The following is the opinion of the author and does not necessarily reflect the views of this publication.
Part VIII: Same As It Ever Was
This month, El Hyena will discuss parallels in our nation’s history. El Hyena is very interested in history, and spends a great deal of time reading history books. He has discovered that when reading about something that occurred 200 years ago, similarities to today’s events are readily apparent. In other words, in some ways it’s déjà vu all over again. Please note, if El Hyena was a scholarly author, he would at this point include a footnote attributing this quote to the eminent philosopher Yogi Berra. But thinking out loud is not a particularly scholarly pursuit; that and the fact that El Hyena does not know how to do footnotes.
Anyway, El Hyena has been reading a book about Thomas Jefferson and Alexander Hamilton, both of whom played major roles in the creation of our nation’s government. While participating in the Revolutionary War, directly or indirectly, both voiced their own complaints about how the “government” of the newly independent states wasn’t working to their liking. Hamilton, an officer serving in the Continental Army, was unhappy because the troops weren’t being paid or properly supplied, mostly due to the Congress having no power to do much of anything. He wanted a strong federal government that would have the power to take charge and do things, like solve problems that needed to be solved whether the individual states, or the people themselves, liked it or not. Jefferson, on the other hand, was a big “states’ rights, weak federal government” guy who felt that regular people should have some, but not much, say in the matter. While governor of Virginia, his problem was that other states weren’t contributing money and militia to Virginia when it was being invaded and ransacked by British troops. Although he favored a system of government where individual states’ sovereignty trumped centralized control, he didn’t like it when other states were slacking and not doing what he considered to be their fair share to help Virginia when Massachusetts wasn’t being affected.
After the Brits gave up and went home, the folks now lauded as our Founding Fathers commenced to fighting among themselves about how the United (sort of) States ought to be run. George Washington, having commanded our victorious army, adopted his usual style of remaining quietly on the sidelines until everybody else begged him to step in and save the country. Jefferson and Hamilton, on the other hand, were more into “working the crowd” by writing anonymous newspaper articles arguing their respective preferences about what kind of government ought to be created. Under the Articles of Confederation, all of the states pretty much did whatever they wanted in support of their own interests with little concern about how it affected the country as a whole. Jefferson, being from Down South, thought that the new country should be an agrarian society with a very weak federal government (he was, after all, a big planter who owned slaves), and despaired of an industrialized, merchant controlled society which he thought would be too much like England and it’s monarchy. Hamilton, on the other hand, being from Up North, wanted a new constitution that would establish a strong federal government overriding the individual powers of the states and being run only by the right kind of people, i.e. rich aristocratic merchant types who would model the system in England (he did, after all, have experience in the merchant business and married a really rich heiress). He thought having a king was the better idea, whereas true democracy was dangerous in that regular people just weren’t the right kind of folks to be allowed to participate in government. Jefferson admired the French Revolution, while Hamilton admired the British constitutional monarchy.
To make a long story short, this is basically how government comprised of two opposing and antagonistic political parties was born. Jefferson and Hamilton hated each other’s guts, and both led opposing political parties, both of which hollered loud and long that their party was best for the country while the other party was doing its best to destroy the country. Jefferson and Hamilton each spent considerable time bad-mouthing the other to our first President Washington.
One can imagine what it would have been like if only they’d have had cable TV, SuperPACs, the Internet, and social media. Jefferson (Republicans, then Democratic-Republicans, then Democrats) and Hamilton (Federalists or, as Jefferson called them, Monarchists) would have been making the talk show circuit on Sunday morning and having TV press conferences every news cycle, each blaming the other and pandering to their “base”. Scandals would have been manufactured and then “tweeted” and argued in “comment threads”. Each party would have had its own think tanks writing op-eds and grass roots organizations running TV commercials in selected markets.
From an historical viewpoint therefore, as far as El Hyena can tell, there is little difference between yesterday’s Founding Fathers and today’s Foundering Fathers. Back then they had The Federalist Papers, today we have “Fed Up”. Both historical periods had, or have, those who want a strong, all powerful federal government as opposed to those who think the federal government has too much power and should be made small enough to drown in a bathtub. Both historical periods had, or have, elected or appointed officials whom some perceived, or perceive, as corrupt and beholden to private interests. Then, as now, everybody hated, or hates, everybody else.
History provides a valuable lesson, but it can also be re-written to suit your tastes. Take your pick, this is nothing new.
