Review by mitchryan3 -- The Right to Nominate

This forum is for volunteer reviews by members of our review team. These reviews are done voluntarily by the reviewers and are published in this forum, separate from the official professional reviews. These reviews are kept separate primarily because the same book may be reviewed by many different reviewers.
Forum rules
Authors and publishers are not able to post replies in the review topics.
Post Reply
User avatar
Posts: 2
Joined: 15 Jun 2019, 15:10
Currently Reading:
Bookshelf Size: 11
Reviewer Page:
Latest Review: The Right to Nominate by Thomas E Peterson

Review by mitchryan3 -- The Right to Nominate

Post by mitchryan3 » 13 Jul 2019, 18:23

[Following is a volunteer review of "The Right to Nominate" by Thomas E Peterson.]
Book Cover
2 out of 4 stars
Share This Review

Thomas Peterson’s, The Right to Nominate: Restoring Power of the People Over the Power of the Parties, is a presentation on America’s dysfunctional party structure. It explores the rights of citizens today and how we have been stripped of our true liberty. Peterson argues that we are ruled under a “government by lurches.” We are constantly orbiting between the two political parties. Each side always looking to pin defamation and conflict on the other party to regain their source of power. Leaving our country in a gridlock with an ever increasing national debt.

The main premise of the book is that the “parties-only” organization completely dismisses our right to nominate candidates for public office. We are forced to choose between only party candidates. Many times, this involves picking the least corrupt politician. If the people could have the opportunity to vote for a non-party candidate they would take the power back from the parties. Thus, fulfilling what the Founding Fathers originally intended with the creation of the U.S. Constitution.

I would rate the novel a 2 out of 4 stars. The author brings forward a compelling and much needed debate on the current binary system, but it falls short. Peterson’s argument for the failing party scheme revolves around the fact that the Founding Fathers despised factions. I find this argument to be very empty. I do not disagree that the Founding Fathers were great pioneers and heroes, but using their opinions on parties is a logical fallacy appealing to their authority on liberty. Although, it was eye-opening to read the disgusted opinions about parties from our country’s most respected leaders.

A redeeming quality from the book was Peterson’s ability to provide historical context to the development of the party platform we have today. The book portrays “two eagles,” Thomas Jefferson and Alexander Hamilton. It was fascinating to learn about the altercations that took place between these two gentlemen. Ultimately, their bickering led to the start of political slander and manipulation that has evolved into the bureaucratic climate we experience today. The author’s stories of Jefferson and Hamilton deeply helped provide context and proof for his argument against factions that the rest of the booked lacked.

The book did not appear to have any punctuation issues. But it was broken down into many sections and chapters that were very circular and repetitive. This proved to be distracting and the book could be improved with further editing.

I would recommend this book to anyone that enjoys books on America’s early history. The book does allow readers to question the shape government currently fulfills. Anyone looking to challenge our political climate would enjoy the concepts presented. I applaud Peterson for taking a stab at fixing the party ideology. He not only details the wrong of this system but presents his own solution, the jury/convention. Peterson’s ideas may inspire other’s to make the change America desperately needs, but a stronger argument and solution remains to be seen.

The Right to Nominate
View: on Bookshelves | on Amazon

User avatar
Posts: 1646
Joined: 21 May 2019, 17:00
Favorite Book: Among Others
Currently Reading:
Bookshelf Size: 75
Reviewer Page:
Latest Review: A Dragon’s Flame by Mercedese Jeffries

Post by esp1975 » 16 Jul 2019, 12:04

I agree that the best part of the book was the history of Jefferson and Hamilton. But yeah, his main arguments against parties got old, fast. It likely would have been a better book if some of those circular and repetitive sections had been cut out.

Post Reply

Return to “Volunteer Reviews”