We lost it quite a bit before then.
Several years ago I read an essay stating that we really weren’t all that different from the French because we had experienced 4 republics. This was a bit different from Yale historian Bruce Ackerman’s 3 republics based on constitutional interpretation, and different again from Jude Wanniski’s 4 republics. (I’m still trying to find that essay.) I’ll try to sum the essay quickly and forego my usual pedantic writing style.
The First Republic functioned under the Articles of Confederation but failed after only a decade, killed off by trade wars between the states. There was no common currency. Things fell apart.
The Second Republic was founded by Hamilton and Madison and functioned under the Constitution. During the ratification debates, anti-Federalists (adherents of the First Republic) saw the Constitutional Convention as treason and a betrayal of 1776. Read the “Anti-Federalist Papers” to get the gist of the argument.
The Federalist impulses of Washington and Hamilton were derailed by Jackson who went to a full states’ right regimen. Jackson’s impact was so great that to restore Hamiltonian governance required cracking the Union and fighting a war. Things fell apart.
The Third Republic was founded by Lincoln and functioned under a greatly amended version of the Constitution. It was a purely Hamiltonian construct, created when Lincoln refused the states what they felt was the ultimate state’s right: To leave peacefully. Big Business ran the country.
During the Second Republic, the Jeffersonian impulse was exercised via states’ rights and a weak federal government, but the Civil War and the amended Constitution had killed that off. As a result, during the Third Republic the Jeffersonian impulse (via the Progressive Movement) favored Big Government protecting the people from Big Business, i.e. Jeffersonian ends achieved through Hamiltonian means. Theodore Roosevelt made the first strides in this direction. Today we call it “compassionate conservatism.”
A business panic related to easy credit from the Federal Reserve led to a depression blamed on Big Business. Things fell apart.
The Fourth Republic was created by Franklin Roosevelt and functioned under Executive Orders. The Constitution meant what hired judges said it meant, and Earl Warren had as much power as the president. This republic was not so much Democratic Socialism as Government Capitalism with a large bureaucracy running the country and the people insulated from ruling themselves. Presidents and Congresses came and went, but the courts and bureaucracy continued on.
Technically speaking, the Jeffersonian republic ended when Lincoln decided to go Hamiltonian and won the argument in 1865. FDR created a semi-socialist version of the Jeffersonian republic, but it’s getting to expensive to maintain. Eventually things will fall apart – but when?
Jefferson's election was often referred to as the "Revolution of 1800." Jackson's election in 1828 was also seen as a radical turn of events. As you say, there was much difference between the ideas that Hamilton or Adams had about the federal government and those that Jefferson represented. The old Federalists who supported the Washington administration were increasingly alienated in Jefferson's and then in Jackson's America. Some second generation Jeffersonians were similarly estranged by Jackson's victory, though their more radical fellows might have embraced him.
The Civil War did mark a break, but was it so catastrophic a break as to constitute the creation of a new Republic? In some of its policies, Lincoln's America represented a return to Washington's and Madison's view of government after the long Jacksonian hiatus. In other ways it was truly radical, but the radicalism wasn't necessarily something the Republicans intended to impose on the country in 1860, but was an outgrowth of war, emancipation, and the defeat of the South.
One major reason why Lincoln's America looks so different was the rise of industry. Different sorts of people came to power after 1860. Politics in an industrial nation will always look and be different from those in a more rural republic, but it would be a mistake to conclude from that that Jefferson's or Jackson's views on the Constitution were the same as those of Washington or Adams or that it was Lincoln's ideas about government that destroyed their America.
If the "Second Republic" did perish it's likely that it did so in 1860 with secession. The idea that those who destroyed the old union represented the "real Constitution" is an illusion. They felt that the Constitution of 1789 didn't provide them with sufficient protection for their interests and that a new departure was necessary. Whatever came after 1860 was bound to be different, regardless of who prevailed in Congress or on the battlefield.
