Replies

I’m not excusing this modern day attack on Jefferson by our current elites.....folks posting here know what they are trying to do to our history & have stated so....but like you, I suspect, I’m none to pleased how things went down between Jefferson & Washington in the end.

Madison eventually reaped what Washington sowed (Following the Federalist Party thinking with appeasing the British after the Revolution) when he allowed the British to hang around the frontier (Which created havoc) despite the Treaty of Paris and the Jay Treaty calling for their ouster. Washington was to politically "scared" to do anything about that. There were plenty of sailors enslaved and killed in the name of pragmatism by Washington's Administration that ticked off a lot of people back then, namely Jefferson and Madison. The British became more dug in, thus...1812. Also Jefferson and Madison had good reason to go after Hamilton's and Adams' (Whom Hamilton disliked but shared ideological aspirations) desire to create a "artificial aristocracy" which Jefferson and any free man would of hated, but promoted by the higher ups in the Federalist Party including your vaunted Hamilton. Plenty to criticize Jefferson on, but his instance (And Madison's) that the strong central government Washington started promoting while Hamilton pulled his strings is not one of them.

"For I agree with you that there is a natural aristocracy among men. The grounds of this are virtue and talents. Formerly bodily powers gave place among the aristoi. But since the invention of gunpowder has armed the weak as well as the strong with missile death, bodily strength, like beauty, good humor, politeness and other accomplishments, has become but an auxiliary ground of distinction. There is also an artificial aristocracy founded on wealth and birth, without either virtue or talents; for with these it would belong to the first class. The natural aristocracy I consider as the most precious gift of nature for the instruction, the trusts, and government of society. And indeed it would have been inconsistent in creation to have formed man for the social state, and not to have provided virtue and wisdom enough to manage the concerns of the society. May we not even say that that form of government is the best which provides the most effectually for a pure selection of these natural aristoi into the offices of government? The artificial aristocracy is a mischievous ingredient in government, and provision should be made to prevent it's ascendancy." TJ to JA

What I find interesting is Hamilton being praised by all kinds a leftist for promoting the strong central State while lambasting Jefferson for his stance on the subject. Of course leftist love quoting Jefferson's about religion but that is a different subject in terms of authoritarian control Hamilton promoted (That led to their differences).

Self-governemt vs. being ruled by the elite, Jefferson was for the former while Hamilton for the later. A good reason for Jefferson and Madison to turn their backs on the Federalist Party.

JEFFERSON: “A private central bank issuing public currency is a greater menace to the liberties of the people than a standing army.” “We must not let our rulers load us with perpetual debt.”

HAMILTON: “No society could succeed which did not unite the interest and credit of rich individuals with those of the state.” “A national debt, if it is not excessive, will be to us a national blessing.” (How did Hamilton propose to control the beast? By faith in the elites, lol)

Agreed. In my office I have a copy of a Stuart portrait of Washington and a bust of Jefferson. They look at each other. Sometimes I wonder what they are thinking. (The Washington is this one, at the Metropolitan Museum in NY, http://www.artsunlight.com/artist-NS/N-S0007-Gilbert-Stuart/N-S0007-057-george-washington-the-vaughan-portrait.html)

These were great men and their contributions spectacular. But by the 1790s, while Washington was thinking of and working for a nation, Jefferson was thinking of and working for himself.