I had intended to post Part II of the WWI question last night, but got caught up doing movie reviews on Life of Ando. So to slake your ravenous historical thirst in the meantime, here is my assignment from my history class this past week. If you’re really into American history and how the politics of the early Republic shook out, Jefferson vs. Hamilton is a great study. It’s also a little, I guess comforting, to know that as bad as we think today’s politicians are, politics was always a very dirty game. Like Bismarck said, “Laws are like sausages. Better to not see them being made.” And as Ecclesiastes says, “There’s nothing new under the sun.”
1) How did the political philosophies of these men differ?
Most clear thinking Americans could probably tell you at least the rudimentary facts of who Thomas Jefferson was. Far fewer would likely have a definite idea of who Alexander Hamilton was and what his contributions as a Founding Father were. Yet his conception of an American government was just as important as that of Jefferson. Both founders foresaw the new nation as a great future power, and both had very different maps of how to get it there.
Jefferson believed the nation’s strength lay in its agricultural roots. He favored an agrarian nation with most powers reserved for the states. He was very opposed to a strong central authority and believed that the people were the final authority in government. Jefferson also encouraged active support for the French Revolution
Hamilton favored a strong central authority. He believed a strong government was necessary to provide order so that business and industry could grow. He envisioned America becoming an industrial power. To this end he sought to establish a national bank and fund the national debt in order to establish firm base for national credit. Hamilton believed that the government should be run by those who were educated and wealthy rather than by “the mob.” He opposed involvement in the French Revolution and worried Jeffersonians by appearing, and maybe even being, too cozy with Britain.
2) How was the conflict between Jefferson and Hamilton a significant factor in the emergence of political parties?
The Jefferson/Hamilton conflict helped give rise to political parties by polarizing factions on opposite political sides. Those who backed Jefferson’s Democratic-Republicans supported states rights, a strict reading of the Constitution, and support for the French Revolution. Those who back Hamilton’s Federalists preferred a much stronger central government, an “elastic” reading of the Constitution, and a hands-off approach to the French Revolution.
3) Which view do you think was best for the US – Hamilton’s or Jefferson’s – and why? [This part should be several paragraphs long]
I don’t know if either view could be considered better or worse for America. Forced to choose, I would probably lean toward Hamiltonian ideas, but I believe both served a vital and necessary role in forming the government. Hamilton was a visionary and saw the potential of a great industrial power. His support of a strong central authority was a key reason the young nation was able to sustain itself in the early days, especially in such crises like Shayes Rebellion. One reason he may have felt as strongly as he did was his service in the Revolutionary War. Being one of Washington’s staff, he experienced first hand the difficulty the Continental army had with an ineffectual congress to keep it fed and supplied. The weak congress was not able to raise funds to pay for supplies because it had no real power.
For all his vision and innovation, Hamilton’s ambition may have carried him too far if left unchecked. The federal government may have become too powerful and curbed the rights of citizens, which in fact did happen to a degree during the Adams administration. Jefferson and his policies provided an important counter balance to Hamilton. Jefferson’s support of states’ rights and agriculture helped to offset the influence of the Hamilton-supporting merchants and manufacturers. However, without Hamilton’s counter-balance Jefferson’s policies may have left the government weak and ineffectual to deal with major crises both at home and abroad.
Each viewpoint needed the other to create a government that would be strong enough to protect itself and it’s people from internal and external strife, but not so strong that it would infringe on the rights of the people as enumerated in the Bill of Rights and in the Revolutionary spirit. These issues, of course, weren’t resolved or ceased to be relevant after Hamilton and Jefferson left the scene. These are still very much the issues we deal with even now, over 200 years later. As much as we might dislike, or even hate, the position of the “other” party, without some balance both sides would undoubtedly abuse their power…more than they already do.
4) List at least 3 sources in proper bibliographic format. No Wiki sources.
Frank, Mitch. “Jefferson vs. Hamilton or Group Hug.” American Partisan. Dec. 28 2006. http://www.american-partisan.com/cols/frank/111799.htm
“Hamilton vs. Jefferson.” Dec. 28 2006. http://countrystudies.us/united-states/history-41.htm
Kennedy, David, Lizabeth Cohen, Thomas A. Bailey. The American Pageant. Boston:
Houghton Mifflin, 2002.
[digg=http://digg.com/political_opinion/Hamilton_vs_Jefferson]
Interesting post, as usual very well stated. I didn’t actually know that Hamilton was a Federalist. I would have to lean to a more Jeffersonian viewpoint myself.
This is quite interesting to me. Thanks for the history knowlege. I think I’ll start calling you Aaron Burr by the way you’re dropping Hamiltons
Hey Ando,
I added this one to my links so I’ll remember to check it. Your statement about understanding how our democracy has become was it is was interestesting to me since I watched several “value” debates in San Diego that tried to answer whether or not the U.S. over-values democracy.
