of 1776 with the French Revolution of 1789. The former was grounded in religious freedom and charity, the latter in atheism and intolerance.
Guinness explores the vast implications of casting aside the liberty that we as a nation have enjoyed and speaks with a prophetic voice to anyone willing to heed the call. He writes, "The decisions Americans make in the next generation will shape the course of American freedom and decide the fate of the American Republic."
Last Call for Liberty is a must-read for Americans who cherish freedom. But it is also a stern warning to those who are trampling on freedom or taking it for granted.
Highly recommended!
Guinness explores the vast implications of casting aside the liberty that we as a nation have enjoyed and speaks with a prophetic voice to anyone willing to heed the call. He writes, "The decisions Americans make in the next generation will shape the course of American freedom and decide the fate of the American Republic."
Last Call for Liberty is a must-read for Americans who cherish freedom. But it is also a stern warning to those who are trampling on freedom or taking it for granted.
Highly recommended!
October 10, 2020
Heady book! Comparing the revolution if 1776 with the revolution of 1789 and why it matters today.
If all you do is read the final chapter it is well worth the price of the book!
Highly recommended
If all you do is read the final chapter it is well worth the price of the book!
Highly recommended
December 7, 2018
Over the past five or six years I have been puzzled and concerned at a change that has come over American assumptions and actions. That change seems to be a shift from a position of "innocent until proven guilty" to "guilty until proven innocent." Make an accusation and the accused is automatically declared guilty by many media moguls, cyber-gurus, podcast pontificators, as well as every Tammy, Dionne, and Henrietta on social media certain of their own self-assured rightness. The accusation is enough and no amount of provable innocence can be found to overcome the attribution. Then it dawned on me earlier this year: the Reign of Terror in France and the Great Terror in Russia followed similar paths. So, in an odd way, I was glad to read a new 336 page dense hardback, "Last Call for Liberty: How America's Genius for Freedom has Become Its Greatest Threat" penned by accomplished author, founder of the Trinity Forum, and senior fellow at the Oxford Centre for Christian Apologetics, Os Guinness. Between the covers of this tightly argued manuscript, Guinness affirmed my growing realizations. But he also offers Americans - whether religious, irreligious, secular, or spiritual - a series of ten worked out questions and perceptions to aid us in recovering foundational principles, since "America will always and only be as great as the ideals by which Americans actually live" (17).
"Last Call for Liberty" is not a handbook for soldiers of the culture wars, nor is it a field manual for social justice activists. And it is not deluded by any fairy-tale notions of a golden era of a one-time "Christian America." Rather it is social critique, historical chronicle, ethics lesson and political science exercise all bundled in a single volume, and guided by seeking answers to ten significant questions. Guinness's approach is to see two "revolutions" at work in the United States. There's the war of Independence, the revolution of 1776; and then there is the French revolution of 1789 with it's reign of terror. Both revolutions operate from different presuppositions and ambitions. "America must make clear what it now means by freedom, and which of the two visions it now chooses: 1776 and the classical liberal freedom of its founding, or 1789 and the Left/liberal freedom of today" (7). Both revolutions define freedom in completely distinct ways, which means that "America today is torn between its competing views of freedom, and the two main competitors are approaching their high-noon showdown. They cannot both be right, for 1776 and 1789 are profoundly contradictory and are on a collision course with each other over issues that are decisive for the American future - including the character of freedom itself" (262). This looming crisis was not brought on by the presiding president (nor the previous one), but it created the moment for his rise. According to Guinness, President Trump "is not the cause of the crisis, as his critics assert. Nor will he be the solution, as his defenders hope" (5).
The author sets out "a citizens' checklist of ten questions that are essential for assessing the character and health of freedom, and the requirements for its restoration and renewal" (16). At many points he provides wholesome considerations: "Vital though presidents and governments are, relationships matter more to freedom than regimes. The personal and interpersonal precede the political" (32). And at other places Guinness pulls us up short to examine our approaches: "Presidents, judges, and movement activists who believe they are correct and on "the right side of history" rarely show respect for such notions as checks and balances, encroachment, and the will of the people. Arrogance replaces humility, persuasion is considered a waste of time, scalability becomes a virtue, and coercion becomes the handiest tool to reach for the domination that consistency calls for" (201). He is not afraid to point out the founders' failures, nor is he foolish enough to assume they should have been perfect to have our appreciation and respect.
"Last Call for Liberty" compactly works its way through ideas and consequences. It thoughtfully addresses topics, and interrogates their meaning from two primary angles: 1776 and 1789. It is a book full of cautions and counsels. To read the manuscript well will require pens, markers and lots of notating. This is a volume for any and every American citizen who cares about the country. If you accept the challenge and take it up to read, be prepared to learn, grow, be challenged, corrected, and given better ways to see what "We the People" once were about, and can be about again. I seriously and decidedly recommend the book!
Thanks to IVP who sent the volume used for this review at my request. There were no constraints imposed on me, no demands made, and no bribes given. The review is my honest assessment, freely made and freely given.
"Last Call for Liberty" is not a handbook for soldiers of the culture wars, nor is it a field manual for social justice activists. And it is not deluded by any fairy-tale notions of a golden era of a one-time "Christian America." Rather it is social critique, historical chronicle, ethics lesson and political science exercise all bundled in a single volume, and guided by seeking answers to ten significant questions. Guinness's approach is to see two "revolutions" at work in the United States. There's the war of Independence, the revolution of 1776; and then there is the French revolution of 1789 with it's reign of terror. Both revolutions operate from different presuppositions and ambitions. "America must make clear what it now means by freedom, and which of the two visions it now chooses: 1776 and the classical liberal freedom of its founding, or 1789 and the Left/liberal freedom of today" (7). Both revolutions define freedom in completely distinct ways, which means that "America today is torn between its competing views of freedom, and the two main competitors are approaching their high-noon showdown. They cannot both be right, for 1776 and 1789 are profoundly contradictory and are on a collision course with each other over issues that are decisive for the American future - including the character of freedom itself" (262). This looming crisis was not brought on by the presiding president (nor the previous one), but it created the moment for his rise. According to Guinness, President Trump "is not the cause of the crisis, as his critics assert. Nor will he be the solution, as his defenders hope" (5).
The author sets out "a citizens' checklist of ten questions that are essential for assessing the character and health of freedom, and the requirements for its restoration and renewal" (16). At many points he provides wholesome considerations: "Vital though presidents and governments are, relationships matter more to freedom than regimes. The personal and interpersonal precede the political" (32). And at other places Guinness pulls us up short to examine our approaches: "Presidents, judges, and movement activists who believe they are correct and on "the right side of history" rarely show respect for such notions as checks and balances, encroachment, and the will of the people. Arrogance replaces humility, persuasion is considered a waste of time, scalability becomes a virtue, and coercion becomes the handiest tool to reach for the domination that consistency calls for" (201). He is not afraid to point out the founders' failures, nor is he foolish enough to assume they should have been perfect to have our appreciation and respect.
"Last Call for Liberty" compactly works its way through ideas and consequences. It thoughtfully addresses topics, and interrogates their meaning from two primary angles: 1776 and 1789. It is a book full of cautions and counsels. To read the manuscript well will require pens, markers and lots of notating. This is a volume for any and every American citizen who cares about the country. If you accept the challenge and take it up to read, be prepared to learn, grow, be challenged, corrected, and given better ways to see what "We the People" once were about, and can be about again. I seriously and decidedly recommend the book!
Thanks to IVP who sent the volume used for this review at my request. There were no constraints imposed on me, no demands made, and no bribes given. The review is my honest assessment, freely made and freely given.
January 26, 2024
I have read a bit of Os Guinness over the past year or so, and this seems to be one of the most important books that he has written. In a way, I believe that Last Call for Liberty is the summation of much of Guinness thinking and writing of the last 20 years, and his clarion call for Americans to take radical measures to restore the liberty that was so hard-fought and long-preserved to be handed down to us.
Most of the book's ten chapters detail how the traditionalists and conservatives (the heirs of 1776) need to do battle against the "progressives" and "Left/liberals" (the heirs of 1789). In fact, the theme could simply be stated in that two rival views of freedom, one embodied in "1776" and the ideals of the American Revolution and the other embodied in in "1789" and the ideals of the French Revolution.
Truth be told, I am on a quest to read Os Guinness's published works by this time next year, such is my belief that he is an immensely important social critic and cultural observer. I have thoroughly enjoyed and benefited from the handful of books that I have read thus far, and I greatly anticipate continuing this journey.
Like many of Guinness's other works, Last Call for Liberty is well worth your time if you are a Christian or a conservative who is concerned about the current cultural situation. Easily five stars.
Most of the book's ten chapters detail how the traditionalists and conservatives (the heirs of 1776) need to do battle against the "progressives" and "Left/liberals" (the heirs of 1789). In fact, the theme could simply be stated in that two rival views of freedom, one embodied in "1776" and the ideals of the American Revolution and the other embodied in in "1789" and the ideals of the French Revolution.
