Replies

First, it would help if you didn’t butcher Jefferson’s quote. What he actually said was,

“(I)f any state in the union will declare that it prefers separation with the 1st alternative, to a continuance in union without it, I have no hesitation in saying ‘let us separate.’ I would rather the states should withdraw, which are for unlimited commerce & war, and confederate with those alone which are for peace & agriculture.”

Second, the quote is meaningless without context - and doesn’t mean what you want it to mean with the added context. Here Jefferson is posing a hypothetical - and one that he realizes is fanciful in its construction. He is stating that if we can chose the ideal (however impossible) from the abhorrent then of course why not go with the ideal.

He closes his letter to William H. Crawford with this:

But possibly these may be the dreams of an old man, or that the occasions of realising them may have past away without return. a government regulating itself by what is wise and just for the many, uninfluenced by the local and selfish views of the few who direct their affairs, has not been seen perhaps on earth. or if it existed, for a moment, at the birth of ours, it would not be easy to fix the term of it’s continuance. still, I believe, it does exist here in a greater degree than any where else; and for it’s growth and continuance, as well as for your personal health and happiness, I offer sincere prayers with the homage of my respect and esteem.

Here he reiterates the fanciful root of his argument and differentiates it from a more reality based pragmatism.

From: https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Jefferson/03-10-02-0101

I would also refer you to his letter to John Taylor in 1798 where he said,

“Perhaps this party division is necessary to induce each to watch and relate to the people the proceedings of the other. But if on a temporary superiority of the one party, the other is to resort to a scission of the Union, no federal government can ever exist. If to rid ourselves of the present rule of Massachusetts and Connecticut, we break the Union, will the evil stop there? Suppose the New England states alone cut off, will our nature be changed? Are we not men still to the south of that, and with all the passions of men? Immediately, we shall see a Pennsylvania and a Virginia party arise in the residuary confederacy, and the public mind will be distracted with the same party spirit. What a game too will the one party in their hands, by eternally threatening the other that unless they do so and so, they will join their northern neighbors. If we reduce our Union to Virginia and North Carolina, immediately the conflict will be established between the representatives of these two States, and they will end by breaking into their simple units.”

The last sentence is the most poignant - when we focus on our differences in place of our shared concerns we will pick and tear away at one another until we are nothing.

I will say this - he does offer a spark of hope for a potential parting of the ways with this line:

“Better keep together as we are, haul off from Europe as soon as we can, and from all attachments to any portions of it; and if they show their power just sufficiently to hoop us together, it will be the happiest situation in which we can exist. If the game runs sometimes against us at home, we must have patience till luck turns, and then we shall have an opportunity of winning back the principles we have lost. For this is a game where principles are the stake. Better luck, therefore, to us all, and health, happiness and friendly salutations to yourself.”

From: http://college.cengage.com/history/ayers_primary_sources/jefferson_taylor_1798.htm

Still, the main thrust of his words support unity, not division.