That worked so well back in the Bush years, that I though we could give it a rest for a while.
The point isn't that Hamilton was right in everything he wanted to do or in everything somebody could blame him for, but that some of the things he did and some of the things he supported had value and helped the country.
Consider "Hamiltonian" post-Civil War America, 1865-1933. They did some things wrong, and many things right, but they didn't really have much in common with centralized, mercantilist France, did they?
“When in doubt, knock France?’’. On a purely personal level two generations of my family fought in two world wars for Frances freedom and damned near lost their lives doing it. And know the Frenchies are letting the Muslims over run them.
Statism didn’t have free reign until the culmination of the disasterous Wilson/FDR years. I’m not in doubt, and I’m not gratuitously knocking France. Hamilton’s ideas were retrograde, and very much in tune with the retrograde example of France’s long-entrenched dirigisme model (from Louis XIV onward). Hamilton did hate the Constitution that was ratified and worked sedulously to subvert it. His acolytes in the courts helped things along dramatically, with Marbury being an example of a poison pill that keeps on giving. Of course, Hamilton wasn’t alone. Many Federalists ignored the Constitution when they could, as, for example, when the Alien and Sedition Acts were passed during the Adams administration. For a more careful look at Hamilton/Clay type policies during the 19th Century, I recommend The Myth of the Robber Barons by Burton Folsum.