Truth be told, I am on a quest to read Os Guinness's published works by this time next year, such is my belief that he is an immensely important social critic and cultural observer. I have thoroughly enjoyed and benefited from the handful of books that I have read thus far, and I greatly anticipate continuing this journey.
Like many of Guinness's other works, Last Call for Liberty is well worth your time if you are a Christian or a conservative who is concerned about the current cultural situation. Easily five stars.
September 30, 2018
What is the root cause of America's problems? What is true liberty? How free is America? In fact, according to respected theologian and cultural observer, Os Guinness, the problem is not the world nor the world against America. It is America herself becoming her "most bitter enemies." They are their own threat to freedom. Donald Trump is not the problem. He has simply turned over the carpet that had covered the problems of the past America had swept under. From political tussles to socio-economic divisions, it is becoming a society where everyone think they are right and others are wrong. Finding the root cause will help us address the greatest threat to America. This is essentially the search for freedom. What then is the key to freedom? Os Guinness shows the way with a series of questions with the single purpose of helping American minds to figure out the "character and condition of freedom." He raises questions like:
What do Americans mean by liberty?
Freedom means different things to different people, so what kind of Freedom does America aspire to become?
What is the difference between a freedom fighter and a terrorist?
How do we allow the conflicting views to exist without breaking up the nation?
What is America fighting for?
What is the difference between the French Revolution and American fight for freedom?
Looking at the monuments in America can give us a clue about America's aspirations. Think of the "Statue of Liberty," the "Land of the Free," "Freedom Trail," "Liberty Bell Center," etc. With so many cultural pointers to liberty, Guinness gives us ten fundamental questions to address this basic theme. One chapter is allocated for each question, making the book an easy reference book for anyone seeking clarity on any of the questions.
Do You Know Where Your Freedom Came From?
Are There Enough Americans Who Care About Freedom?
What Do You Mean by Freedom?
Have You Faced Up to the Central Paradox of Freedom?
How Do You Plan to Sustain Freedom?
How Will You Make the World Safe for Diversity?
How Do You Justify Your Vision of a Free and Open Society?
Where Do You Ground Your Faith in Human Freedom?
Are You Vigilant About the Institutions Crucial to Freedom: Republicanism or Democracy?
Are You Vigilant About the Ideas Crucial to Freedom: Which Revolution Do They Serve?
The first question alone stumped many people when asked. Instead of seeking out answers from the 18th Century, Guinness takes us further back to the Jewish ancient history; the exodus from slavery to freedom. That is the source of modern American liberty. He distinguishes government as those based on founding rather than types of government. The four different types of founding are: Organic societies that are tribal or family; hierarchical; contractual; and covenantal. Modern American liberty is based on the latter. In the second question, Guinness probes behind the reasons for modern American perspectives of freedom and takes a dig at the way America has trumpeted itself as "torchbearers" of freedom to the world. On the oft self-congratulatory, arrogant, and self-promoting forms of descriptions, Guinness sees beneath them a mesh of inward looking inclinations that are based on individualism, consumerism, and narcissism. Taken in this context, freedom essentially means what is in there for me without any interest in how it impacts others. In response, Guinness asserts that true freedom is one of the human will; of commitment; of human responsibility; of having freedom not as an end in itself, but as a means to a greater goal. We learn about the positive (freedom for) and negative (freedom from) forms of freedom. Freedom comes with a cost. The greatest paradox is that the greatest enemy of freedom is freedom itself. He warns us that freedom is just one generation away from being lost. For freedom to flourish, we need order and self-restraint. The one who is most free is not the one who controls others but oneself. Responsibility is a huge thing in true freedom. In order to sustain freedom, checks and balances are not enough. We need separation of powers. We need to move from negative to positive forms of freedom. We need freedom to be anchored on fundamental faith. For faith in itself is a voluntary act of freedom of expression. The sixth question is about freedom and diversity, something that is increasingly relevant in our society. Secular or religious, we need space for all to have their own expressions of faith. That means secular authorities should allow the freedom of religious expressions in public spheres, along with the freedom for atheists and secularists to parade their own views openly. Instead of pandering to the erroneous statement of "secular societies," we need to re-state that we are a "free society."
Guinness has many interesting perspectives about modern society and their struggles with the problems of today. One of the major things is diversity. Even in an increasingly pluralistic society, there remains a widening gulf between the left and the right; the conservative and the liberal; and various divisions of all kinds. How do we enable true freedom of beliefs? In order to get a clearer way forward, we need to get at the roots of the problem. Calling it the Radical Rs, he points out that the "Reducers" have radically shrunk the space for freedom of religion. They also shrink "freedom of religion" into "freedom of worship." The "Removers" had moved toward "freedom from religion" instead of maintaining the rightful "freedom of religion." The "Rebranders" argue against the freedom of religion by attacking it as a power play. Such people turn the "freedom of religion" advocates into some kind of bigot party. They then attempt to turn society against religious people by saying they are attacking the rights of minority groups. They forget that religious freedom is actually more of a shield rather than a sword. The "Reimaginers" dream of a new world just like John Lennon's song, Imagine, which is about a world where one can be happy without any common authority or domain. This also reduces religion into some inconvenient corner of society in favour of this utopia. He makes a powerful observation about the state of the cultural wars with the 4Rs continuing to shrink or subvert the basic freedom of religion.
My Thoughts
First, we must acknowledge the great divide in our societies today. Whether it is pro-something or anti-something, any strong assertion will create an equal and opposite reaction. In other words, one extremity will create a polar opposite extremity. Recognizing such a divided state is crucial to determining a need for reconciliation and re-engagement. For diversity to exist, we must make room for different worldviews to co-exist. Granted that truth is to be upheld at all times, we can adopt a stand of seeing the different worldviews as efforts to reveal and to understand truth. No one effort is perfect. This acknowledgment should spearhead a greater emphasis on creating a "civil public square" led by a political framework that underscores the rights and freedoms of every citizen. This framework must assert the "three Rs of freedom of thought and conscience: rights, responsibilities, and respect." Guinness is spot on with regard to the 3Rs in contrast to the 1R (namely, rights) that most of society seem to focus upon nowadays. The sooner we recognize the problem with our short-sighted view of the problem, the better it will be for recovery and renewal.
Second, freedom is about returning to the basics of covenanting. It is not about contractual agreements. Neither is it about a marriage of ideas of convenience. Covenant entails commitment and conviction. This avoids the extremes of chaos and control. The former is too liberal and allows society to descend into splintering groups that disunites and disenfranchises society at large. The latter instills a totalitarian regime and mindset that insists on conformity more than diversity. With a covenant, we go back frequently to our fundamental laws and liberties enshrined in our nation's constitutions. Chaos turn freedom into licentiousness. Control limits freedom strictly according to one set of interpretation. Learning to navigate between these two extremes will expand the scope of community space and diversity. This is just the starting point as details will still need to be fleshed out with regard to what covenanting means for each society. It is hoped that the central agreement toward this covenant would bind people together in regular dialogues and constructive conversational moments.
Third, there are many powerful insights with regard to the American culture and political climate. The author's chief concern is about preventing America from falling further apart. By focusing on the theme of freedom, Guinness has touched a raw nerve and central concern among many Americans. Freedom or liberty is something often talked about but rarely understood in the way that Guinness has done. That is why this book is a gift for America and the world to learn from. By understanding the American context, perhaps the rest of the world will be better able to design their own versions of freedom in their respective contexts.
For those of us who are concerned about the growing divisions in our cultures, pick up this book. With every page glistening with insights, I am sure that the patient and thoughtful reader will be able to grasp not only the great need for America but also the deep passion of the author.
Os Guinness is an English author and social critic, born to missionary parents to China. He is also the great-great-great-grandson of Arthur Guinness, from the famous Irish brewing company.
Rating: 5 stars of 5.
conrade
This book has been provided courtesy of InterVarsity Press and NetGalley without requiring a positive review. All opinions offered above are mine unless otherwise stated or implied.
What do Americans mean by liberty?
Freedom means different things to different people, so what kind of Freedom does America aspire to become?
What is the difference between a freedom fighter and a terrorist?
How do we allow the conflicting views to exist without breaking up the nation?
What is America fighting for?
What is the difference between the French Revolution and American fight for freedom?
Looking at the monuments in America can give us a clue about America's aspirations. Think of the "Statue of Liberty," the "Land of the Free," "Freedom Trail," "Liberty Bell Center," etc. With so many cultural pointers to liberty, Guinness gives us ten fundamental questions to address this basic theme. One chapter is allocated for each question, making the book an easy reference book for anyone seeking clarity on any of the questions.
Do You Know Where Your Freedom Came From?
Are There Enough Americans Who Care About Freedom?
What Do You Mean by Freedom?
Have You Faced Up to the Central Paradox of Freedom?
How Do You Plan to Sustain Freedom?
How Will You Make the World Safe for Diversity?
How Do You Justify Your Vision of a Free and Open Society?
Where Do You Ground Your Faith in Human Freedom?
Are You Vigilant About the Institutions Crucial to Freedom: Republicanism or Democracy?
