Tuesday, July 27, 2010
Jefferson vs. Hamilton: The Origin of American Politics
In the beginning there were the Federalists and the Democratic-Republicans. At the forefront of these parties in early days were the nation's first treasury secretary Alexander Hamilton (federalist) and president Thomas Jefferson (d-republican). By knowing even a little about the fundamental principles of these two parties, it's easy to see that the rift separating America's two primary political groups has been in place even since the birth of our Republic.
I found a simple side-by-side comparison chart of the differences between Jeffersonian and Hamiltonian government systems and found it to be very accurate, yet simple and concise. I would emphasize that the biggest cause for disagreement even today, seems to be that both sides simply view the Constitution differently, and most importantly the Bill of Rights.
Check it out for yourself, and understand more about the differences in our party system today.
(side by side chart here)
Jeffersonians, for the most part, were artisans, shopkeepers, frontier settlers, or owners of small farms in the interior regions of the South and West.
ATTITUDE TOWARDS GOVERNMENT
Jeffersonians favored a form of government that was more democratic than that of England.
Jeffersonians thought that the common people were capable of self-government. They wanted to establish a small property owner's democracy.
Jeffersonians desired to increase the opportunities for the common people to participate in government by lowering voting qualifications.
Jeffersonians favored a strict interpretation of the Constitution to limit the powers of the central government and conserve state rights.
Jeffersonians wanted to reduce the number of federal officeholders.
Jeffersonians favored freedom of speech and press.
secretary of state,
letter to George Washington
September 9, 1792
"That...[internal] dissensions have taken place is certain, and even among those who are nearest to you in the administration. To no one they gien deeper concern than myself...
"That I have utterly, in my private conversations, disapproved of the system of the Secretary of the Treasury [i.e. Hamilton's economic program], I acknowledge and avow; and this was not merely a speculative difference. His system flowed from principles adverse to liberty, and was calculated to undermine and demolish the Republic, by creating an influence of his department over the members of the legislature. I saw his influence actually produced, and its first fruits to be the establishment of the great outlines of his project by the votes of the very persons who, having swallowed his bait, were laying themselves out to profit by his plans..."
letter to Phillip Mazzei of Italy
"The aspect of our politics has wonderfully changed since you left us. In place of that noble love of liberty, and republican government which carried us triumphantly through the war, an Anglican monarchical, and aristocratical party has sprung up, whose avowed object is to draw over us the substance, as they have already done the forms, of the British government. The main body of our citizens, however, remain true to their republican principles; the whole landed interest is republican, and so is a great mass of talents. Against us are the Executive, the Judiciary, two out of three branches of the legislature, all the officers of the government, all who want to be officers, all timid men who prefer the calm of despotism to the boisterous sea of liberty, British merchants and Americans trading on British [capital], speculators and holders in the banks and public funds..."
Hamiltonians, for the most part, were merchants, bankers, manufacturers, or professional men from New England and the Atlantic seaboard, along with some wealthy farmers and southern planters.
ATTITUDE TOWARD GOVERNMENT
Hamiltonians admired the English aristocracy and the English system of government and wished to ssee it used as a model.
Hamiltonians considered the common people ignorant and incapable of self-government.
Hamiltonians desired high voting qualifications, claiming that unfettered democracy was anarchy.
Hamiltonians favored a broad interpretation of the Constitution to strengthen the central government at the expense of of state's rights.
Hamiltonians wanted an expanding bureaucracy.
Hamiltonians, under certain circumstances, favored restrictions on speech and the press.
secretary of the treasury,
letter to Colonel Edward Carrington of Virginia
May 26, 1792
"it was not till the last session [of Congress] that I become unequivocally convinced of the following truth: 'That Mr. Madison, cooperating with Mr. Jefferson [the secretary of state], is at the head of the faction decidedly hostile to me and my administration; and actuated by views, in my judgment, subversive of the principles of good government and dangerous to the Union, peace, and happiness of the country.'
"In respect to foreign politics, the views of these gentlemen are, in my judgment,...unsound and dangerous. They have a womanish attachment to France and a womanish resentment against Great Britain. They would draw us into the closest embrace of the former, and involve us in all the consequences of her politics; and they would risk the peace of the country in their endeavors to keep us at the greatest possible distance from the latter...Various circumstances prove to me that if these gentlemen were left to pursue their own course, there would be, in less than six months, an open war between the United States and Great Britain.
"A word on another point. I am told that serious apprehensions are disseminated in your state [Virginia] as to the existence of a monarchical party meditating the destruction of State and republican government. If it is possible that so absurd an idea can gain ground, it is necessary that it should be combated. I assure you, on my private faith and honor as a man, that there is not, in my judgment, a shadow of foundation for it. A very small number of men indeed may entertain theories less republican than Mr. Jefferson and Mr. Madison, but I am persuaded there is not a man among them who would not regard as both criminal and visionary any attempt to subvert the republican system of the country."
Thomas Jefferson had a vision of every man working to earn a living for himself and his family. It was this man's right and responsibility to see after his security and his welfare. The government only exists to provide a few fundamental needs such as border security and common currency. Jefferson knew that throughout history governments always lead to tyranny as they gain more and more power, and through finance and corruption, external entities can take hold to their own ends.
If I can assign a term to Jefferson, I'd consider him "the anti-tyrant". in laying the foundation of our country, he put more emphasis on preventing the seed of tyranny than any he did any other goal. He had studied historically how governments were corrupted and the terrible effects this had on the rights of citizens. With every written word and act of legislation, he fought against any loopholes in the formation of the Constitution that would have allowed the government to grow too large.
Alexander Hamilton was of a different path altogether. A strong advocate of the British monarchy style of government, Hamilton had much lighter convictions against the tyrannical rule of King George. In fact, at the Philadelphia Convention in 1787, Hamilton proposed a plan for government that included a president that would hold office for life; a king of sorts. This plan was not considered as an option.
If you've spent more than a moment on my blog, you know how I feel about the Rothschilds, the Bank of England, Federal Reserve, and big banks in general. Historically, they are the root of all tyranny and the evil preceding it. Hamilton setup the American branch of the bank of England in 1791 under the name "First Bank of the United States", owned by Nathan Rothschild. The story of the evils of the banks can be seen here.
Hamilton was a traitor to his countrymen, a calculating agent of foreign business and banking interests (primarily the Rothschild/Bank of England cartel), and through his Illuminati backing was able to infiltrate our nation at birth, as a virus injected into a newborn. His Federalist party represented the interest of the very tyrants from which Jefferson and others sought freedom for themselves and future generations. And it was his party, and the values held within it, that still divides the country from its constitutional values today.
I think understanding that our Democrat and Republican parties came from these two men in our nation's infancy, and knowing these two men intimately, we can understand far better the problems set before us today.