Economic interpretations of history are irrevocably identified with the name of Charles A. Beard. This is mainly due to his early book An Economic Interpretation of the Constitution of the United States (1913). Yet, in Beard's later work, The Economic Basis of Politics (1922), he articulates the main principles of his method and argues for its applicability to understanding of current events. In this brief survey of Western political philosophy and contemporary constitutional arrangements, Beard concludes that it is well established doctrine that "there is a vital relation between the forms of state and the distribution of property, revolutions in the state being usually the results of contests over property." In advancing this axiom, Beard responds to charges that he was a "Marxist" by constructing an interpretation of Western political philosophy and history that draws a firm distinction between his economic interpretation of history and Marx's historical materialism. Beard traces the origins of his own method to the works of Aristotle, Machiavelli, Harrington, Locke, and Montesquieu. This view of political theory and political theorists stands in sharp contrast to the view prevailing among many contemporary political philosophers, who insist that political theory must somehow transcend history and rise above ordinary politics to count as theory. Beard's observations on the nature and tradition of Western political philosophy provide an entrue into New World political thought, which many academic political philosophers have long regarded as something less than "political theory." In contrast, Beard regards the development and application of the method of economic interpretation to be the greatest contribution of American political thought to the tradition of Western political theory. In his surveys of thinkers such as Madison, Webster, and Calhoun, Beard links American political thought to the Western tradition of economic interpretation, which undergirds both "liberalism" and "republicanism." The present-day relevance of this important volume will be evident to all social scientists.

Conceived by Charles Beard as a sequel to his provocative study of American Foreign Policy in the Making, 1932-1940, President Roosevelt and the Coming of the War outraged a nation, permanently damaging Beard's status as America's most influential historian. Beard's main argument is that both Democratic and Republican leaders, but Roosevelt above all, worked quietly in 1940 and 1941 to insinuate the United States into the Second World War. Basing his work on available congressional records and administrative reports, Beard concludes that FDR's image as a neutral, peace-loving leader was a smokescreen, behind which he planned for war against Germany and Japan even well before the attack on Pearl Harbor. Beard contends that the distinction between aiding allies in Europe like Great Britain and maintaining strict neutrality with respect to nations like Germany and Japan was untenable. Beard does not argue that all nations were alike, or that some did and others did not merit American support, but rather that Roosevelt chose to aid Great Britain secretly and unconstitutionally rather than making the case to the American public. President Roosevelt shifted from a policy of neutrality to one of armed intervention, but he did so without surrendering the appearance, the fiction of neutrality. This core argument makes the work no less explosive in 2003 than it was when first issued in 1948.

Conceived by Charles Beard as a sequel to his provocative study of "American Foreign Policy in the Making, 1932-1940, President Roosevelt and the Coming of the War" outraged a nation, permanently damaging Beard's status as America's most influential historian.

Beard's main argument is that both Democratic and Republican leaders, but Roosevelt above all, worked quietly in 1940 and 1941 to insinuate the United States into the Second World War. Basing his work on available congressional records and administrative reports, Beard concludes that FDR's image as a neutral, peace-loving leader was a smokescreen, behind which he planned for war against Germany and Japan even well before the attack on Pearl Harbor.

Beard contends that the distinction between aiding allies in Europe like Great Britain and maintaining strict neutrality with respect to nations like Germany and Japan was untenable. Beard does not argue that all nations were alike, or that some did and others did not merit American support, but rather that Roosevelt chose to aid Great Britain secretly and unconstitutionally rather than making the case to the American public. President Roosevelt shifted from a policy of neutrality to one of armed intervention, but he did so without surrendering the appearance, the fiction of neutrality. This core argument makes the work no less explosive in 2003 than it was when first issued in 1948.

Economic interpretations of history are irrevocably identified with the name of Charles A. Beard. This is mainly due to his early book "An Economic Interpretation of the Constitution of the United States" (1913). Yet, in Beard's later work, "The Economic Basis of Politics" (1922), he articulates the main principles of his method and argues for its applicability to understanding of current events. In this brief survey of Western political philosophy and contemporary constitutional arrangements, Beard concludes that it is well established doctrine that "there is a vital relation between the forms of state and the distribution of property, revolutions in the state being usually the results of contests over property." In advancing this axiom, Beard responds to charges that he was a "Marxist" by constructing an interpretation of Western political philosophy and history that draws a firm distinction between his economic interpretation of history and Marx's historical materialism. Beard traces the origins of his own method to the works of Aristotle, Machiavelli, Harrington, Locke, and Montesquieu. This view of political theory and political theorists stands in sharp contrast to the view prevailing among many contemporary political philosophers, who insist that political theory must somehow transcend history and rise above ordinary politics to count as theory. Beard's observations on the nature and tradition of Western political philosophy provide an entrue into New World political thought, which many academic political philosophers have long regarded as something less than "political theory." In contrast, Beard regards the development and application of the method of economic interpretation to be the greatest contribution of American political thought to the tradition of Western political theory. In his surveys of thinkers such as Madison, Webster, and Calhoun, Beard links American political thought to the Western tradition of economic interpretation, which undergirds both "liberalism" and "republicanism." The present-day relevance of this important volume will be evident to all social scientists. Charles A. Beard (1874-1948) taught at Columbia University, then resigned to become a founder of The New School for Social Research. Among his many works are "Development of Modern Europe, Economic Origins of Jeffersonian Democracy, The Rise of American Civilization," and "President Roosevelt and the Coming of the War." Clyde W. Barrow is professor of political science and director of the Center for Policy Analysis at the University of Massachusetts at Dartmouth. He is the author of "More than a Historian: The Political and Economic Thought of Charles A. Beard," published by Transaction.

In his piercing introduction to An Economic Interpretation the author wrote that "whoever leaves economic pressures out of history or out of discussion of public questions is in mortal peril of substituting mythology for reality." It was Beard's view that the founding fathers, especially Madison, Jay, and Hamilton, never made such a miscalculation. Indeed, these statesmen placed themselves among the great practitioners of all ages and gave instructions to succeeding generations in the art of government by their vigorous deployment of classical political economy.

In this new printing of a major classic in American historiography, Louis Filler provides a sense of the person behind the book, the background that enabled Beard to move well beyond the shibboleths of the second decade of the twentieth century. While the controversies over Beard's book have quieted, the issues which it raised have hardly abated. Indeed, one can say that just about every major work in the politics and economics of the American nation must contend with Beard's classic work. Beard's work rests on an examination of primary documents: land and slave owners, geographic distribution of money, ownership of public securities, the specific condition of those who were disenfranchised as well as those who were in charge of the nascent American economy.

The great merit of Beard's work is that despite its incendiary potential, he himself viewed An Economic Interpretation in coldly analytical terms, seeing such a position as giving comfort to neither revolutionaries nor reactionaries. Attacked by Marxists for being too mechanical, and by conservatives as being blind to the moral purposes of the framers of the constitution, the work continues to exercise a tremendous influence on all concerned. The fact that Beard wrote with a scalpel-like precision that gripped the attention of those in power no less than the common man is, it should be added, no small element in the enduring forces of this work.