Are You Vigilant About the Ideas Crucial to Freedom: Which Revolution Do They Serve?
The first question alone stumped many people when asked. Instead of seeking out answers from the 18th Century, Guinness takes us further back to the Jewish ancient history; the exodus from slavery to freedom. That is the source of modern American liberty. He distinguishes government as those based on founding rather than types of government. The four different types of founding are: Organic societies that are tribal or family; hierarchical; contractual; and covenantal. Modern American liberty is based on the latter. In the second question, Guinness probes behind the reasons for modern American perspectives of freedom and takes a dig at the way America has trumpeted itself as "torchbearers" of freedom to the world. On the oft self-congratulatory, arrogant, and self-promoting forms of descriptions, Guinness sees beneath them a mesh of inward looking inclinations that are based on individualism, consumerism, and narcissism. Taken in this context, freedom essentially means what is in there for me without any interest in how it impacts others. In response, Guinness asserts that true freedom is one of the human will; of commitment; of human responsibility; of having freedom not as an end in itself, but as a means to a greater goal. We learn about the positive (freedom for) and negative (freedom from) forms of freedom. Freedom comes with a cost. The greatest paradox is that the greatest enemy of freedom is freedom itself. He warns us that freedom is just one generation away from being lost. For freedom to flourish, we need order and self-restraint. The one who is most free is not the one who controls others but oneself. Responsibility is a huge thing in true freedom. In order to sustain freedom, checks and balances are not enough. We need separation of powers. We need to move from negative to positive forms of freedom. We need freedom to be anchored on fundamental faith. For faith in itself is a voluntary act of freedom of expression. The sixth question is about freedom and diversity, something that is increasingly relevant in our society. Secular or religious, we need space for all to have their own expressions of faith. That means secular authorities should allow the freedom of religious expressions in public spheres, along with the freedom for atheists and secularists to parade their own views openly. Instead of pandering to the erroneous statement of "secular societies," we need to re-state that we are a "free society."
Guinness has many interesting perspectives about modern society and their struggles with the problems of today. One of the major things is diversity. Even in an increasingly pluralistic society, there remains a widening gulf between the left and the right; the conservative and the liberal; and various divisions of all kinds. How do we enable true freedom of beliefs? In order to get a clearer way forward, we need to get at the roots of the problem. Calling it the Radical Rs, he points out that the "Reducers" have radically shrunk the space for freedom of religion. They also shrink "freedom of religion" into "freedom of worship." The "Removers" had moved toward "freedom from religion" instead of maintaining the rightful "freedom of religion." The "Rebranders" argue against the freedom of religion by attacking it as a power play. Such people turn the "freedom of religion" advocates into some kind of bigot party. They then attempt to turn society against religious people by saying they are attacking the rights of minority groups. They forget that religious freedom is actually more of a shield rather than a sword. The "Reimaginers" dream of a new world just like John Lennon's song, Imagine, which is about a world where one can be happy without any common authority or domain. This also reduces religion into some inconvenient corner of society in favour of this utopia. He makes a powerful observation about the state of the cultural wars with the 4Rs continuing to shrink or subvert the basic freedom of religion.
My Thoughts
First, we must acknowledge the great divide in our societies today. Whether it is pro-something or anti-something, any strong assertion will create an equal and opposite reaction. In other words, one extremity will create a polar opposite extremity. Recognizing such a divided state is crucial to determining a need for reconciliation and re-engagement. For diversity to exist, we must make room for different worldviews to co-exist. Granted that truth is to be upheld at all times, we can adopt a stand of seeing the different worldviews as efforts to reveal and to understand truth. No one effort is perfect. This acknowledgment should spearhead a greater emphasis on creating a "civil public square" led by a political framework that underscores the rights and freedoms of every citizen. This framework must assert the "three Rs of freedom of thought and conscience: rights, responsibilities, and respect." Guinness is spot on with regard to the 3Rs in contrast to the 1R (namely, rights) that most of society seem to focus upon nowadays. The sooner we recognize the problem with our short-sighted view of the problem, the better it will be for recovery and renewal.
Second, freedom is about returning to the basics of covenanting. It is not about contractual agreements. Neither is it about a marriage of ideas of convenience. Covenant entails commitment and conviction. This avoids the extremes of chaos and control. The former is too liberal and allows society to descend into splintering groups that disunites and disenfranchises society at large. The latter instills a totalitarian regime and mindset that insists on conformity more than diversity. With a covenant, we go back frequently to our fundamental laws and liberties enshrined in our nation's constitutions. Chaos turn freedom into licentiousness. Control limits freedom strictly according to one set of interpretation. Learning to navigate between these two extremes will expand the scope of community space and diversity. This is just the starting point as details will still need to be fleshed out with regard to what covenanting means for each society. It is hoped that the central agreement toward this covenant would bind people together in regular dialogues and constructive conversational moments.
Third, there are many powerful insights with regard to the American culture and political climate. The author's chief concern is about preventing America from falling further apart. By focusing on the theme of freedom, Guinness has touched a raw nerve and central concern among many Americans. Freedom or liberty is something often talked about but rarely understood in the way that Guinness has done. That is why this book is a gift for America and the world to learn from. By understanding the American context, perhaps the rest of the world will be better able to design their own versions of freedom in their respective contexts.
For those of us who are concerned about the growing divisions in our cultures, pick up this book. With every page glistening with insights, I am sure that the patient and thoughtful reader will be able to grasp not only the great need for America but also the deep passion of the author.
Os Guinness is an English author and social critic, born to missionary parents to China. He is also the great-great-great-grandson of Arthur Guinness, from the famous Irish brewing company.
Rating: 5 stars of 5.
conrade
This book has been provided courtesy of InterVarsity Press and NetGalley without requiring a positive review. All opinions offered above are mine unless otherwise stated or implied.
December 12, 2020
I commend Guinness' ouevre in general to all keen students of history but find this book particularly rich. This is not just of interest to Americans but to any thoughtful lover of true freedom. He's the first person since Rabbi Sacks whose books I've devoured so ravenously in a couple of days. This large book on liberty is as much of a firecracker as Carpe Diem or Fool's Talk on time and apologetics.
The Christian apologist indeed fills in some of the holes evident in aforementioned Sacks' work and provides a distinctly Christian voice at a time of dire need.
It's a rare quality and refreshing to see how he frames so many serious and divisive issues in such a hopeful and theologically rich manner, and covers so many relevent worldwide movements and time periods for the purpose of true freedom:
Freedom- negative and positive, left and right, rights and responsibilities, by way of French, Russian, English, Chinese, sexual and American revolutions.
This careful study elicits the real and deep effects of freedom, from the Exodus story and covenants for inheritors of Judeo-Christian traditions. And unknowing others, decrying their many secular perversions and alternatives before redirecting us to the road back. Which is the road of biblical Truth.
But this is no crude theocracy in enforced form. Os speaks for God as freeing and respects the freedom of people to choose, always seeking to share and persuade the good news for all.
With help from history and conscientious scholarship, he provides copious examples to incarnate his points and balances more academic analyses with prose suitable for the layman:
Referencing life in the American colonies, The Magna Carta, abolitionism, Scotland in the middle ages, and personal lives and legacies from anti-Christians like Macchiaveli and Marcuse to today's challenges of political correctness and various fundamentalisms, to forms of, and men, of true freedom like Frederick Douglass and Rabbi Sacks.
One area I'd liked to have seen more engagement is with Christian anarchists and minarchists, like myself. As some of those lesser known distinctions and differences could prove of huge importance in the twenty first century. But we are not all that far apart at many foundational points and are allied in our stances against so many of the ills described in the book.
I'm still wary of relying on the state and secularists as reliable allies today, in some ways, and do wonder if 'liberal democracy' is redeemable or whether that's the right goal.
This is especially so, when we consider the criticisms of Kenneth Minogue, Hans Herman Hoppe, et al. Or the temptations to 'disgust' against outside groups as delineated by Jonathan Haidt. This has no harmless outlet valve for 'buffered selves'.
Plus, we must take seriously Girard and Eliade on the 'religious' and sacrificial nature of man, way back into the mists of time. Today is no different, beneath the shallow pretense of 'rationality'.
However, Os and Rabbi Sacks do offer the best cases for this form of government and are right at least to place dialogue and civility front and centre. Dia-Logos should be central from an Orthodox Christian perspective. (See Deacon Stephen Muse)
Plus, Guinness raises the right elemental questions, and even when he can't provide a comprehensive answer that we might be content with, he's already elevated the issue, wisely calling us back to first principles.
The Christian apologist indeed fills in some of the holes evident in aforementioned Sacks' work and provides a distinctly Christian voice at a time of dire need.
It's a rare quality and refreshing to see how he frames so many serious and divisive issues in such a hopeful and theologically rich manner, and covers so many relevent worldwide movements and time periods for the purpose of true freedom:
Freedom- negative and positive, left and right, rights and responsibilities, by way of French, Russian, English, Chinese, sexual and American revolutions.
This careful study elicits the real and deep effects of freedom, from the Exodus story and covenants for inheritors of Judeo-Christian traditions. And unknowing others, decrying their many secular perversions and alternatives before redirecting us to the road back. Which is the road of biblical Truth.