BTW, when will that teacher assign a NATO question? 🙂
The democracy question was a big one at the time of the founding. For obvious reasons the more aristocratic folks were more than a little concerned about a mob-ocracy. These disagreements are what make the checks and balances so important.
I doubt I’ll have any NATO assignments anytime soon. My current classes end in a couple weeks and next session I’m taking Ancient Rome and a photography class. Probably not a lot of NATO there.
I agree on the jefferson side because the frech helped them, they should help them. Right? Hamilton was to –can’t the think of the word. but oh yes he thought this country should’ve been ran by the rich and money. And i don’t agree. this might not make complete sense to you but it does to me.
Thanks for dropping Brandi by, I appreciate your comments.
Left to his devices, I think Hamilton would have gone too far in his desire to see only the wealthy have a strong voice in the government. However, I think Jefferson was relying far too heavily on human nature to keep law and order and showed a surprisingly naive lack of vision for the future of the nation. The combination of the two ideologies was the best possible scenario, in my opinion.
As to support for the French Revolution, while it may have been idealistic and noble to lend support to those seeking to throw off the yoke of the Bourbon monarchy, practically speaking the United States was not in the strongest position to do so. Getting itself tangled in a civil war on the other side of the globe would have been costly, monetarily to be sure, but potentially in the survival of the nation itself. Britain no doubt would have taken advantage of the situation to reclaim at least a part of their lost colonies. Neutrality was in the best interest of the country.
this didnt help me.
lol im gonna use this as a source XD
This was interesting.
This was an interesting outlook. Yes I agress that it would have hurt the US to go and defend the French simply because as a country the US was in debt and after our war we needed to get ourselves established first before we go tearing off and starting something else. Its nice to think they should have helped with the French but it just wasn’t practical at the time.
Thank you for that, I have a essay to write and this helps loads!
Thanks for this! i am actually doing an essay comparing the two and this helped loads! Now im just having trouble with there oppinion on the bank of the united states
[…] how many visits I get and how many times a particular post is viewed. For a while my post on Hamilton vs. Jefferson was getting a lot of hits, and recently my Essentially What Ended the Cold War post has been a […]
this didnt help me at all
Hamilton was an elitist who admitted that he was(unlike Jefferson – an elitist who was always talking about ‘the People’) one and he had a realistic view of human nature: people with money would act in their self-interest always if allowed to do so. Hamilton’s idea with the National Bank was to harness this well-monied influence to that of developing the economic infrastructure of the new United States.Hamilton had the forsight to know that the USA w/o industry would always be at the mercy of the European colonial powers, namely Great Britain. He was one of the few in the 1790s who realized that political independence from Great Britain would be nullified without economic independence.His sense of Federalism was that of community, a harmony of interests in the Republic – the base what became the American System of economics, something that we have long lost here today.
Another interesting point should be made: the people who are gaga on Jefferson presently are focusing on the early views of Jefferson before he became President. In the White House, and later as elder Statesman, TJ came to accept and endorce the main policies of Hamilton from the National Bank to the need for protected industry& national internal improvements. Jefferson’s Presidency is ironically Hamilton triumphant.
Hamilton did admire the British financial system and also the policies of the French mercantilist, Colbert, who he had studied a great deal. But some who assert today that Hamilton is the godfather of this global corporate free-market edifice are in error, because Hamilton’s prime concern was for the utilitarian wealth of the nation, the USA, as is the basis of national political economy. Hamilton was very much for statist influence in developing the economy which is something that free-market crusaders hold as anthema. Hamilton would had been revolted by the cosmopolitan corporations in their pursuit of pushing out the Public sector from the economies in the nation/states of today.
As Michael Lind hinted in his works, Hamilton would had probably had been a New Dealer if he were around in the 1930s, for example. The Early Jefferson, at least, would had found more common ground with supply-sider Reaganomics of the 20th Century and what we have presently in circa 2007. So I always laugh a bit when people who call themselves liberals or social democrats today praise Jefferson so highly.
i thuink you guys are weird who talks about history anyway
thanks it helped alot 😉
Tony is not as cute as I am…or as smart 🙂
this helped
Thanks for this, I’m doing a report upon these two parties and this helped me a ton.
this was a good source. lots of info and im glad you took a side because i was chosen to lead a debate on why hamilton’s views were superior than jefferson’s and your ideas really were helpful.
i hate you Caesar. im going to plot against you and turn Brutus against you and along with the conspirators and overthrow your power. peace, ho!
this does not help at all
thanks for the help i really needed somethin like this
i really hated it a lot i dont like history at all well at least you wasted ur time writing it
i am a dictator and i will not stand for
this nonsence and you live obey me
and if you dont then i will tourcher you for lige
your cool
this is very interesting and tough since you can’t really be in the middle of both Jefferson and Hamilton it really brought my views to the political scene and i have learned from this;……….
I agree with anyone who agrees with Jefferson and Hamilton. By that I mean
Jefferson Hamilton Mix
I LOVE FIRST PER.;]
hey! sup? kk tnx for posting this essay thingy, it helped me allott.. in my Social Studies homework! We’re doing a Hamilton vs Jefferson poster! Thanks alllllloott….
very interesting. i’m adding in RSS Reader
very intersting but i think that hamilton is tight and that jefferson is actually a little better than hamilton so hamilton might be better in terms that jefferson is sometimes even better!
HI. That was good
i agree with aksbar Jefferson rocks
This helped alot with a US history project.
im wondering y did u guys start this website?
Thanks for this!! I am doing a report and it helped so much!!!
hamilton hamilton wooooo yaaaa
hey this article was the best but u need to add the Similarities between the two men
to all the kids that said somtin bad ur imature
totally helped
thanks this did help me to understand the difference between the two
[…] last bastions of populist democracy in American society, New Media lend a fresh perspective to this age old debate. With the advent of Website optimization, blogging, pay-per-click campaigns, viral videos, and […]
nice report, it helped me for an essay test!!!! =^_^=
I have been having so much trouble trying to write an essay about Jefferson’s ideas versus Hamilton’s. I really wasn’t sure if I fully supported one over the other. Even though I still don’t know, this site really helped me to understand their views and how the country may have turned out. I don’t know why some people don’t think this site helped, but it definitely helped me! 🙂
This was a really interesting essay, very insightful.
Hamilton was an elitist snob who believed that the common citizens of the United States not intelligent enough to be given the responsibilities of self-government. He wasn’t born in the colonies, he admired the English social structure (classism), and I’m totallly convinced that his banking set up is directly responsible for globalization by world bankers (mainly British) today. Those who say otherwise are in total denial.
Hamilton was not an elist snob and embraced the ideas of a strong central government not because he wanted the rich and powerful to rule the minons, but because he saw first hand how the Articles of Confefderacy were not working with a weak, central government ( from his days in the revoluntionary army and as a member of the Continental congress ). He was a patriot of the highest order for this country. He was a complete visionary who knew that the best way to bring peace and prosperity to ALL was to create a wealthy nation (via a strong, central government) that would allow the individual the ability to use their creativity and bring the best minds in the world to this country – he said so in his writings. In my estimation that makes him the greatest of the founding fathers because of his unassailable genius and foresight that has helped this country become the greatest the world has ever seen.
Its ok but needs more on the events that happened and the effect it has on todays government.
This article sucks it didnt help me at all make something usefull of your life dont ever write an article again u useless waste of space
i need to find the website
gyusagFDS HCUD9S DYDSPA7g xdgidugduy cdjh
Hamilton did admire the British financial system and also the policies of the French mercantilist, Colbert, who he had studied a great deal. But some who assert today that Hamilton is the godfather of this global corporate free-market edifice are in error, because Hamilton’s prime concern was for the utilitarian wealth of the nation, the USA, as is the basis of national political economy. Hamilton was very much for statist influence in developing the economy which is something that free-market crusaders hold as anthema. Hamilton would had been revolted by the cosmopolitan corporations in their pursuit of pushing out the Public sector from the economies in the nation/states of today.
As Michael Lind hinted in his works, Hamilton would had probably had been a New Dealer if he were around in the 1930s, for example. The Early Jefferson, at least, would had found more common ground with supply-sider Reaganomics of the 20th Century and what we have presently in circa 2007. So I always laugh a bit when people who call themselves liberals or social democrats today praise Jefferson so highly.
Hamilton was not an elist snob and embraced the ideas of a strong central government not because he wanted the rich and powerful to rule the minons, but because he saw first hand how the Articles of Confefderacy were not working with a weak, central government ( from his days in the revoluntionary army and as a member of the Continental congress ). He was a patriot of the highest order for this country. He was a complete visionary who knew that the best way to bring peace and prosperity to ALL was to create a wealthy nation (via a strong, central government) that would allow the individual the ability to use their creativity and bring the best minds in the world to this country – he said so in his writings. In my estimation that makes him the greatest of the founding fathers because of his unassailable genius and foresight that has helped this country become the greatest the world has ever seen.
I don’t know if either view could be considered better or worse for America. Forced to choose, I would probably lean toward Hamiltonian ideas, but I believe both served a vital and necessary role in forming the government. Hamilton was a visionary and saw the potential of a great industrial power. His support of a strong central authority was a key reason the young nation was able to sustain itself in the early days, especially in such crises like Shayes Rebellion. One reason he may have felt as strongly as he did was his service in the Revolutionary War. Being one of Washington’s staff, he experienced first hand the difficulty the Continental army had with an ineffectual congress to keep it fed and supplied. The weak congress was not able to raise funds to pay for supplies because it had no real power.
For all his vision and innovation, Hamilton’s ambition may have carried him too far if left unchecked. The federal government may have become too powerful and curbed the rights of citizens, which in fact did happen to a degree during the Adams administration. Jefferson and his policies provided an important counter balance to Hamilton. Jefferson’s support of states’ rights and agriculture helped to offset the influence of the Hamilton-supporting merchants and manufacturers. However, without Hamilton’s counter-balance Jefferson’s policies may have left the government weak and ineffectual to deal with major crises both at home and abroad.
Each viewpoint needed the other to create a government that would be strong enough to protect itself and it’s people from internal and external strife, but not so strong that it would infringe on the rights of the people as enumerated in the Bill of Rights and in the Revolutionary spirit. These issues, of course, weren’t resolved or ceased to be relevant after Hamilton and Jefferson left the scene. These are still very much the issues we deal with even now, over 200 years later. As much as we might dislike, or even hate, the position of the “other” party, without some balance both sides would undoubtedly abuse their power…more than they already do.
Neither Jefferson or Hamilton’s intellectual efforts would have benefited any of us had not Frodo Baggins destroyed the ring.
On a side note:
Wouldn’t it be interesting to compare western European history against J.R.R. Tolkien’s masterpieces? I bet you can dig out striking parallels.
njihbfuponhkmg bygtvkiadrs
this site is poopy
thnx xD
hey ando…
did you make this site? if so, when?
Hamilton contended that because of the mass of necessary detail, a vast body of powers had to be implied by general clauses, and one of these authorized Congress to “make all laws which shall be necessary and proper” for carrying out other powers specifically granted. The Constitution authorized the national government to levy and collect taxes, pay debts and borrow money. A national bank would materially help in performing these functions efficiently. Congress, therefore, was entitled, under its implied powers, to create such a bank. Washington and the Congress accepted Hamilton’s view — and an important precedent for an expansive interpretation of the federal government’s authority.
going to use for my research paper!
Hamilton believed that the government should be run by those who were educated and wealthy rather than by “the mob.”
So if we are not healthy and educated we belong to the mob? Wrong! What about honesty?
Not healthy but wealthy.
Hamilton idea of establishing a Central Bank was just a private bank selected from where United States could borrow money. By just selecting a specific bank to borrow from without regards to other banks is just not fair and violate the Free Market. Today the Feds are just composed of european private banks belonging to a powerful family of bankers who are collecting from us interest on the huge debt of our country. Hamilton was an elitist since the beginning who consedered the common people as “the mob”. The government could have borrow money from different banks within United States based on the lowest bid.
Jefferson must be turning over in his grave during these economic times
Thank you for posting this, it’s very insightful and has helped me with history paper I’m writing. Overall I completely agree with you that Hamilton’s views were better for America at that time and that a balance between Jefferson’s ideas and Hamilton’s was needed as well. Hamilton believed that the common people were too governed by “passions” and were so “turbulent and changing” (Hamilton said this) that they weren’t able to govern themselves. However Jefferson argued that “every government degenerates when trusted to the rulers…alone” (Jefferson said this). Much of what Jefferson said though was more the ideal rather than the reality of a government run by the common people.
Thanks again for posting this. And to those who said this didn’t help, why did you bother typing out the words when you could have been looking for something that DID help?
I’ve just finished Chernow’s biography on Hamilton and Ellis’s on Jefferson. I cam away from these two books loathing Jefferson and everything he stood for. I can’t imagine a more petty, vindictive, slightly crazy and devious politican, nor a bigger coward. Jefferson spent his entire career hiding behind pamplateer henchmen for hire to attack Washington and Hamilton because he was too much a social misfit to win an argument face to face. Madison was not much different. I can value their counterpoint in their politics, but measured as men of action and accomplishment in the early republic Hamilton was a Lion to Jefferson’s hamster.
Jefferson committed near treasonous acts several times as Sec. of State to Washington and V.P. to Adams. If he disagreed with a policy – like lack of support for the murderous, unprincipled French revolution he would conspire with the French to undermine his own country. When he didn’t like Adam’s Sedition Act he plotted behind the scenes with Kentucky and Virginia to pass motions in the state legislature to ignore federal (congressional) authority to pass laws. How insightful was that? He would have destroyed our democracy in it’s second decade.
He also opposed the Constitution and warned Madison against involvement in getting it passed. Hamilton gave an inconceivalbe effort to write the Federalist papers (60% of them himself) and to get the Constitution ratified in New York. Jefferson, as Governor of Virginia, never declard war on the British during the revolution due to fears he’d lose his own land, and he never fought a moment against the British. Then he made up lies about Hamilton being a coward which was a pathetic. Hamilton served nobly, ably and worked tirelessly to get combat action. His brilliance in administration was required at Washington’s side where he helped make Washington the towering figure he was.
Jefferson was a dandy. Born into money, marrying into more money and dying in debt due to his in ablility to manage money. Had he run the country’s economy the U.S. would never have survived. Hamilton came from squalor. Made himself successful and terrifically brilliant. Then he applied his great gifts to making his fledgling nation wealthy and independent financially. He opposed ties with the French due to their barbarities of revolution. He worked tirelessly in public service almost all his life, retiring only to get his own financial affairs in order. He suffered countless lies and defamations at the hands of Jefferson’s cronies, but he won almost every political fight he had with them because nobody could hold a candle to him in debate. Certainly not the corner skulking Jefferson.
Jefferson could never bring himself to free his slaves or speak openly against slavery (Virginian). Hamilton was a fierce opponent in contrast. I could go on, but I’ll finsih with this sentiment.
Throw away your nickels good people.
Rafael,
To call Hamilton an elitist is fairly crazy. Hamilton was orphaned by the age of eleven. He grew up on an island in the West Indies similar to the Pirate Island of Tortuga in the movie. He rose from that to do incomprehensibly complex and brilliant things to start this nation. Without him, America would not have survived. Certainly, if this nation had followed Jefferson’s economic ideas we would have become a colony of France or England again before 1810. Jefferson was an Economic ignoramous compared to anyone. Compared to Hamilton he was not even worth consideration. You complain about wealthy, educated people running the government. Where in the world is that not the case? Venezuela? Cuba? You take away a strong, virtuous government and you end up with anarchy that leads to revolution and then to a new form of dictatorship that allows no decent. That’s how it has always worked. Every time.
Steve – I’d recommend that the fact that people have abused the system we have is not a reflection on Jefferson’s wisdom, but simple proof that people can be corrupted no matter where they start from.
Sinit Habteselassie – It’s been a year since your post, but I agree whole-heartedly with you that Hamilton is the greatest of the founding fathers, not to mention he helped make Washington who he was. I would bet that Hamilton would have responded to the Carter years just as Reagan did. Why? Because he was that smart.
Also Everyone, don’t forget that the French ruler who helped America defeat the British was Louis XVI and the French Jacobins took him and his family out and cut off their heads. Those are the people that Jefferson wanted to partner with and Washington (and Hamilton) said no thanks to that MOB. So please remember the term MOB has a significant meaning to Hamilton. He was frequently threatened by French/Jefferson crowds and felt threatened in his own country by the lunatic movement that started in France – and Jefferson helped foster that atmosphere in America. Read Ron Chernow’s Hamilton Biography. Fantistic!
As a Newbie, I am always searching online for articles that can help me get further ahead. Thanks a million!
well i am here to ask what are the diffrrences between hamilition and jefferson i need basic fats on both of them… thankyou
Hey there, This website is very informative! Keep up the amazing work. I just bookmarked it
This um whatever it is was very interesting. I didn’t fall asleep to it like I did all the other websites I’ve been forced to read through. Thanks U.S history for that.
uhh…. right. Hamilton was an idiot, but he had the right idea about not going and helping France. We were ided by the monarchy being overthrown! If we were to truly repay our debts, we would give them back all the money we took (which was a huge cause of the rising grain costs that fueled the French Revolution) and we would fight to help that monarchy. Unfortunately, Hamilton still decided to raise taxes enough to cover this foreign debt which no longer existed, because his efforts to help the rich and elite control our government could not also allow him to be an honest man. Jefferson bent his ideals, sure, but only to do what was prudent and opportune (the Louisiana Purchase, for example) for the USA; Hamilton never abandoned his core beliefs and would have built a monarchy, bankrupted us, and starved everyone doing it.
This isn’t an issue for anyone who knows history and has common sense / any knowledge of economics.
^ we were aided*
thanks 4 the info 🙂
thanks 4 the info even though it was boring 🙂
i only had one simple question and i was shocked that this looooooonng paragraph didnt have my question it didn’t help me at all thank you very much for your help! 😦 BOO
this was so boring i almost died u guys really need to make this less boring i had a five word question and guess wut people?!?!? THEY DIDN’T HAVE IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! OMG I HATE THIS AND I WANTED TO EXPRESS MY FEELINGS AT THIS THING SO YA that’s it people i recomend u dont get your info on this thing UGH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! LOL! :l
What is your name sir, I need to cite this for socail science project, also the date it was published.
