Jeffersonian vs Hamiltonian Visions - Essay Example

The Two Visions of American Life: The Jeffersonian vs. Hamiltonian Visions of America The American historyworks to guide the country’s present and future political, economic, and social approaches to life. The founding tenets of the American politics, for instance, are an outcome of varied historical ideologies that sometimes complement each other and at other times are in conflict with each other. The ideologies which have been dominant in the history of America includes: Hamiltonians, Jeffersonians, Jacksonians, and Transcendentalists. This is contrary to world view that divides ideologies into realism, idealism, or internationalism. Followers of these ideologies shape the American politics and inform public debate on various issues. Most especially the Hamiltonians and Jeffersonians have been of much influence in the last half of Twentieth century when it comes to the role of government and welfare policies. Though both Thomas Jefferson and Alexander Hamilton believed in the nation as a great future power, they differed on the ways to get it there. Jefferson thought the best way was to create an “empire of liberty” based on weak federal government, state rights, and agrarian economy. He detested the banking system and also feared that an alliance of social elite with powerful government and strong central bank would turn America into an aristocratic or monarchical society. Hamilton on the other hand, envisaged America as an industrial power enhanced by strong centralized federal government, national bank, commerce and funding national debt and a government that was run by the educated and wealthy (Mead n.p). This research seeks to explore the last half of the 20th century with an aim to establish the ideologies that defined the American politics in the era and also to establish which ideology between Jefferson and Hamilton best describes the 20th century politics. The research will show that the Hamiltonian ideology dominated the era as evidenced by its influence on majority of events in the era. However, it will also show that Jeffersonian ideologies had a significant role to play especially the maintenance of human values and observance of human rights at the close of the industrial era. The difference between Jefferson and Hamilton ideologies can best be explained by the way both of them viewed nature during the early days of American republic. Just as the two agreed on the instrumental value of nature, so did they agree on a new republic that had a bright future and just as they disagreed on how nature serves human purpose, so did they disagree on the role of government in achieving their ends (Martinez 522-552). In a nutshell, Jefferson and Hamilton agreed on the ends to be achieved by the new republic but differed on the means to get there. In regards to nature, the environmentalists value it for its aesthetic beauty; its intrinsic value without regard to its use while the Ancient Greeks and enlightenment thinkers alike believed nature was only useful if it served human purposes hence has instrumental value (522). This is in line with Thomas Hobbes thinking that in the state of nature, life is “solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short” and also the biblical teachings (creation story) that view man as the dominant creature in the universe whole role is to subdue nature. Man therefore, has to exploit nature in order to survive and preserve the human race. Just like the enlightenment thinkers, Jefferson and Hamilton also agreed that nature had to be subdued to satisfy human needs. However, they disagreed on the degree to which natural resources could be used to serve human purposes. Whilst Hamilton believed that land and earth were the bases of well ordered human life and as such, men were supposed to expand yield through manufacturing and commerce, Jefferson was of the view that farming alone was enough to maintain the society and that connection to land was an important virtue (Martinez 525). Hamilton thus favored mercantilism while Jefferson favored agrarian pursuits. Jefferson also was not more concerned of the land but the Yeomen farmers whom he viewed as the chosen race. These Yeomen lived in small decentralized villages where they practiced self-government. This attraction to the Yeomen is what shaped his political ideology as he preferred a decentralized government based on agrarian economy led by men whose interests were tied to the community or what Martinez called “democracy or liberalism” (522). Hamilton, on his part did not believe that farming alone could satisfy the ever increasing population. Moreover, advancements in technology had paved way for better farming methods that could produce better yields to sustain the race. If yields could be improved, so why rely on farming alone? Instead, the surplus produce could create more value by being manufactured and sold in the market. For example, cotton cannot be consumed but it can be transformed into other uses. Virtue to him was of no consequence as his vision was driven by self-interest (526). This view of nature shaped his political ideology as he believed in strong centralized federal government managed by educated elites and the wealthy to ensure commerce runs smoothly. He thus favored aristocracy (conservatism) over democracy. These two schools of thought were dominant during early American history. Jefferson and Hamilton were among the founding fathers of the nation and worked under President George Washington’s government as Secretary of State and Secretary of Treasury respectively. They were often in conflict with each other due to their divergent views on different issues prompting the formation of the first American parties based on the different ideologies. As treasury secretary, Hamilton came up with an ambitious economic program believing that it would drive the nation’s prosperity. The plan included a strong central government, repayment of debts incurred during the war, and formation of the First national bank of America (Mead n.p). He was a supporter of big government whose role was to formulate laws that would enhance commerce and not interfere with it. He preferred a laissez-faire atmosphere in conduct of business where private