But this is no crude theocracy in enforced form. Os speaks for God as freeing and respects the freedom of people to choose, always seeking to share and persuade the good news for all.
With help from history and conscientious scholarship, he provides copious examples to incarnate his points and balances more academic analyses with prose suitable for the layman:
Referencing life in the American colonies, The Magna Carta, abolitionism, Scotland in the middle ages, and personal lives and legacies from anti-Christians like Macchiaveli and Marcuse to today's challenges of political correctness and various fundamentalisms, to forms of, and men, of true freedom like Frederick Douglass and Rabbi Sacks.
One area I'd liked to have seen more engagement is with Christian anarchists and minarchists, like myself. As some of those lesser known distinctions and differences could prove of huge importance in the twenty first century. But we are not all that far apart at many foundational points and are allied in our stances against so many of the ills described in the book.
I'm still wary of relying on the state and secularists as reliable allies today, in some ways, and do wonder if 'liberal democracy' is redeemable or whether that's the right goal.
This is especially so, when we consider the criticisms of Kenneth Minogue, Hans Herman Hoppe, et al. Or the temptations to 'disgust' against outside groups as delineated by Jonathan Haidt. This has no harmless outlet valve for 'buffered selves'.
Plus, we must take seriously Girard and Eliade on the 'religious' and sacrificial nature of man, way back into the mists of time. Today is no different, beneath the shallow pretense of 'rationality'.
However, Os and Rabbi Sacks do offer the best cases for this form of government and are right at least to place dialogue and civility front and centre. Dia-Logos should be central from an Orthodox Christian perspective. (See Deacon Stephen Muse)
Plus, Guinness raises the right elemental questions, and even when he can't provide a comprehensive answer that we might be content with, he's already elevated the issue, wisely calling us back to first principles.
January 11, 2019
Os Guinness' new book Last Call for Liberty is definitely one of the most thought-provoking books that I've read in a while. He examines liberty, what it is, how it used to be defined, what it means now, and how to preserve it. While I may not necessarily agree with all of Guinness' conclusions, the book forced me to carefully consider what liberty is and how it is to be maintained. Last Call for Liberty is rife with quotes and historical background on the concept of liberty. Guinness also ties the American conception of liberty back to the covenantal form of government that God established with Israel under the leadership of Moses. The book's emphasis is that liberty can only be preserved when it is inseparably bound to responsibility. Much of the book is about explaining Lord Moulton's definition: "Liberty is obedience to the unenforceable." This understanding is contrasted with today's common view of liberty, the pursuit of whatever the individual wants at the moment. While this book is a bit dense at times and occasionally strays off topic, it is nonetheless an extremely worthwhile read. I highly recommend it! I received a digital copy of this book for free from the publisher and was not required to write a positive review. The opinions I express in this review are entirely my own.
December 7, 2018
This was a helpful book for understanding freedom. The contrasting paradigms of the American and French revolutions were helpful grids for understanding the current view of freedom in America. This was a good pull from the right for me with challenging ideas.
I think the weakness (or perhaps the great omission) of this book is highlighting the failures of the left, without also pointing out the failures of the right in the same categories.
Without a prior knowledge of American politics, one might walk away from this book thinking, “as long as I vote Republican, our country will be protected from all the dangerous ideas that Guinness brings up.” This is not true.
This book takes some thought to get through. It’s a thoughtful, non-cartoonish challenge to folks who have caricatured the right as unthinking or moronic.
The book is worth it just for the extensive historical quotes about freedom in the pages preceding the Table of contents.
I think the weakness (or perhaps the great omission) of this book is highlighting the failures of the left, without also pointing out the failures of the right in the same categories.
Without a prior knowledge of American politics, one might walk away from this book thinking, “as long as I vote Republican, our country will be protected from all the dangerous ideas that Guinness brings up.” This is not true.
This book takes some thought to get through. It’s a thoughtful, non-cartoonish challenge to folks who have caricatured the right as unthinking or moronic.
The book is worth it just for the extensive historical quotes about freedom in the pages preceding the Table of contents.
January 8, 2019
Os Guinness is perhaps the leading thinker (at the popular level) of liberty and whether America can sustain the freedom declared in 1776, won in 1783, and codified in 1787. In "Last Call for Liberty" Guinness challenges the current generation of Americans with ten penetrating questions. How we answer these questions will determine whether true freedom will long endure in the "land of the free." Every American, and especially those in government, higher education, and media, ought to wrestle with the questions put forth in this volume. The future of freedom hangs in the balance.
August 4, 2020
Quite good
July 29, 2018
"Os Guinness argues—rightly, I think—that America today is really two nations with incompatible views of fundamental ideas. And while until now these two views have lived in a sort-of uneasy (or even a friendly) peace, our cultural has hit a critical point where open collision between these two views is inevitable, if not already underway. Guinness consequently believes it critical that we stop and take stock of ourselves and adjust our nation and our culture in order to put it back in its historical place as a defender and beacon of a certain kind of freedom."
Read the rest at: http://www.christianhumanist.org/2018...
Read the rest at: http://www.christianhumanist.org/2018...
July 3, 2021
Listened with husband and we took rather longer than I would have liked because the chapter divisions were not clear in the audio book so it was hard to work it into mealtimes. We finally finished it on a long car ride.
It wasn't the best way of "reading"... I think more concentration would have been in order. However, we were impressed enough to buy the Kindle version. There was such good material and would like to share quotations. I would also like to reread it to see if it doesn't flow better when its read it a shorter time.
It wasn't the best way of "reading"... I think more concentration would have been in order. However, we were impressed enough to buy the Kindle version. There was such good material and would like to share quotations. I would also like to reread it to see if it doesn't flow better when its read it a shorter time.
October 28, 2018
Very good. For a more detailed review see Jimmy Reagan's.
July 1, 2021
LAST CALL FOR LIBERTY: How America’s Genius for Freedom has Become its Greatest Threat – Os Guinness, IVP Books, Illinois, 2018, 308 pgs.
This is a well-structured book which sets out to ask and answer a series of ten questions regarding freedom, where it comes from, what it means to you, how to sustain it, etc. It is well-written, well-reasoned, and well-presented albeit in academic fashion. However, this is no dry and dusty treatise. It is a call to identify and resolve America’s declension and deterioration under aggressive Progressivism.
Guinness points to the source of the toxic seeds of destruction: “For 1776 [American Revolution] and its heirs the focus was on truth, whereas for 1789 [French Revolution] its focus was on power. The former stresses inner freedom as well as outer freedom, and both negative and positive freedom, whereas 1789 stresses outer freedom over inner freedom, and negative freedom at the expense of positive freedom. For 1776, freedom is viewed as personal freedom from government control, whereas 1789 views freedom as progressive freedom through government control. The former is realistic about the potential for the of abuse of power, and therefore takes “under God” seriously, whereas 1789 is utopian about human nature, and has no final accountability.” p. 90.
The main thesis of the book is about the initial establishment of American freedom, i.e., freedom through covenant: “The impact of the covenant and the notion of covenantalism can be seen can be seen in three periods of history. First, and most obviously, the Sinai covenant constituted the Jewish people and formed the Jewish nation… Second, the precedent and pattern of the Sinai covenant was rediscovered and developed by the Reformation. Along with the truths of calling and conscience, it became one of the three most decisive gifts of the Reformation that shaped the rise of the modern world. Switzerland, the Netherlands, Scotland, England, and the United States – each was powerfully shaped by the Reformation and in turn helped to shape the modern world … The third period of influence is the most recent … The US Constitution, which has been the pacesetter document for so many other countries and constitutions, is in essence a form of national and somewhat secularized covenant and a notion that goes back to Mount Sinai.” pgs. 35-37.
Guinness optimistically believes America can recapture her rapidly evaporating freedom: “As with other covenantal societies, the truth is that the United States goes forward best by going back first. It must return to its roots in constitutional or covenantal freedom, renewing the ideals that made it possible, and righting the wrongs where America has betrayed its founding promise. By recovenanting and going back first, the United States is in fact able to go forward.” p. 280.
Last Call for Liberty is worth taking the time to read, though this reviewer was left a bit confused with Guinness’s Arminian, and somewhat Dispensational theology. Guinness holds the view that God waits for sinners to take the initiative in their own salvation, and Guinness equates Old Testament believers with anti-Trinitarian Judaism. However, these views don’t seem to overly affect the main thesis of his book. However, it will affect his understanding of God’s Covenant and it’s various administrations (including Sinai) throughout Scripture.
This is a well-structured book which sets out to ask and answer a series of ten questions regarding freedom, where it comes from, what it means to you, how to sustain it, etc. It is well-written, well-reasoned, and well-presented albeit in academic fashion. However, this is no dry and dusty treatise. It is a call to identify and resolve America’s declension and deterioration under aggressive Progressivism.
