Every economic action has a multitude of unintended impacts outside the area targeted. I would never deny that.
Hamilton’s economics were the result of practical adaption as much as theory. It wasn’t well developed but there was no one capable of convincing when arrayed against him. Certainly not Jefferson. He did not favor “monopolies” and there were none in the country at the time. It is quite a stretch to claim the tariff led to any claimed technological backwardness. Friedman’s ideology would led to some of his critique of Hamilton and does not convince me of anything other than the danger of monday morning qbing.
And there is no question that Britain’s colonial policies distorted our economic development. It was intended to do just that.
Hamilton’s economics were the result of practical adaption as much as theory.
They were the result of playing politics to beneficiary interest groups that he wanted on his side.
It wasn’t well developed but there was no one capable of convincing when arrayed against him.
I'd argue that Taylor of Caroline and, to the limited extent he wrote on them in his final days, Edmund Pendleton provided more than adequate refutations of the Hamiltonian economic system.
It is quite a stretch to claim the tariff led to any claimed technological backwardness.
It's no stretch at all. Historical studies of the U.S. iron industry from the founding era to roughly the 1840's show that we lagged behind Britain's smelting techniques by years and even decades in some cases. The main cause was the increasing protection iron received after 1816.