entities have the freedom to operate. According to Martinez “government was the means while economic progress was the end” (539). The government also had a role to impose taxes and also to ensure that farmers did not renege on their debts or act as barriers to free trade. It is not that Hamilton did not appreciate the great role played by agriculture in the economy but he understood that it could produce more yield through manufactures and enabled by human ingenuity. He favored scientific means of operating such as division of labor, use of machinery, diversity of talents and expanded markets. Thomas Jefferson was very critical of Hamiltonian methods especially central government and national bank. He claimed that the economic programs as they favored the rich and speculators rather than the agriculturalists most especially the Yeomen farmers. As for economic expansion, he argued for self-sufficiency and in case the population grew, then men would cultivate more land as resources were abundant. This is the same reason he argued for property ownership and the role of the government was to protect these rights and also liberty as enshrined in the constitution (Martinez 532). Just like the Marxists who came later, he believed migration to cities would alienate people from their land and means of production hence virtue would be lost. No wonder he envisaged an “empire of liberty” and this was fulfilled through the Monroe Doctrine of expansion to the west and the Manifest Destiny by O’Sullivan. Civic education was also crucial for defending one’s rights. His criticism for Hamilton led him to unite with James Madison to form the Democratic - Republican Party which with which he won presidential elections in 1800. However, on assumption to office, he did not renounce Hamilton’s plans but extended them. An example is the Barbary war with pirates. In his first inaugural address, he did agree with Hamilton that the role of the president was to enhance peace and commerce by cooperating with other nations. However, he differed with him when it came to forming alliances with foreign nations. Whilst Hamilton favored alliances, Jefferson was against them. He envisaged a nation full of liberty, peace and prosperity. This would be achieved through democracy, support for state government rights, union preservation, and freedom of press and religion. Besides reduction of debts and expiry of national bank charter, Jeffersonians also cut military spending and emphasized on social equality. Though Jefferson and Hamilton are long gone, their legacies still live on with the Americans and continue to influence government policies and public debates especially in the twentieth-century. The Hamiltonians reigned from 1896-1932 and this was a period full of events especially the First World War in 1914. Twentieth century was dominated by Jeffersonians and Hamiltonian ideologies especially on the domestic and foreign policy but the Hamiltonian views were more dominant in the period. Both schools believed that foreign policy was an extension of domestic policy (Mead 90). The foreign and domestic policy for Jeffersonians was to be guided by strong democracies at home and not forming alliances with other nations while Hamiltonians favored multilateral cooperation based on national interest. However, the national interest in this case, is defined in terms of growth of trade and commerce (94). As such, Hamiltonian ideology was very influential during this period and even today. Unlike Europe which understood interest in military terms, Hamiltonians understood interest in diplomatic terms as engaging in war would be a reversal of any gains made. Moreover, as long as Britain the only superpower at the time remained in that state, America had little to worry about insecurity hence military was of little concern. Britain dominance was not to last as Germany began building its army to match that of Britain and acquire some territories. This was a threat to U.S as well but even as the WWI began in 1914, America decided to take an isolationist position thus following the Jeffersonian approach. Since foreign policy was based on commerce, diplomats spent more time negotiating on trade to form compromises of mutual benefit with foreign powers rather than spending time on forming military alliances (Mead n.p). The sole reason it remained neutral in WW1 is because it was beneficial for trade especially with Britain. However, it was the same reason that drove America to join the war against Germany in the first place as its ships were being sank thus affecting trade. According to Mead America’s first interest was “freedom of the seas” (96). This implied that citizens and goods as well as American ships were free to travel anywhere for the sake of trade hence there was supposed to be neutral shipping during war. This is the same reason that drove Jefferson into war with Barbary States over piracy in 1800s. The policy also led America to enter the Second World War against Japan in 1941 after it bombed the Pearl Harbor. America ended up dropping two atomic bombs in Japan to end Japan’s dominance in the pacific. Other wars fought to protect neutral shipping include Persian Gulf war between Iraq and Iran during Ronald Reagan’s reign and Taiwan by President Clinton in 1996 (Mead 96). Besides open sea, America also had open skies policy to protect trade through airlines. Another American interest was the open door policy that ensured equal treatment of its goods as other colonial powers. This according to Mead, led to the signing of a treaty between U.S and France involving trade and military to enhance commerce by treating each other as Most Favored Nation (Mead 97). Jeffersonians could not have supported such a treaty as they were against any form of foreign alliances. They were also against division of China into spheres of influence as this would have threatened their commercial ambitions in the pacific and especially China. America while imposing an open door policy for its goods was on the other hand, using closed door policy to prevent imports. This is evidenced by the high level of tariffs during the time. Later it opened its doors for imports but on reciprocal basis and as progressive as Hamiltonians were, their policies changed with the