Guinness points to the source of the toxic seeds of destruction: “For 1776 [American Revolution] and its heirs the focus was on truth, whereas for 1789 [French Revolution] its focus was on power. The former stresses inner freedom as well as outer freedom, and both negative and positive freedom, whereas 1789 stresses outer freedom over inner freedom, and negative freedom at the expense of positive freedom. For 1776, freedom is viewed as personal freedom from government control, whereas 1789 views freedom as progressive freedom through government control. The former is realistic about the potential for the of abuse of power, and therefore takes “under God” seriously, whereas 1789 is utopian about human nature, and has no final accountability.” p. 90.
The main thesis of the book is about the initial establishment of American freedom, i.e., freedom through covenant: “The impact of the covenant and the notion of covenantalism can be seen can be seen in three periods of history. First, and most obviously, the Sinai covenant constituted the Jewish people and formed the Jewish nation… Second, the precedent and pattern of the Sinai covenant was rediscovered and developed by the Reformation. Along with the truths of calling and conscience, it became one of the three most decisive gifts of the Reformation that shaped the rise of the modern world. Switzerland, the Netherlands, Scotland, England, and the United States – each was powerfully shaped by the Reformation and in turn helped to shape the modern world … The third period of influence is the most recent … The US Constitution, which has been the pacesetter document for so many other countries and constitutions, is in essence a form of national and somewhat secularized covenant and a notion that goes back to Mount Sinai.” pgs. 35-37.
Guinness optimistically believes America can recapture her rapidly evaporating freedom: “As with other covenantal societies, the truth is that the United States goes forward best by going back first. It must return to its roots in constitutional or covenantal freedom, renewing the ideals that made it possible, and righting the wrongs where America has betrayed its founding promise. By recovenanting and going back first, the United States is in fact able to go forward.” p. 280.
Last Call for Liberty is worth taking the time to read, though this reviewer was left a bit confused with Guinness’s Arminian, and somewhat Dispensational theology. Guinness holds the view that God waits for sinners to take the initiative in their own salvation, and Guinness equates Old Testament believers with anti-Trinitarian Judaism. However, these views don’t seem to overly affect the main thesis of his book. However, it will affect his understanding of God’s Covenant and it’s various administrations (including Sinai) throughout Scripture.
November 20, 2018
I was disappointed and actually more disturbed by this book than I am when reviewing something I know will be full of partisan red meat and finger-pointing.
Many of the questions raised are valid and important. As Americans how do we define liberty or freedom and what are we willing to do to protect it? Does freedom go beyond freedom to do as one wants and does it place a responsibility upon us as citizens?
These are important questions. Living in the turmoil and chaos of the Trump presidency many are looking for answers. I agree with the author that the election of Trump is a symptom of the state of our democracy not the problem. So how did we get here and what can we do to live up to the ideals of the founders?
Here is where this book loses credibility. Whenever an author places all the wrong on a particular party or philosophy I begin to doubt the validity of their argument. In this case all the faults of our society are placed at the door of what he calls the liberal/left and a 1789 style revolution and view of freedom. The good guys are conservatives who see the constitution as a covenant based on the Jewish covenant with God on Mt. Sinai. There is a riff about how Catholicism destroyed that covenant only to have it restored during Reformation where it became the foundation for free societies. However, when reading the constitutional debates and the federalist papers the focus is on self-governance and a framework to protect our liberty from our worst instincts. The philosophical ideas they refer to are mostly from secular philosophers.
I could overlook his focus on OT teaching as the basis for our democracy however the failure to attribute even the slightest responsibility for the division we are experiencing — in politics, economic success or race and ethnicity — to corporate or conservative policies turns what could have been a helpful analysis into a partisan polemic.
This book will be avidly embraced by those who are looking for a simple answer and find social change threatening. The numerous instances where the author decides to descend into political attack (Obama, Hillary, Bill Clinton) is distracting and reveals a partisan approach as opposed to an objective analysis. His focus on sexual excess, unbridled “negative freedom,” obsession with media, and passion for stuff, fails to consider what drives our excessive consumerism.
It is too simplistic to compare the two revolutions and declare one good and one bad. The founders who led the country into revolution were in an entirely different position than the people of France. The reasons for the terror can be analyzed but to equate all liberal/left policy as the equivalent of the terror, or the communist revolutions in Russia and China is to ignore many of the underlying inequalities dividing our country.
I agree that freedom is a responsibility but this book only asks those who don’t agree with the author to bear the responsibility, or blame. In that there is no solution just more division.
Many of the questions raised are valid and important. As Americans how do we define liberty or freedom and what are we willing to do to protect it? Does freedom go beyond freedom to do as one wants and does it place a responsibility upon us as citizens?
These are important questions. Living in the turmoil and chaos of the Trump presidency many are looking for answers. I agree with the author that the election of Trump is a symptom of the state of our democracy not the problem. So how did we get here and what can we do to live up to the ideals of the founders?
Here is where this book loses credibility. Whenever an author places all the wrong on a particular party or philosophy I begin to doubt the validity of their argument. In this case all the faults of our society are placed at the door of what he calls the liberal/left and a 1789 style revolution and view of freedom. The good guys are conservatives who see the constitution as a covenant based on the Jewish covenant with God on Mt. Sinai. There is a riff about how Catholicism destroyed that covenant only to have it restored during Reformation where it became the foundation for free societies. However, when reading the constitutional debates and the federalist papers the focus is on self-governance and a framework to protect our liberty from our worst instincts. The philosophical ideas they refer to are mostly from secular philosophers.
I could overlook his focus on OT teaching as the basis for our democracy however the failure to attribute even the slightest responsibility for the division we are experiencing — in politics, economic success or race and ethnicity — to corporate or conservative policies turns what could have been a helpful analysis into a partisan polemic.
This book will be avidly embraced by those who are looking for a simple answer and find social change threatening. The numerous instances where the author decides to descend into political attack (Obama, Hillary, Bill Clinton) is distracting and reveals a partisan approach as opposed to an objective analysis. His focus on sexual excess, unbridled “negative freedom,” obsession with media, and passion for stuff, fails to consider what drives our excessive consumerism.
It is too simplistic to compare the two revolutions and declare one good and one bad. The founders who led the country into revolution were in an entirely different position than the people of France. The reasons for the terror can be analyzed but to equate all liberal/left policy as the equivalent of the terror, or the communist revolutions in Russia and China is to ignore many of the underlying inequalities dividing our country.
I agree that freedom is a responsibility but this book only asks those who don’t agree with the author to bear the responsibility, or blame. In that there is no solution just more division.
April 23, 2021
There are times when you discover a book that is not very big, but it needs to be digested slowly, each sentence consumed with much thought. Os Guinness is such an author. No, this book is not a conservative rant or a liberal babble. This book is a philosophical look at why freedom is the greatest enemy of freedom. America is currently at a strange place where the freedom of speech leans to being told that you better watch what you say as to not infringe on someone else's freedom not to hear it. Here are a few juicy quotes to consider:
"Rights and rights talk therefore far outweigh responsibility, yet rights without responsibility are simply self-politicized self-interests, and they sound the death knell of republican freedom."
"Thus the heart of the problem of freedom is the problem of the heart, because free societies are restless at their core and always anxious to throw off restraint."
As the book continued on, Os Guinness makes a great point using the enslavement of Jews by the Egyptians. Freedom was granted by the pharaoh, but it didn't take long for the Jews to understand that pure freedom has a core dependence on self and came to believe that being enslaved was better because things were provided for them by the government and actually wanted to return to it! Os sums this up quoting Tocqueville, "The people are excited by two conflicting passions: They want to be led and they wish to remain free."
The only MAJOR problem that I had with Os Guinness's book is his understanding of Abraham Lincoln's purpose in winning the Civil War, stating that winning the war confirmed the overall direction of America's founding by correcting a major contradiction by the founders. Facts are stubborn things, Dr. Guinness. The founders were very much in favor of individual states having their own rights, not a massive government structure. Three amendments were added to the Constitution that directly destroyed much of the states' rights, speaking to the 14th Amendment. Many great things came out of the Civil War, but confirmation of direction of America's founding was not one of them. After 1865, the U.S. government has only continued to grow and dominate. A tiny example would be something as simple as the seatbelt law. Oh, you don't want it? That's fine, but you won't get any more federal funding for roads and infrastructure . . . passed? I thought so.
"Rights and rights talk therefore far outweigh responsibility, yet rights without responsibility are simply self-politicized self-interests, and they sound the death knell of republican freedom."
"Thus the heart of the problem of freedom is the problem of the heart, because free societies are restless at their core and always anxious to throw off restraint."
As the book continued on, Os Guinness makes a great point using the enslavement of Jews by the Egyptians. Freedom was granted by the pharaoh, but it didn't take long for the Jews to understand that pure freedom has a core dependence on self and came to believe that being enslaved was better because things were provided for them by the government and actually wanted to return to it! Os sums this up quoting Tocqueville, "The people are excited by two conflicting passions: They want to be led and they wish to remain free."
The only MAJOR problem that I had with Os Guinness's book is his understanding of Abraham Lincoln's purpose in winning the Civil War, stating that winning the war confirmed the overall direction of America's founding by correcting a major contradiction by the founders. Facts are stubborn things, Dr. Guinness. The founders were very much in favor of individual states having their own rights, not a massive government structure. Three amendments were added to the Constitution that directly destroyed much of the states' rights, speaking to the 14th Amendment. Many great things came out of the Civil War, but confirmation of direction of America's founding was not one of them. After 1865, the U.S. government has only continued to grow and dominate. A tiny example would be something as simple as the seatbelt law. Oh, you don't want it? That's fine, but you won't get any more federal funding for roads and infrastructure . . . passed? I thought so.
September 14, 2020
Last Call for Liberty is a timely book for a country who has largely forgotten (or intentionally forsaken) it’s core principles and has descended into confusion. Os Guinness helps us consider what freedom really means and how it can best be protected and maintained. He does this primarily by contrasting the American revolution of 1776 with the French revolution of 1789. The two revolutions were about freedom but they had very distinct, divergent understandings of freedom. America understood freedom to include two aspects: negative freedom (freedom from despotic state control) and positive freedom (freedom to do as you ought, not as you please). “Negative feeedom is vital but by itself it is only a half truth and pursued by itself it is only a fools gold.” The weight of importance was, therefore, placed on the positive/internal freedom. “To describe the showdown in terms that 17th and 18th Century Americans would have understood, the contest is between the forces of federal liberty—foedus being Latin for covenant, the freedom to act freely but within the terms of traditional moral life and the American constitution and it’s ways. And the forces of natural liberty—the freedom for Americans to act as they please so long as they do no harm to others and they can survive the consequences.”
Americans of 1776 understood that freedom is always paired with responsibility, that it exists “under God” and that our freedom obligates us to, in the words of Edmund Burke, place “moral chains” upon our wills and appetites both for our own sake and for that of our fellow man.
Guinness argues that America today has abandoned the principles of 1776 in favor of 1789, and that we may soon reap the consequences. He is not without hope though. He makes an urgent plea for America to remember its past, to understand the true source of its freedom, to discern true freedom as distinct from its lesser forms, and to renew its covenant commitment (or Constitutional commitment) to freedom and to one another.
Americans of 1776 understood that freedom is always paired with responsibility, that it exists “under God” and that our freedom obligates us to, in the words of Edmund Burke, place “moral chains” upon our wills and appetites both for our own sake and for that of our fellow man.
Guinness argues that America today has abandoned the principles of 1776 in favor of 1789, and that we may soon reap the consequences. He is not without hope though. He makes an urgent plea for America to remember its past, to understand the true source of its freedom, to discern true freedom as distinct from its lesser forms, and to renew its covenant commitment (or Constitutional commitment) to freedom and to one another.
August 14, 2021
This may be the most important book I have read in a decade. If there were a 6 star rating this would be one of the few books I would use such a high commendation for. I took this read needfully slow for it's depth of insight; I will go back and review my many underlines and star marks in the margins. I have read several of Guinness' thoughtful books, but this seems a summary: a life work if you will. The book reminded my of a college level course I had in Government (Cornell University) which opened my head to the sticky problems in human nature and the options within political philosophy which attempted to address human community.
The writer is a Christian philosopher but he addresses a broad audience about the real questions underlying the nature of freedom, the reasons such a value is abused, and the implications in human failure and human governing. Guinness quotes several Rabbi’s, discusses the positive and constraining nature of faith in many cultures and he has a wide understanding of political history across the generations. His summary observations are prescriptive in ways that will make you sigh for the evidence is clear and we are failing fast as a culture, but Guinness is not writing an angry screed nor wringing his hands but rather addressing the why’s and some of the key questions we yet need to grapple with. He is credibly hopeful about the creative nature of freedom which has only real basis from the Judeo-Christian texts. Yet Guinness is appealing to any and all thinkers who care, not bashing worldviews, but reasoning with carefully thought out arguments as to why we need to hold fast and to guard yet what we still have. "Covenant renewal defeats national entropy" and "freedom is never a matter of the odds"
The writer is a Christian philosopher but he addresses a broad audience about the real questions underlying the nature of freedom, the reasons such a value is abused, and the implications in human failure and human governing. Guinness quotes several Rabbi’s, discusses the positive and constraining nature of faith in many cultures and he has a wide understanding of political history across the generations. His summary observations are prescriptive in ways that will make you sigh for the evidence is clear and we are failing fast as a culture, but Guinness is not writing an angry screed nor wringing his hands but rather addressing the why’s and some of the key questions we yet need to grapple with. He is credibly hopeful about the creative nature of freedom which has only real basis from the Judeo-Christian texts. Yet Guinness is appealing to any and all thinkers who care, not bashing worldviews, but reasoning with carefully thought out arguments as to why we need to hold fast and to guard yet what we still have. "Covenant renewal defeats national entropy" and "freedom is never a matter of the odds"
March 11, 2019
Last Call for Liberty is truly a magnum opus work. It is an essential read for American thinkers. Os Guinness adeptly demonstrates the tear in the fabric of our nation with the worldview of 1776 (American Revolution) on one side and the worldview of 1789 (French Revolution) on the other. I would even argue that those who have a 1776 view of freedom, have lost the reasoning/theology to support their view. This book will help readers who love American freedom of 1776 to know why it is important and distinct from 1789. It will help readers who lean towards 1789 understand their folly.
Making American great again must be more than a political platitude – it must restore the worldview heritage that created America. The worldview that generated the freedom leading to 1776 is the same worldview that will save our nation from moral, economic, and institutional collapse.
The Founders were never concerned a foreign foe would be our downfall, they were gravely concerned we would create our own downfall from failing to keep liberty alive from within. Guinness makes this point both in A Free People’s Suicide and in Last Call for Liberty. I recommend both books along with The Global Public Square and Impossible People.
The Founders insolated this great experiment in many layers of checks and balances, but without the worldview that undergirds the entire national identity even the checks and balances will fail to prevent our unraveling.
I absolutely loved his concluding chapter and the hope therein – how he framed the dire problem and yet provided a clarion call of hope for leadership that can rise above the challenges and restore a nation to truth.
Making American great again must be more than a political platitude – it must restore the worldview heritage that created America. The worldview that generated the freedom leading to 1776 is the same worldview that will save our nation from moral, economic, and institutional collapse.
The Founders were never concerned a foreign foe would be our downfall, they were gravely concerned we would create our own downfall from failing to keep liberty alive from within. Guinness makes this point both in A Free People’s Suicide and in Last Call for Liberty. I recommend both books along with The Global Public Square and Impossible People.
The Founders insolated this great experiment in many layers of checks and balances, but without the worldview that undergirds the entire national identity even the checks and balances will fail to prevent our unraveling.
I absolutely loved his concluding chapter and the hope therein – how he framed the dire problem and yet provided a clarion call of hope for leadership that can rise above the challenges and restore a nation to truth.
March 4, 2022
Though many of Guinness’ thoughts prove helpful to get the right questions in front of American citizens, his writing and observations often lack nuance appropriate to the important and subtle things being discussed as well as the historical figures being praised or shamed.
Many of his comments on freedom are clear-minded, especially when he discusses the importance of positive freedom, the spirit of freedom, the civic public square, and the like, but what a book like this does poorly is it sets out to have the conversation for us instead of imploring us to return to the sources (ad fontes) to truly converse about what will establish ordered liberty within the soul once again.
To make this point more clear: for American citizens to truly return to a rooted understanding of American freedom, we ought to be gathering around and discussing Montesquieu’s Spirit of the Laws or Plato’s Republic or Hobbes’ Leviathan. As citizens in modernity, and if we are indeed citizens worth our salt, we should be able to apply these political works to today’s conversations ourselves and sift what is true, good, and beautiful as well as false, bad, and ugly through the sieve of Judeo-Christian understanding as it relates to our modern conversations. If we cannot even do this, then the hope of maintaining freedom properly understood is likely lost, and gathering to discuss a book like Guinness’ will do little to recover it.
Many of his comments on freedom are clear-minded, especially when he discusses the importance of positive freedom, the spirit of freedom, the civic public square, and the like, but what a book like this does poorly is it sets out to have the conversation for us instead of imploring us to return to the sources (ad fontes) to truly converse about what will establish ordered liberty within the soul once again.
To make this point more clear: for American citizens to truly return to a rooted understanding of American freedom, we ought to be gathering around and discussing Montesquieu’s Spirit of the Laws or Plato’s Republic or Hobbes’ Leviathan. As citizens in modernity, and if we are indeed citizens worth our salt, we should be able to apply these political works to today’s conversations ourselves and sift what is true, good, and beautiful as well as false, bad, and ugly through the sieve of Judeo-Christian understanding as it relates to our modern conversations. If we cannot even do this, then the hope of maintaining freedom properly understood is likely lost, and gathering to discuss a book like Guinness’ will do little to recover it.
