The Effect Of Hamiltonian And Jeffersonian Political Philosophy On The Development Of American Political Attitudes Between 1790 And 1860 - Essay Example

Download file to see previous pages In the history of America’s development, there are two key political figured referred to as the core of the nation’s political division: Alexander Hamilton and Thomas Jefferson. The philosophies and political ideas of these two philosophers inspired several political actions in essential events during our great nation’s birth in the 1820s. On the side of Hamilton, the government was supposed to address people matters meaning that there should be the establishment of federal law controlling the states and focusing on financial gain. On the other hand, Jefferson believed that the government had no responsibility to deal with state affairs and the people’s rights. Since these two sides were contradicting, some people believed that establishing the two parties was not a good idea, while others believed that these parties would result to a bizarrely moderate nation. On the right side of Hamilton, the government was supposed to address people matters meaning that there should be the establishment of federal law controlling the states and focusing on financial gain. During the Marbury V. Madison’s case, federalist Marbury William did not get the position as a Supreme Court member as he expected from the current president during that time, Thomas Jefferson withheld the official documents. Therefore, it happened that Marshall insisted for his new governmental position not for political or moral standing, but the reason of wealth and status he was to gain, making his requirements not to politically harm President Jefferson, but due to status and financial gain it would cost him (DBQ #9. Doc .8). The political leaders had feared that, the citizens were educated and wild enabling them to run themselves. For instance, there was the Shay’s Rebellion whereby threads of U.S. laws were about to be undone through mass rioting, which were uncontrollable, in which Massachusetts’ federalist gave a talk on the recent episodes, arguing that there existed an “excess of democracy” amongst the American people, strengthening Federalist support until the 1812 War (DBQ #5, Doc. #9). However, the Federalists often came up with opportunistic plans. An example was Federalist John Randolph who realized how simple it would be to seize land from British colony while it was busy concentrating with its war in France (DBQ #7, Doc. #3). These federalist parties’ policies for financial gain and Federal control were essential for ensuring a realistic government, although often brought conflict from those whose beliefs were from the Jeffersonian left side. On the other hand, Jefferson had a belief that the government had no responsibility to deal with state’s affairs and the people’s rights. Such people acted against the government’s actions that would affect peoples' affairs and rights like the 1798 Sedition Act. The government, according to this Act was to limit what the press would say and represent (DBQ #6, doc. #5). Politicians such as Democratic-Republican George Hay protested about the Act arguing that it was unconstitutional and had limitations on Americans’ liberties (DBQ #6, DOC. #8). They also portrayed a negative attitude towards the 1812 War, whereby people such as Democratic-Republic Huge Nelson stated that the war was not only about British threatening on the financial operations, but about also contravening the American’s rights, which British had captured and armed (DBQ #7, DOC. #7). Their liberty belief was extended by those who had the education and wealth. Whereby, in the year 1821 Democrats such as Nathan Stanford worked tirelessly to ensure that all whites had voting rights including adult men, non-Irish, and all those who were qualified to vote claiming that voting rights should be for all qualified citizens but not the educated and the rich (DBQ #8, DOC. #1). People from these two parties ...Download file to see next pagesRead More