situation in the global market. Another area of importance to Hamiltonians was capital flows. To enhance commerce, a stable currency had to be adopted thus integrating the money markets (Mead 100). Even today, the dollar is used as a medium of exchange in world markets alongside the pound. Another feature common to what Hamilton had instituted during the early times was a strong central bank to regulate currency by keeping a check on interest rates and inflation rates. The Federal Reserve Bank which changed its name from House of Morgan is the central bank in America that regulates money supply. The burden of maintaining international financial order is squarely on the U.S (Mead n.p).The Jeffersonians were very much against such a strong national bank as it favored the rich and the speculators at the expense of farmers. The Hamiltonian’s policy in the twentieth-century is more dominated by the U.S as it emerged the only superpower after the Cold War as opposed to Britain. America views itself as the global police and this has placed a lot of burden on its shoulders. True to Hamilton’s tradition, America had a large army and navy with war budget escalating especially during WWII and the Cold War with the Soviet Union (Mead n.p). This is what led Lyndon Johnson to neglect his “Great Society” program in the 1960s and cost him his seat in 1968 elections. Though Hamiltonian ideas were prevalent in formulating foreign policy in the 20th century, the Jeffersonian ideas were also important to some extent especially in formulating domestic policies and programs. An example is the progressives who combined egalitarian and individual rights-based ideas of Jefferson with national greatness tradition of Hamilton (Williams & Halpin 3). Mead compares the 2012 and 1912 elections to show how similar the situation is today. According to Mead “three things still divide us today: the role of federal government, the nature of credit system, and the future of social hierarchy” (n.p). This is apparent in this progressive era since the welfare reforms instituted received much criticism from the Republicans. One great influence of Jefferson was the ideals set out in the Declaration of Independence of life, liberty and pursuit of happiness bearing in mind that all men are equal. Jefferson favored limited government tied to civic republican vision of free and self-sufficient citizens. These ideals have guided and continue to guide the American life. Hamilton believed in strong national government that provided infrastructure for growth and this influenced Keynesian economists who supported government intervention in the economy through use of fiscal policy (Vorlander 485). Just like Jefferson they realized dangers posed by moneyed interests and therefore sought to right this wrong by providing welfare facilities. Franklin Roosevelt who came to power after the Great Depression in 1933 said that “corporation was the greatest threat to individual liberty” (Williams & Halpin 11). Vorlander acknowledges that the progressive era was “a return to republican-influenced philosophy of community and new social philosophy of civic betterment” (480). This is result of influence of Jefferson’s idea on civic community. However, progressives also acknowledged that agriculture could no longer work and that manufacturing was essential. President Woodrow Wilson (1912 & 1918) a Democrat engaged in deregulation of state monopolies and democratizing political system hence a Jeffersonian follower. During the period, there was increased federal regulation of economy and intervention in social matters. The Great Depression in 1930 broke the dominance of the Hamiltonians as President Franklin Roosevelt engaged in the New Deal program to revive the economy. This involved offering agricultural subsidies, suspending some anti-trust laws, energizing unions to bargain collectively for higher wages and better working conditions as well as federally funded public works (Vorlander 485-487). The second New Deal involved offering social security, pensions, unemployment insurance and care for dependent children and the disabled. Another ambitious program that reflected Jefferson ideas was the “Great Society” by Lyndon Johnson in 1964. He ensured passage of Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Voting Rights Act of 1965, wilderness protection Act to protect forests, Medicare for the elderly, low-housing constructions and support for arts (Vorlander 487). However, the gains were reversed by the Clinton regime as he embarked on a comprehensive welfare reform to cut on such provisions and terminate others. Although gains were reversed, it is evident that Jefferson ideas continue to influence American policies. Conclusion In the research, I have argued that the Hamiltonian ideology best describes the 20th century politics as it is the basis upon which domestic policy and by extension foreign policy are based. America defines it policies based on national interest and this is derived from Hamilton’s idea of self-interest as the guide to commerce. Everything America does is to enhance trade and commerce hence the application of open door policy, freedom of the seas, and international financial order maintenance. It also guided America in deciding whether to enter WWI and WWII as well as the pacific relations. Most policies also are economically driven as agriculture as mainstay of economy is no longer tenable. However, Jeffersonian ideas also are important especially in restoration of human dignity and values as well as preservation of human rights. Works Cited Martinez, J. Michael. Jeffersonian and Hamiltonian Views of Nature in the Early American Republic. Politics & Policy 33.3 (2005): 522-552. Print Mead, Walter Russell. Hamiltons Way. World Policy Journal (1996): 89-106. Print. Mead, Walter Russell. The Age of Hamilton. The American Interest LLC (December 6 2011). President Thomas Jefferson’s First Inaugural Address. 4 March 1801 Vorlander, Hans. Liberalism. In: Stephen J. Whitfield., ed. A Companion to 20th-century America. John Wiley & Sons, 2008: 478-510.Print. Williams, Conor and Halpin, John. The Progressivism of America’s Founding: Part Five of the Progressive Tradition Series. Center for American progress, (October 2010).Web. Read More