Over the years, I have lost some respect for Jefferson.
His actions in both of Washington’s administrations, from a viewpoint of loyalty and respect to George Washington (which should have been unquestioned) paint him in a less than positive light. Jefferson had been spreading rumors behind the scenes that Washington was a feeble, doddering old man who was making decisions based on the whispers in his ear from people like Hamilton, whom he detested.
For his own personal reasons, he was undermining the legitimacy of the very administration he was a member of.
Washington found out via an unimpeachable source that Jefferson was behind some of that, and confronted him directly and personally with that information. After that, their relationship in private was non-existent, and in public, was limited to polite exchanges.
His admiration and support for the French Revolution was disturbing to me as well, as he had plenty of knowledgable people telling him exactly what was going on over there, yet he persisted.
All in all, I do (to an extent) view Jefferson as the forefather of today’s Democrats, though their desire to destroy this country and mold it in their model sets them far, far apart from him.
All that said, it is hard not to admire Jefferson for his impressive intellect and written communication skills. He was remarkable in that respect.
Since you've associated Jefferson with the French Revolution, can you please explain why it is that people who do this seem to NEVER mention Thomas Paine's participation in the "Reign of Terror".
Since you've associated Jefferson with the French Revolution, can you please explain why it is that people who do this seem to NEVER mention Thomas Paine's participation in the "Reign of Terror".
First of all, Thomas Jefferson wasn't the best of administrators or the most practical of men. As governor of Virginia, Jefferson botched the defense of the state and had to flee the capital. He also didn't leave our military in as good a shape as it could have been when the War of 1812 began. Whatever Hamilton's ideological faults, he did bring a degree of practical financial know-how to government, and he was concerned with building a stronger America.
Secondly, Jefferson wasn't always the greatest advocate of liberty. We know about his problems with slavery and his admiration for the French Revolution, even in its uglier aspects. There has also been criticism from libertarians for the way he enforced the Embargo Acts, but the impetus he gave to pro-slavery and separationist thinking in his later years is also a great blot on his record.
Third, there's a self-righteousness and hypocrisy about Jefferson and his supporters that's off-putting. They played the game of politics well, not always fairly, and to their own advantage, but claimed to be much more righteous and moralistic than their record merited. In that they are a lot like today's liberals.
Jefferson did have his positive side -- he wrote the Declaration of Independence and went after the Barbary Pirates, and where would we be as a country without the Louisiana Purchase? -- but he comes across as a romantic, a poet, a (flawed) idealist in situations when a bluffer, more down-to-earth man like Washington would have been a better leader.
Once again, thanks for your input.