Posted on 03/01/2009 6:35:25 PM PST by neverdem
How New Yorks opportunity society became Americas
We New Yorkers imagine our citys history begins in earnest with the Gilded Age and the Great Migration that brought many of our forebears sailing under the Statue of Libertys torch to supercharge a nascent metropolis with a jolt of new energy. But this summer, when a handful of square-bearded, antique-garbed Pennsylvania German Baptists jacked a yellow clapboard house up over a Harlem church and wheeled it around the corner to a new site in St. Nicholas Park, we recalled that more than a century earlier Gotham took center stage as the nations first capital. For the house belonged to Alexander Hamiltonnot only one of the greatest Founding Fathers but the one who stamped the infant republic forever with the unique spirit of New York City.
The other Founders were Americans of a centurys standing, who fought the Revolution to defend liberties their families had claimed for generations. Washington and Jefferson, landed grandees, descended from seventeenth-century Virginians; Harvard-educated John Adamss forebears settled in Massachusetts Bay in 1638. Such men were rooted Americans, living on land inherited from their fathers. Hamilton, by contrast, was a penniless immigrant from the West Indies; like so many New Yorkers, he had come here from elsewhere, seeking his fortune.
And he wasnt just penniless. My birth, as he delicately put it, is the subject of the most humiliating criticismfor he was, in John Adamss acidulous taunt, the bastard brat of a Scotch pedlar. Nevertheless, as a prime exemplar of that American opportunity and enterprise he so fervently promoted, he rose to be the countrys second most powerful man. As Ron Chernow puts it in his indispensable biography, he served in effect as George Washingtons prime minister and head of government, directing his administrations policy and molding the enduring institutions...
(Excerpt) Read more at city-journal.org ...
FF ping
That may be true, but the man was a sh!t head (which says a lot about "Modern America"). Consider Mr. Hamilton's proposed plan of government:
http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/debates_618.asp
"In his [Mr. Hamilton's] private opinion he had no scruple in declaring, supported as he was by the opinions of so many of the wise & good, that the British Govt. was the best in the world [one must ask - what was he doing in America?]: and that he doubted much whether any thing short of it would do in America...As to the [proposed federal] Executive, it seemed to be admitted that no good one could be established on Republican principles [Hamilton was obviously a RINO]. Was not this giving up the merits of the question: for can there be a good Govt. without a good Executive. The English model was the only good one on this subject [RINO!]. The Hereditary interest of the King was so interwoven with that of the Nation, and his personal emoluments so great, that he was placed above the danger of being corrupted from abroad [oh, you betcha]-and at the same time was both sufficiently independent and sufficiently controuled, to answer the purpose of the institution at home...Let one branch of the [federal] Legislature [the Senate] hold their places for life [picture "Dingy" Reid & "Chuck You" Schumer serving for life] or at least during good behaviour. Let the Executive also be for life [please note - Carter is still alive]...[a federal] Executive for life... will therefore be a safer depository of power. It will be objected probably, that such [a federal] Executive will be an elective Monarch, and will give birth to the tumults which characterize that form of Govt. He wd. reply that Monarch is an indefinite term [how Clintonian]..."
Er, which poison pill?
Thank the Lord for Aaron Burr.
Hamilton was an insidious traitor who did everything he could to undermine the power of the new Constitution. He fought the limitation of the power of the federal government, he fought against the creation of the Bill of Rights, and he fought against staying debt-free. He was a subversive monarchist, and he did incredible damage to our country literally at the moment it was being born. And he did it with thoroughly modern spin techniques - every shred of his efforts was done in the name of freedom (a tactic that continues to allow his name to be protected today). Because of this he was literally reviled by some of the other Founders, and has continued to be reviled by many through history, up to and including today. In fact, he can be directly blamed for establishing the philosophical underpinnings of the legalisms which enable all federal overreaching, as well as the creation of the Federal Reserve. Burr was a hero.
/rant (but I’m not apologizing for it - he was a bastard in more ways than mere birth)
Hamilton was a hero.
The cultists of Ayn Rand follow an ideology foreign to America. Put down the philandering russian and pick up a collection of Hamilton’s works.
You don’t get it either because have not read Hamilton (and selective quoting from a google search doesn’t count) or because sacrifice is unimaginable to you. Hamilton was taking an extreme monarchist position to try to balance the lunacy of the Ant-Federalists and parochial mobs. He was willing to become a pariah to create a stable government.
Yep, its ALLLLLL about NY...Like this republic would not have existed with their undying support and sacrifice to the Union...
(Steve rolls his eyes)
It took a lot of politicking and fake hair pulling to get NY to get with the program, and it was not because they had some great principle dissagreement...There were too many Torrey’s in NY society that weren’t willing to give up their loyalty to the crown...It took everyone at that convention to agree to split, before NY would join in...Such courage...
So yeah, give us your Alexander Hamilton...
I would prefer John Adams and even Thomas Jefferson over AH anyday...
Well hang on a sec...
I think it is a tragedy that dueling has gone out of style today...
Burr was a pill nonetheless, and Hamilton had his deficiencies, yet we all know why there were problems with both sides of that equation...
Thats why it would be neat to sit back and watch liberals dissagree, and take the dissagreement out on the steps (and capitol ground) and duke it out...Or at least shoot at each other...
Quite entertaining in these times...
Hamilton may be dead but his legacy lives on in ObamaNation.
Best regards,
Maybe you should be careful about the slurs you use, and the selective clipping and pasting you do before you start throwing “ignorance” and “teenager” around...
Obviously you stopped short of how much it took NY to agree to get into the ground floor of this experiment called these United States of America...
Sure, you must think I do not know the trials and tribulations every single state went thru to gain our overall independence from England...How ignorant of an opinion you must have...
So go right ahead and assume some more...I’m sure you’ll not lose sleep over your interpretation of U.S. history...WE could all learn something from you, but that is beside the point...
...as a prime exemplar of that American opportunity and enterprise he so fervently promoted, he rose to be the country's second most powerful man. As Ron Chernow puts it in his indispensable biography, he served in effect as George Washington's prime minister and head of government, directing his administration's policy and molding the enduring institutions...Alexander Hamilton drafted George Washington's Farewell Address in 1796.
You dont get it either because have not read Hamilton (and selective quoting from a google search doesnt count) or because sacrifice is unimaginable to you. Hamilton was taking an extreme monarchist position to try to balance the lunacy of the Ant-Federalists and parochial mobs. He was willing to become a pariah to create a stable government.
The reference I cited ( http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/debates_618.asp ) was Mr. Hamilton's 'high water mark.' He could have discussed absolutely anything in the world, regarding government, and he elected to suggest that "the British Govt. was the best in the world." You may wish to rationalize his statements - that is obviously your right. But if the convention had actually adopted his 'plan of government' (with a President & the entire Senate serving for life), I doubt he would have complained - no matter what you & your fellow Hamiltonian-big-government "cultists," who obviously "follow an ideology foreign to America," may think...
;>)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.