March 12, 2022
Well written book. Guinness argues that the cultural war is really a trading of the epistemological foundation of the 1776 American Revolution for the epistemological foundation of the French Revolution of 1789. Guinness argues,
“Both sides are fighting for freedom, but with different views of what freedom is and how it may be attained. On one side, there is the classical liberal understanding of freedom championed by the Jewish and Christian faiths and by many believers in other world religions. On the other side, there is the left/liberal understanding of freedom, championed by the forces of progressive and post-modern secularism, challenging all customs, conventions, and tradition, and transgressing all unwanted boundaries and taboos.
To describe the showdown in terms that 17th and 18th century Americans would have understood, the contest is between the forces of federal liberty, the freedom to act freely but within the terms of traditional moral life and the American Constitution and its ways, and the forces of natural liberty, the freedom for Americans to act as they please so long as they do no harm to others and they can survive the consequences.“ (263)
Guinness writes an excellent book that succinctly outlines the opposing sides of the cultural war and the dire results of the trajectory remains. It is worth your time.
“Both sides are fighting for freedom, but with different views of what freedom is and how it may be attained. On one side, there is the classical liberal understanding of freedom championed by the Jewish and Christian faiths and by many believers in other world religions. On the other side, there is the left/liberal understanding of freedom, championed by the forces of progressive and post-modern secularism, challenging all customs, conventions, and tradition, and transgressing all unwanted boundaries and taboos.
To describe the showdown in terms that 17th and 18th century Americans would have understood, the contest is between the forces of federal liberty, the freedom to act freely but within the terms of traditional moral life and the American Constitution and its ways, and the forces of natural liberty, the freedom for Americans to act as they please so long as they do no harm to others and they can survive the consequences.“ (263)
Guinness writes an excellent book that succinctly outlines the opposing sides of the cultural war and the dire results of the trajectory remains. It is worth your time.
February 19, 2023
CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION | 1
A New, New Birth of Freedom?
QUESTION ONE | 19
Do You Know Where Your Freedom Came From?
QUESTION TWO | 55
Are There Enough Americans Who Care About Freedom?
QUESTION THREE 67
What Do You Mean by Freedom?
QUESTION FOUR | 99
Have You Faced Up to the Central Paradox of Freedom?
QUESTION FIVE | 113
How Do You Plan to Sustain Freedom?
QUESTION SIX | 141
How Will You Make the World Safe for Diversity?
QUESTION SEVEN | 169
How Do You Justify Your Vision of a Free and Open Society?
QUESTION EIGHT | 181
Where Do You Ground Your Faith in Human Freedom?
QUESTION NINE | 205
Are You Vigilant About the Institutions Crucial to Freedom?
A Republic or a Democracy?
QUESTION TEN | 221
Are You Vigilant About the Ideas Crucial to Freedom?
Which Revolution Do They Serve?
CONCLUSION | 259
America's Choice: Covenant, Chaos, or Control?
“At the core, the deepest division is rooted in the differences between two world-changing and opposing revolutions, the American Revolution of 1776 and the French Revolution of 1789, and their rival views of freedom and the nature of the American experiment.
It could be argued that the clash is simply between the old, classical American liberalism and the new Left/liberalism that emerged from the 1960s. But it is deeper than that. The fundamental clash is between the spirit, the heirs, and the allies of 1776 and the ideas that made the American Revolution versus the spirit, the heirs, and the allies of 1789 and the different ideas that made the French Revolution and seeded the progressive liberalism of the Left (with the later help of thinkers such as Friedrich Nietzsche, Antonio Gramsci, the Frankfurt School, and Michel Foucault).
Either the classical liberalism of the republic will prevail and 1776 will defeat 1789, or the Left/liberalism of 1789 will defeat 1776, and the republic will fail and become a republic in name only. The American republic divided in this way cannot stand….
1776–freedom from government control to do as one ought.
1789–freedom through government control to achieve utopian visions.
This crisis is an American crisis. For those on one side, the classical liberals and the present-day conservatives, the American Revolution launched history's noblest experiment in freedom, justice, and a liberal political order. The American experiment was undergirded by the Jewish and Christian faiths, and while never perfect and at times far from perfect, it represents an achievement of the human spirit worthy of celebration and emulation. For those on the other side, the Left/liberals, the progressives and the cultural Marxists, that vision of America should be castigated, not celebrated. America has shown itself to be hegemonic, inherently flawed and hypo-critical, and at times racist, sexist, imperialist, militarist, and genocidal. These criticisms have been delivered along with an implacable animosity to religion as the enduring source of repression and the greatest remaining obstacle to full freedom, and delivered as part of the war cry of a very different revolution with very different assumptions and ideals….
The chaos of American politics is the outworking of the real conflict of our times—America's profound clash over fundamental differences about what constitutes freedom and, therefore what constitutes humanity, justice, social change, and the human future.”
“As a nation of free men, either we shall live free for all time, or die by suicide."—Abraham Lincoln
“…a covenantal (constitutional) republic can die, not just because of bad government but death through a million tiny acts of selfishness. Americans should stop to ponder this point. Under the impact of radical individualism, America has become the land of the autonomous and unencumbered self, and the tragedy of the commons is far advanced in America.”
“The present obsession with President Trump, whether supporting or opposing him, is a massively distorting factor for a simple reason: Donald Trump is the consequence of the crisis and not the cause. The "Never Trumpers," both Democrats and his fellow Republicans, and politicians, journalists, academics, as well as celebrities, have developed such a manic obsession about the president that they cannot see straight or talk of much else. Above all, they miss a crucial fact. The president did not create America's present crisis. The crisis created the president, and the crisis is older, deeper, and more consequential than any president. Regardless of this administration, its opposition, and its outcome, what matters in the long run is understanding and resolving the American crisis itself.”
“Freedom is the capacity to exercise the will without interference or restraint as the genuine expression of who you are… the ability to choose between alternatives and to act in accordance with one’s choices.”
Right: Stress economic freedom and freedom from central authority.
Left: Stress freedom regarding social issues.
1. The human will is essential to freedom.
2. Commitment/promise to the future builds trust.
3. Freedom means shouldering responsibility for the choices we have made.
4. Freedom assumes and requires power. (Nietzsche insists that the human instinct to freedom is nothing more than the Will to Power.)
5. Freedom requires alternatives to choose from.
6. Freedom is a means to an end. What are we using freedom for?
7. Social/collective. 3 essentials… 1. Foundations. 2. Personal self-restraint. 3. Freedom requires that individuals know how to respect the equal freedom of the others.
National freedom: the capacity a nation has to exert its will in relation to other nations.
Political freedom: the degree of freedom individuals enjoy within the nation.
Inner vs. external freedom
Negative (freedom from) vs. positive (freedom to)
The unrestrained power of the free is one of the greatest enemies of freedom.
Utopian assumption: complete and absolute freedom is possible; humans are essentially good and need only to be freed from sexual and cultural repressions to be happy, peaceful and fulfilled.
When the gap between the ideal and the real cannot be bridged by persuasion, it will be bridged by force.
INTRODUCTION | 1
A New, New Birth of Freedom?
QUESTION ONE | 19
Do You Know Where Your Freedom Came From?
QUESTION TWO | 55
Are There Enough Americans Who Care About Freedom?
QUESTION THREE 67
What Do You Mean by Freedom?
QUESTION FOUR | 99
Have You Faced Up to the Central Paradox of Freedom?
QUESTION FIVE | 113
How Do You Plan to Sustain Freedom?
QUESTION SIX | 141
How Will You Make the World Safe for Diversity?
QUESTION SEVEN | 169
How Do You Justify Your Vision of a Free and Open Society?
QUESTION EIGHT | 181
Where Do You Ground Your Faith in Human Freedom?
QUESTION NINE | 205
Are You Vigilant About the Institutions Crucial to Freedom?
A Republic or a Democracy?
QUESTION TEN | 221
Are You Vigilant About the Ideas Crucial to Freedom?
Which Revolution Do They Serve?
CONCLUSION | 259
America's Choice: Covenant, Chaos, or Control?
“At the core, the deepest division is rooted in the differences between two world-changing and opposing revolutions, the American Revolution of 1776 and the French Revolution of 1789, and their rival views of freedom and the nature of the American experiment.
It could be argued that the clash is simply between the old, classical American liberalism and the new Left/liberalism that emerged from the 1960s. But it is deeper than that. The fundamental clash is between the spirit, the heirs, and the allies of 1776 and the ideas that made the American Revolution versus the spirit, the heirs, and the allies of 1789 and the different ideas that made the French Revolution and seeded the progressive liberalism of the Left (with the later help of thinkers such as Friedrich Nietzsche, Antonio Gramsci, the Frankfurt School, and Michel Foucault).
Either the classical liberalism of the republic will prevail and 1776 will defeat 1789, or the Left/liberalism of 1789 will defeat 1776, and the republic will fail and become a republic in name only. The American republic divided in this way cannot stand….
1776–freedom from government control to do as one ought.
1789–freedom through government control to achieve utopian visions.