It's also worth noting that when Republicans Jefferson, Madison, and Monroe were in the White House, they adopted some of the Federalist policies that they had criticized when they were in opposition. Lincoln could cite some Jeffersonian Republican precedents for his policies, and he and his idol Clay never particularly thought of themselves as Hamiltonians. Jefferson himself was a swing figure between constructive statesmen like Madison and Monroe and more radical figures like John Randolph and John Taylor.
If Jefferson's reputation has fallen in recent years one reason surely is that he was all over the map: pro-slavery but anti-slavery, libertarian but willing to countenance nationalist and restrictive policies, a revolutionary and radical with a conservative side, an agrarian isolationist republican who put the country on the road to empire, an egalitarian aristocrat. The many-sidedness that made Jefferson such an attractive, provocative, and intellectually fruitful figure in previous generations, now looks like something of a muddle and a mess. There's still a wealth of ideas and perceptions in Jefferson, but one can't blame people for throwing up their hands.
We lost it quite a bit before then.
Several years ago I read an essay stating that we really weren't all that different from the French because we had experienced 4 republics. This was a bit different from Yale historian Bruce Ackerman's 3 republics based on constitutional interpretation, and different again from Jude Wanniski's 4 republics. (I'm still trying to find that essay.) I'll try to sum the essay quickly and forego my usual pedantic writing style.
Where did we 'lose it' before 1900?
The First Republic functioned under the Articles of Confederation but failed after only a decade, killed off by trade wars between the states. There was no common currency. Things fell apart. The Second Republic was founded by Hamilton and Madison and functioned under the Constitution. During the ratification debates, anti-Federalists (adherents of the First Republic) saw the Constitutional Convention as treason and a betrayal of 1776. Read the "Anti-Federalist Papers" to get the gist of the argument. The Federalist impulses of Washington and Hamilton were derailed by Jackson who went to a full states' right regimen. Jackson's impact was so great that to restore Hamiltonian governance required cracking the Union and fighting a war. Things fell apart.
Quite convoluted theory. -- IMO, the 'states rightists' were direct anti-constitutionalists. They meant to destroy the union, and almost did.
The Third Republic was founded by Lincoln and functioned under a greatly amended version of the Constitution. It was a purely Hamiltonian construct, created when Lincoln refused the states what they felt was the ultimate state's right: To leave peacefully.
The states had no enumerated power to leave. By leaving, they were violating the constitutional rights of state residents who enjoyed US Constitutional protection from the dictates of majority rule.
Big Business ran the country. During the Second Republic, the Jeffersonian impulse was exercised via states' rights and a weak federal government, but the Civil War and the amended Constitution had killed that off.
The 14th amendment 'killed off' Jeffersonian principles? - It's intent was to restore them.
As a result, during the Third Republic the Jeffersonian impulse (via the Progressive Movement) favored Big Government protecting the people from Big Business, i.e. Jeffersonian ends achieved through Hamiltonian means. Theodore Roosevelt made the first strides in this direction.
You just jumped over about 50 years of working jeffersonian republic, as I mentioned in my first line, above..
Today we call it "compassionate conservatism." A business panic related to easy credit from the Federal Reserve led to a depression blamed on Big Business. Things fell apart. The Fourth Republic was created by Franklin Roosevelt and functioned under Executive Orders. The Constitution meant what hired judges said it meant, and Earl Warren had as much power as the president. This republic was not so much Democratic Socialism as Government Capitalism with a large bureaucracy running the country and the people insulated from ruling themselves. Presidents and Congresses came and went, but the courts and bureaucracy continued on.
Sure glad you weren't so pedantic.
Technically speaking, the Jeffersonian republic ended when Lincoln decided to go Hamiltonian and won the argument in 1865.
I think it continued for nearly 50 more years, until the prohibitionary socialists gained control..
FDR created a semi-socialist version of the Jeffersonian republic, but it's getting to expensive to maintain. Eventually things will fall apart – but when?
They are falling now -- as we speak, literally..
I see hamiltonian-socialism/statism on one side of this political gulf, and jeffersonian-republican/conservatism on the other, both defined by our view of the principles of our constitution. Far too many citizens are willing to ignore our base principles for the political issues of the day.