Thanks,
Carter
lol spelled social science wrong
nvm found it at the top
can u please describe the conflicts and consequences between jefferson and hamilton please and thank u oh and all u nerds out there get a life hahah xD
RODERICK RICHARD IS GAY
I myself would have to lean toward Jefferson. I agree with Hamilton about the central power thing. I think giving the states too much power would make them branch out and not be part of the USA. Other than that, Jefferson rocks. I think the federalists sound like snotty rich kids who don’t fully understand the amazing potential of the average person.
For all those people out there saying we are nerds, maybe we aren’t what you think. For example I’m just looking around for a project I’m doing in history. And also, don’t call us nerds if you are looking on this site too.
In my class, we are allowed to choose between federalist and republican… only 6 people did federalist. Hamilton admired Britain too much, and would have just turned American into Britain. Jefferson took time to think through major decisions, while Hamilton knew them in a snap. Like Hamilton would raise our taxes in a snap. Hamilton may have been an orphan at a young age, but he was intellegent. He could make it through. Jefferson thought that a national bank was biast, because they would loan money to people building factories, but not to farmers who wanted to buy land. Hamilton would have just turned us all into robots, doing the same dumb routine every day.
Hi would you mind sharing which blog platform you’re using? I’m planning to start my own blog in the near future but I’m having a tough time selecting between BlogEngine/Wordpress/B2evolution and Drupal. The reason I ask is because your design seems different then most blogs and I’m looking for something completely unique. P.S Sorry for getting off-topic but I had to ask!
this is not cool
absolutely no help
thanks !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I had intended to post Part II of the WWI question last night, but got caught up doing movie reviews on Life of Ando. So to slake your ravenous historical thirst in the meantime, here is my assignment from my history class this past week. If you’re really into American history and how the politics of the early Republic shook out, Jefferson vs. Hamilton is a great study. It’s also a little, I guess comforting, to know that as bad as we think today’s politicians are, politics was always a very dirty game. Like Bismarck said, “Laws are like sausages. Better to not see them being made.” And as Ecclesiastes says, “There’s nothing new under the sun.”
1) How did the political philosophies of these men differ?
Most clear thinking Americans could probably tell you at least the rudimentary facts of who Thomas Jefferson was. Far fewer would likely have a definite idea of who Alexander Hamilton was and what his contributions as a Founding Father were. Yet his conception of an American government was just as important as that of Jefferson. Both founders foresaw the new nation as a great future power, and both had very different maps of how to get it there.
Jefferson believed the nation’s strength lay in its agricultural roots. He favored an agrarian nation with most powers reserved for the states. He was very opposed to a strong central authority and believed that the people were the final authority in government. Jefferson also encouraged active support for the French Revolution
Hamilton favored a strong central authority. He believed a strong government was necessary to provide order so that business and industry could grow. He envisioned America becoming an industrial power. To this end he sought to establish a national bank and fund the national debt in order to establish firm base for national credit. Hamilton believed that the government should be run by those who were educated and wealthy rather than by “the mob.” He opposed involvement in the French Revolution and worried Jeffersonians by appearing, and maybe even being, too cozy with Britain.
2) How was the conflict between Jefferson and Hamilton a significant factor in the emergence of political parties?
The Jefferson/Hamilton conflict helped give rise to political parties by polarizing factions on opposite political sides. Those who backed Jefferson’s Democratic-Republicans supported states rights, a strict reading of the Constitution, and support for the French Revolution. Those who back Hamilton’s Federalists preferred a much stronger central government, an “elastic” reading of the Constitution, and a hands-off approach to the French Revolution.
3) Which view do you think was best for the US – Hamilton’s or Jefferson’s – and why? [This part should be several paragraphs long]
I don’t know if either view could be considered better or worse for America. Forced to choose, I would probably lean toward Hamiltonian ideas, but I believe both served a vital and necessary role in forming the government. Hamilton was a visionary and saw the potential of a great industrial power. His support of a strong central authority was a key reason the young nation was able to sustain itself in the early days, especially in such crises like Shayes Rebellion. One reason he may have felt as strongly as he did was his service in the Revolutionary War. Being one of Washington’s staff, he experienced first hand the difficulty the Continental army had with an ineffectual congress to keep it fed and supplied. The weak congress was not able to raise funds to pay for supplies because it had no real power.
For all his vision and innovation, Hamilton’s ambition may have carried him too far if left unchecked. The federal government may have become too powerful and curbed the rights of citizens, which in fact did happen to a degree during the Adams administration. Jefferson and his policies provided an important counter balance to Hamilton. Jefferson’s support of states’ rights and agriculture helped to offset the influence of the Hamilton-supporting merchants and manufacturers. However, without Hamilton’s counter-balance Jefferson’s policies may have left the government weak and ineffectual to deal with major crises both at home and abroad.
Each viewpoint needed the other to create a government that would be strong enough to protect itself and it’s people from internal and external strife, but not so strong that it would infringe on the rights of the people as enumerated in the Bill of Rights and in the Revolutionary spirit. These issues, of course, weren’t resolved or ceased to be relevant after Hamilton and Jefferson left the scene. These are still very much the issues we deal with even now, over 200 years later. As much as we might dislike, or even hate, the position of the “other” party, without some balance both sides would undoubtedly abuse their power…more than they already do.
PS: Seriously Ando, You are verrry boring and so is your durable crappy and boring lecture. Go get a life, I have other things to do you know, instead of me sitting around reading this nuissence(i think I spelled it wrong) lecture. All you basically had to say was: Hamilton as Federalists and Jefferson as a Antifederalist. Now was that hard? Am I right or am I right?
What ever Ando. You………………………..suckkkkkkkkkkkk!!!!!!!!!
And so do both of those coots(Jefferson and Hamilton). I mean, what’s the point of creating a government and still not be peaceful about it. Especially that Jefferson is a racist freaken Bi***. He owned thousands of slaves. Abraham should have kicked his butt out of the election procession. Abraham rocks NOT JEFFERSON!!!!
PS: I am BLITsZ 🙂
I love you Julia! Kiss and kiss and sex!
memorial tattoo designs,
[…] https://answersinhistory.wordpress.com/2006/12/29/hamilton-vs-jefferson/ […]
[…] […]
cheeseburger!
This is awesome, for anyone who actually wants to take the time to learn a little behind each correct answer (google could have easily told you who was a Federalist and who was a Democrat-Republican, people.) This is a great sum-up for those who actually have essays to write, and not so much time to troll… although I must say I’m enjoying it so far 🙂 Thank you for this!
uhmm omg i liike it but i think that jefferson part got over quicker and that halmatin part was so slow but i think it was helpful enough see you can tell i do not now what im talking about
Thank you
what did this bring avout?
this was kinda helpful
Thank’s you helped me BIG TIME
I love when you discuss this kind of stuff within your posts. Perhaps might you continue this?
Alot of Hamiltonian policies are now failing today, his predictions compared to Jefferson fall short. Jefferson new what would happen with too much of a central authority and now look we have the NDAA
ppppppppppppppppppppp
pppppppppppppppppp
sss
this was really helpful .. i got quite a few interesting facts for my U.S. History Homework! :)) thanks.
This is really going to help me with my exam tommarow. Great article you summed up there viewa quite nicley.
Thanks as thisss helpss mee a lot withh my assignment 🙂
I am reading the Federalist Papers and wanted to wrap my mind around a good comparison of these two distinct forces in the forming of our nation. It is amazing that all of this is still with us.
this helped very Much , I acshully read it && it was quiet intresting && you should post more about this fact , Thanks alot (:
-Aguero ..
this stuff is retarted
Jefferson’s way would have provided us more freedom, no corporate control, and a country of artisans, craftsmen, and their apprentices. That’s true freedom, working for yourself rather than “the corporation.” It’s most unfortunate that Hamilton’s way won out.
This was very good, except i didnt read it, because it was boring…. go figure
I’m glad you boys are all doing your homework!
Thanks MOM!!!!
This ain’t how it went down yo heil hitler
wow….. this is actually so wrong….. i was dere yo
This is a credible source! But if u choose it u suk! lol
I pity all you fools
MotherF***er i hate this Sh*t
I can tell Henry Taylor is up to no good 😉
I am so grumpy all the time
Brimming examples on why people aren’t so smart.
this shit did not help at ALL
What i don’t understood is if truth be told how you are no longer actually a lot more well-liked than you might be right now. You are very intelligent. You know therefore considerably in the case of this topic, made me in my view consider it from so many numerous angles. Its like men and women aren’t interested unless it is something to do with Girl gaga!
Your personal stuffs excellent. At all times take care of
it up!
Where did u obtain the techniques to write ““Hamilton Vs.
Jefferson .”? Regards -Hazel
This is no help
For those of you who want to call Jefferson a racist, be warned, if anything he was a hypocrite. Near the end of his political career, Jefferson was ripped apart by one of America’s first sex scandals folks! Apparently word leaked that he had ‘carnal knowledge’ of one of his slaves and actually went so far as to father 5 children with her. Jefferson never publicly denied this, and in fact remained suspiciously silent about the whole matter. In 1998, DNA testing verified that Jefferson’s family was connected with his slave girl’s family. Sorry folks I can’t recall her name right now, but I felt our founding father deserved more than to be called a racist. And as far as calling him a hypocrite, let’s be serious people, it’s politics, who isn’t one really?
These minerals are actually crucial to the wellbeing of your human body.
. The specific technique in RO will work will be as follows: Reverse osmosis pushes the liquid through the semi-permeable membrane.
so many comments. i like oranges… 🙂
Does anyone else like oranges? 😐
DFIGJHDFK;GJO;F…. GARY STOP CRAWLING ALL OVER THE KEYBOARD, YOU’RE GETTING YOUR SLIME ON IT!!! Oh hey guys! I just came back from jellyfishing with Patrick, and I got stung twice! I went to Sandy’s house, and look at this, she has this contraption called a “COM-POOH-TUHR”. Interesting, eh? *wiggles eyebrows* Eh? Eh? Eh? Eh? Eh? Eh? Eh? Eh? Anyways, she said it doesn’t work in water, it’ll “EE-LICK-TRUH-CYOOT” me… So, here I am. I never know you land creatures could do such amazing things on the “COM-POOH-TUHR”. I actually went on this “WEHB-SIYT” called “YOOH-TOOB” and there were many videos of ME on there! It’s like TV, but with me on it! And wow you land creatures sure are funny! I was watching some funny “KATT” videos, and boy are they funny! I laughed for 3 days straight, and then Squidward came over to play the yelling game with me! It’s so fun. He said it’s where he yells at me and smashes stuff in my house, while I sit and watch! Yipee! Well, I need to change the water in this bowl on my head. Bye now, land creatures!
D-do YOU like oranges? 😦
Not now ORANGE MAN!
Do the Bubba Gump, man. Bubba Gump it up in here!
I WILL NOT TAKE THE GARBAGE OUT!
i have no time to read all of this!
i am star
hello… i am a puppy looking for other facts about cake. rut rough i now turned into scooby doo
Did I say I like cake?
di di say that i shine brught like a diamond shine brught like diamond ohhhhh yeahhhh yeahhhh eaaayeaahhhh shibne brught and beautiful seas i just want to be happy never mind you and i are like diamonds in the sky my first ione was like a melody i saw it ayeeeee i saw the light it was a starrrrrr
It’s hard to find well-informed people about this subject, however, you sound like you know what you’re talking
about! Thanks
It’s hard to find educated people about this subject, however, you seem like you know what you’re talking about!
Thanks
Thank you for the good writeup. It in fact was once a entertainment account it.
Look advanced to more added agreeable from you!
However, how can we be in contact?
Hi there, I enjoy reading through your article post.
I like to write a little comment to support you.
Hamilton and Madison both authored the Virgina Plan, while the counter balance to their proposal was the New Jersey Plan. Thomas Jefferson was very “conveniently” sent to France to mend relations with France right after the Revolutionary War. If Jefferson was present at the Phillie Convention, Hamilton would have had very little luck with his proposal. He wanted us to resemble a monarchy like England with the abolition of state borders. There would not have been a separation of powers or the ability for each branch to check the other.
As far as the French Revolution, Hamilton was more concerned of disrupting his profits or his attempt to create a foreign banking system with England. Jefferson was one of those guys who always loved a rebellion no matter who it was. Abigail Adams was really upset with Jefferson when he got word of Shays Rebellion, and was delighted. The French did turn their revolution into a complete bloodbath though, but regardless it’s how THEY chose to gain freedom.
“Every twenty years there should be a rebellion” lol
Funny if you think about twenty years is the length of a generation. Every 80 years we enter or end a total war.
1785
1865
1945
2025?
I am writing a paper I need to know what a “follower” of hamilton would say to this: Alexander hamiltons belief that only the wealthy and well educated should rule, although he was very poor growing up and he had a informal education. What would be the counter argument????????????
c.laboure returns
[…] #, #, […]
I found this very helpful, you did a great job.
Very well noted, loved everything about it. It was very helpful, great if you need a resource, everything was clearly stated. Loved it!
Personally I loved it. Other people may have different thoughts, and if you are a hater and reading this, don’t comment on this essay if you didn’t like it. keep all the bad thoughts to yourself and don’t share them because the comments could be very hurtful and who ever wrote this put a lot of time in to this beautiful essay. So think before you say. Thanks.
Mmmmmm
your websit was much interesting to us! I’ll thank you u very much to sharing this interesting stuff!
not much help i really just want to know who won!!??
Pendejos!!!
Kristoff is GAYYY!!!
what was one thing they both agreed on?
this site is gay af
Howdy! This is my first comment here so I just wanted to give a quick shout
out and tell you I genuinely enjoy reading through your blog
posts. Can you recommend any other blogs/websites/forums that deal
with the same subjects? Thanks a ton!
It’s really a great and helpful piece of info. I am glad that you simply shared this useful info with us. Please keep us informed like this. Thanks for sharing.|
[…] the U.S. Constitution was a compromise between the political ideas of Alexander Hamilton (New York) and Thomas Jefferson […]
[…] the U.S. Constitution was a compromise between the political ideas of Alexander Hamilton (New York) and Thomas Jefferson […]