This crisis is an American crisis. For those on one side, the classical liberals and the present-day conservatives, the American Revolution launched history's noblest experiment in freedom, justice, and a liberal political order. The American experiment was undergirded by the Jewish and Christian faiths, and while never perfect and at times far from perfect, it represents an achievement of the human spirit worthy of celebration and emulation. For those on the other side, the Left/liberals, the progressives and the cultural Marxists, that vision of America should be castigated, not celebrated. America has shown itself to be hegemonic, inherently flawed and hypo-critical, and at times racist, sexist, imperialist, militarist, and genocidal. These criticisms have been delivered along with an implacable animosity to religion as the enduring source of repression and the greatest remaining obstacle to full freedom, and delivered as part of the war cry of a very different revolution with very different assumptions and ideals….
The chaos of American politics is the outworking of the real conflict of our times—America's profound clash over fundamental differences about what constitutes freedom and, therefore what constitutes humanity, justice, social change, and the human future.”
“As a nation of free men, either we shall live free for all time, or die by suicide."—Abraham Lincoln
“…a covenantal (constitutional) republic can die, not just because of bad government but death through a million tiny acts of selfishness. Americans should stop to ponder this point. Under the impact of radical individualism, America has become the land of the autonomous and unencumbered self, and the tragedy of the commons is far advanced in America.”
“The present obsession with President Trump, whether supporting or opposing him, is a massively distorting factor for a simple reason: Donald Trump is the consequence of the crisis and not the cause. The "Never Trumpers," both Democrats and his fellow Republicans, and politicians, journalists, academics, as well as celebrities, have developed such a manic obsession about the president that they cannot see straight or talk of much else. Above all, they miss a crucial fact. The president did not create America's present crisis. The crisis created the president, and the crisis is older, deeper, and more consequential than any president. Regardless of this administration, its opposition, and its outcome, what matters in the long run is understanding and resolving the American crisis itself.”
“Freedom is the capacity to exercise the will without interference or restraint as the genuine expression of who you are… the ability to choose between alternatives and to act in accordance with one’s choices.”
Right: Stress economic freedom and freedom from central authority.
Left: Stress freedom regarding social issues.
1. The human will is essential to freedom.
2. Commitment/promise to the future builds trust.
3. Freedom means shouldering responsibility for the choices we have made.
4. Freedom assumes and requires power. (Nietzsche insists that the human instinct to freedom is nothing more than the Will to Power.)
5. Freedom requires alternatives to choose from.
6. Freedom is a means to an end. What are we using freedom for?
7. Social/collective. 3 essentials… 1. Foundations. 2. Personal self-restraint. 3. Freedom requires that individuals know how to respect the equal freedom of the others.
National freedom: the capacity a nation has to exert its will in relation to other nations.
Political freedom: the degree of freedom individuals enjoy within the nation.
Inner vs. external freedom
Negative (freedom from) vs. positive (freedom to)
The unrestrained power of the free is one of the greatest enemies of freedom.
Utopian assumption: complete and absolute freedom is possible; humans are essentially good and need only to be freed from sexual and cultural repressions to be happy, peaceful and fulfilled.
When the gap between the ideal and the real cannot be bridged by persuasion, it will be bridged by force.
June 4, 2019
A Jewish Intellectual’s Ramblings
A Jewish intellectual’s ramblings that believes America’s freedom was built on the backs of black slaves. Slavery was an ugly scar on American history, but the author ignores the half a million Americans that died in the war that freed the slaves. Even though slavery contributed a minor portion to the overall economy or creativity of the United States. Millions of men, mostly white, fought and about a half a million of them died to free slaves.
The author continues his ramblings in ancient history with his focus on Moses’ exodus from Egypt with a long dissertation on how humanity owes it’s concept of freedom to the Jewish people. He gives one sentence to the division on the country on racial lines caused by the Obama administration.
If you are an intellectual with a leather elbowed smoking jacket that enjoy reading long winded dissertations that do not offer a clue about how to solve the problem; this is the book for you.
I was hoping for fresh insight into our current problems that I believe that if not redirected will end in civil war. Instead of help or hope, I got dribble.
A Jewish intellectual’s ramblings that believes America’s freedom was built on the backs of black slaves. Slavery was an ugly scar on American history, but the author ignores the half a million Americans that died in the war that freed the slaves. Even though slavery contributed a minor portion to the overall economy or creativity of the United States. Millions of men, mostly white, fought and about a half a million of them died to free slaves.
The author continues his ramblings in ancient history with his focus on Moses’ exodus from Egypt with a long dissertation on how humanity owes it’s concept of freedom to the Jewish people. He gives one sentence to the division on the country on racial lines caused by the Obama administration.
If you are an intellectual with a leather elbowed smoking jacket that enjoy reading long winded dissertations that do not offer a clue about how to solve the problem; this is the book for you.
I was hoping for fresh insight into our current problems that I believe that if not redirected will end in civil war. Instead of help or hope, I got dribble.
March 6, 2019
I picked up this book because I whole-heartedly agree with the idea that this is a very important time in history where Americans need to set aside differences and reevaluate our freedoms. I was excited to read these conversations with a Christian worldview.
However, I was very surprised and disappointed with the turn this book took. I expected a nonpartisan outsider view of America, but Guinness quickly started taking shots at America's "Left/liberal" supporters at every opportunity, essentially blaming progressives for America's struggles. I completely disagree with this stance and it made it very hard to read more of the book. One of the most striking points was when Guinness referenced how the civil rights movement of the 1960s has led to a liberal ideology that is spreading devastation through the country. These kinds of arguments were not supported by facts and were not empathetic at all to people who are affected by discrimination every day.
However, I was very surprised and disappointed with the turn this book took. I expected a nonpartisan outsider view of America, but Guinness quickly started taking shots at America's "Left/liberal" supporters at every opportunity, essentially blaming progressives for America's struggles. I completely disagree with this stance and it made it very hard to read more of the book. One of the most striking points was when Guinness referenced how the civil rights movement of the 1960s has led to a liberal ideology that is spreading devastation through the country. These kinds of arguments were not supported by facts and were not empathetic at all to people who are affected by discrimination every day.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
February 3, 2021
Guinness does a fantastic job of walking through the history of the United States (and Western Society) to argue in favor of defending freedom (liberty). He writes on the heels of the 2016 election, and I can only imagine how this book would look if he were to have written it in 2021. Guinness gives his defense and history lesson by posing 10 questions concerning America and freedom and ultimately asking will America stand for 1776 or 1789. This is a great way to go about this topic, for many of the questions have already been answered in just 4 short years with a resounding no. Guinness does a superb job of making this book accessible for all, presenting a biblical worldview, and defending the necessity of fighting for freedom for all, not just those that agree with you. This is a must read, and while I thoroughly enjoyed the previous two books of this trilogy this is by far the best, most accessible, and necessary for the current political and cultural climate.
September 21, 2021
I love Os Guinness and this book did not disappoint!
It got a tad heavy in the middle but when you are trying to build a foundation for such sweeping ideas and asking a new generation of Americans to actually exercise their brain, one must support the question posed with context.
I believe the most surprising aspect of the book was the role of the sexual revolution in undermining our Christian faith as the foundation of our Constitutional Republic. There truly is a huge difference between a covenantal form of government and a contractual one. As he states, one is moral and the other is purely legal. People must trust one another to achieve "obedience to the unenforceable" and a legalistic society cannot enforce many laws already on the books.
These ten questions on the topic of freedom are something each and every American should take very seriously, especially as the Left are racing as fast as they can to undo our Constitutional Republic.
It got a tad heavy in the middle but when you are trying to build a foundation for such sweeping ideas and asking a new generation of Americans to actually exercise their brain, one must support the question posed with context.
I believe the most surprising aspect of the book was the role of the sexual revolution in undermining our Christian faith as the foundation of our Constitutional Republic. There truly is a huge difference between a covenantal form of government and a contractual one. As he states, one is moral and the other is purely legal. People must trust one another to achieve "obedience to the unenforceable" and a legalistic society cannot enforce many laws already on the books.
These ten questions on the topic of freedom are something each and every American should take very seriously, especially as the Left are racing as fast as they can to undo our Constitutional Republic.
March 17, 2019
Riveting, thought-provoking and slightly fear-inducing read on American's past and present understanding of freedom. Guinness walks through a checklist of 10 questions about freedom and covers a range of topics from the philosophical basis of freedom, how freedom was defined by the American republic in 1776, the central paradox of freedom (that freedom is freedom's greatest enemy), institutions currently threatened by post-modernism's definition of freedom, and a final call for America to examine where she stands on the path of her great experiment in republican freedom. Don't dismiss this book because it is written by a non-American citizen; his thoughts are well worth examining and carefully thinking through.
February 26, 2022
WOW!!!! I loved loved loved this book!!! It is one of my favorite books of all time now. The quotes he uses are so perfectly employed throughout. I now understand freedom and covenants with more clarity and this has spiritual implications that affect how well I understand the message of the Bible. I am not saying America is a Christian nation or that it represents God’s people, but knowing it’s purpose and role more clearly after reading this book is so helpful to me. Utopian thinking always ends un dictatorship…and actualizing the idea that we are totally free to do/live/be however we want always ends in slavery to our desires. I wish this book was required reading in all American History classes!
Displaying 1 - 30 of 54 reviews