Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Congressman Billybob
Neither Jefferson's nor Hamilton's ideas are sufficient by themselves. Hamilton is generally right; but Jeffersonian ideas are the necessary break and restraint on excessive Hamiltonianism -- as we have today.

Good point. People lose sight of three things: 1) what's often taken to be the old order was largely a result of Jefferson's and Jackson's electoral victories, not of the ideas of the Framers, 2) Jefferson's views had as many problems as Hamilton's -- arguably we'd still be complaining if states had the kind of power Jefferson wanted and the federal government was no more than a weak league of independent commonwealths, and 3) once the Federalists had been vanquished, Jefferson and his fellow Republicans adopted or adapted many Federalist ideas and programs for their own use.

Jefferson wasn't a consistent libertarian, or state's righter or free trader or anti-industrialist. As with other politicians -- as with Hamilton -- the sense of the national interest sometimes overcame Jefferson's own political ideology.

Today's challenge is how to adapt Jefferson's decentralist vision to current circumstances without taking on all of the historical baggage associated with Jeffersonianism.

45 posted on 02/04/2004 2:58:20 PM PST by x
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies ]


To: x
the sense of the national interest sometimes overcame Jefferson's own political ideology

Still, we need the Jeffersonian spirit of liberty as the spiritus animans of our country, and it is that spirit, not Hamilton's snobbish, vanguardist, and contemptuous one, that we need presiding over our country.

We can't get that by electing functional Hamiltonians.

53 posted on 02/04/2004 3:22:47 PM PST by lentulusgracchus (Et praeterea caeterum censeo, delenda est Carthago. -- M. Porcius Cato)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies ]

To: x
People lose sight of three things:
1) what's often taken to be the old order was largely a result of Jefferson's and Jackson's electoral victories, not of the ideas of the Framers,

The founders intent, the 'old order', were strong states, bound by a constitution based on individuals rights, whose rights were to be protected by a small but militarily powerful federal union against all usurpers, foreign OR domestic..

2) Jefferson's views had as many problems as Hamilton's -- arguably we'd still be complaining if states had the kind of power Jefferson wanted and the federal government was no more than a weak league of independent commonwealths,

The constitutions BOR's were considered binding on the states till 1833, when the infamous Barron decision, in an futile attempt to avert civil war, set the states 'free' to regulate some of our rights out of existence..
Some states still are busy writing 'regs', -- on the RKBA's, for instance..

and 3) once the Federalists had been vanquished, Jefferson and his fellow Republicans adopted or adapted many Federalist ideas and programs for their own use.

Jeffersonians had never really opposed a relatively powerful union, within constitutional bounds, imo.

Jefferson wasn't a consistent libertarian, or state's righter or free trader or anti-industrialist. As with other politicians -- as with Hamilton -- the sense of the national interest sometimes overcame Jefferson's own political ideology. Today's challenge is how to adapt Jefferson's decentralist vision to current circumstances without taking on all of the historical baggage associated with Jeffersonianism.

Most of that 'baggage' was packed by enemies of conservative republicanism, as I see it..

61 posted on 02/04/2004 3:51:08 PM PST by tpaine (I'm trying to be 'Mr Nice Guy', but the U.S. Constitution defines a conservative. (writer 33 )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson