Yo! George!
Posted on 02/17/2007 12:45:14 PM PST by wagglebee
George Washington is one of the most recognized figures in U.S. history. But familiarity breeds contempt. More often than not, Washington is an old painting on the wall – solemn, impersonal and distant – or the subject of childhood stories and nursery rhymes. We all know that he chopped down a cherry tree and had wooden teeth.
The actual Washington is much more compelling. We can all see the brilliant flourishes of Jefferson's pen, Madison's constitutional handiwork or the success of Hamilton's economic policies, and that can cause us to overlook or underestimate the magnitude of Washington's achievement. Yet he really was, as Washington's greatest biographer, James Flexner, put it, the "indispensable man" of the American founding.
Remember that we look at history with the luxury of knowing what happened. What might seem inevitable or obvious in hindsight was more often than not a bold course, the outcome of which was uncertain at best. We must recapture this sense of contingency and daring if we are to understand Washington.
A soldier by profession and a surveyor by trade, Washington was first and foremost a man of action. He was at every important intersection of the American founding; his decisions and practical wisdom were crucial to the success of the effort at every stage. And at every moment – from the time he became commander in chief to his death – his project was to found a self-governing nation, a constitutional republic. It is here that we see the brilliance of Washington's statesmanship, his hand on the political pulse of the nation, all the while urging, counseling, warning, bolstering and leading his fellow patriots in their common efforts.
From 1775 onward, when the Continental Congress appointed him military commander of continental forces, Washington personified the American Revolution and was the de-facto leader of the colonial struggle. For eight years, Gen. Washington led his small army through the rigors of war, from the defeats in New York and the risky crossing of the Delaware River to the hardships of Valley Forge and the ultimate triumph at Yorktown.
Through force of character and great leadership, Washington transformed an underfunded militia into a capable force that, although never able to take the British army head-on, outwitted and defeated the mightiest military power in the world. Washington lost many more battles than he won, but his defensive strategy achieved his political objective: an independent and unified nation.
After the war, Washington was the central hub of correspondence among the most thoughtful men of the day, leading the effort in nation-building. He was instrumental in bringing about the Constitutional Convention, and his widely publicized participation gave the resulting document a credibility and legitimacy it would otherwise have lacked. Having been immediately and unanimously elected president of the convention, he worked actively throughout the proceedings to create the new Constitution. "Be assured," James Monroe once reminded Thomas Jefferson, "his influence carried this government."
As our first president, he set the precedents that define what it means to be a constitutional executive: strong and energetic, aware of the limits of authority but guarding the prerogatives of office. The vast powers of the presidency, as one Convention delegate wrote, would not have been made as great "had not many of the members cast their eyes towards General Washington as president; and shaped their ideas of the powers to be given to a president by their opinions of his virtue."
And the key ingredient in all of these things was moral character, something that Washington took very seriously and which gave to his decision-making a deeply prudential quality and to his authority an unmatched magnanimity. "His integrity was pure, his justice the most inflexible I have ever known, no motives of interest or consanguinity, of friendship or hatred, being able to bias his decision," Jefferson later observed. "He was, indeed, in every sense of the words, a wise, a good, and a great man."
It is no coincidence, then, that Washington's most important legacy comes during moments of temptation, when the lure of power was before him. Twice during the Revolution, in 1776 and again in 1777 when Congress was forced to abandon Philadelphia in the face of advancing British troops, Gen. Washington was granted virtually unlimited powers to maintain the war effort and preserve civil society, powers not unlike those assumed in an earlier era by Roman dictators. He shouldered the responsibility but gave the authority back as soon as possible.
After the war, there were calls for Washington to claim formal political power. Indeed, seven months after the victory at Yorktown, one of his officers suggested what many thought only reasonable in the context of the 18th century: that America should establish a monarchy and that Washington should become king. A shocked Washington immediately rejected the offer out of hand as both inappropriate and dishonorable, and demanded the topic never be raised again.
More subtle and problematic was a move by a group of officers in 1783 to use the military, with or without Washington's participation, to threaten the Continental Congress in order to ensure their payment of the army. The Newburgh Conspiracy placed Washington in a critical and delicate position. Had he either ignored the discontent or tacitly approved it, the political outcome would have been different and the possibility of a peaceful resolution of constitutional questions less likely.
On top of that, several political leaders welcomed the army's pressure, and wanted to use the threat as a way of strengthening their call for a stronger national government. Congressman Alexander Hamilton recommended that Washington "take the direction of them" and lead the effort.
But Washington would have none of it. "The Army," he rebuked young Hamilton, "is a dangerous instrument to play with." Instead, he responded to the unsigned papers calling for the army to stand up against the political leadership, by holding a meeting of his officers for March 15 – the Ides of March – 1783. There, Washington denounced the move as destructive of the very ground of republican government, and expressed his "utmost horror and detestation" of those who would "open the flood Gates of Civil discord, and deluge our rising Empire in Blood."
After the speech, Washington drew a letter from his pocket expressing Congress' intention to redress the army. He hesitated, pulled out a pair of glasses and remarked, "Gentlemen, you will permit me to put on my spectacles, for I have not only grown gray, but almost blind, in the service of my country." Many of the officers were in tears. If the speech had not already destroyed the movement, this remark assured its demise.
"On other occasions he had been supported by the exertions of the army and the countenance of his friends," wrote Capt. Samuel Shaw of the episode, "but in this he stood single and alone."
By year's end, Washington, victorious in war, proceeded voluntarily to resign his military commission. When he stepped down again, after his second term as president, a dumbfounded King George III proclaimed him "the greatest character of the age." His peaceful transfer of the presidency to John Adams in 1797 inaugurated one of America's greatest democratic traditions.
Without Washington, America would never have won its war of independence; he was the catalyst of the American founding. Even more significant, he proved that republican government was not only possible but indeed noble. Defeated and exiled, Napoleon lamented the significance of it all: "They wanted me to be another Washington."
No one did more to put the United States on the path to success than Washington. No one did more to assure a government with sufficient power to function but sufficient limits to allow freedom to flourish. No one walked away from power with more dignity or did more to assure the prosperous society we enjoy today. This is why Washington and Washington alone – not Jefferson, not Madison, not Hamilton – is the father of this country.
Celebrated as early as 1778, Washington's Birthday was by the early 18th century second only to the Fourth of July as a patriotic holiday. It was officially recognized by Congress as a national holiday in 1870. The Monday Holiday Law in 1968 moved it from Feb. 22 to the third Monday in February. Contrary to popular opinion, though, no act of Congress or order by any president has changed Washington's Birthday to "Presidents Day."
If Americans wish to honor George Washington, they should recall his deeds, recollect his advice, and once again call the holiday celebrating him what it is, in fact: Washington's Birthday.
God's Grace surely shone upon our Founding Fathers.
Ping
Yo! George!
Founding Father BTTT
Crickets chirping.
By year's end, Washington, victorious in war, proceeded voluntarily to resign his military commission.
Let's run through together the long list of other successful revolutionary leaders who've done the same.
Crickets chirping.
The current George in the White House could learn some lessons from the first George. If you think the current president has it bad, consider what the founder of our country had to endure. We were not even a nation when he was fighting the British.
History Channel is running a "Presidents" special most of the day today. Little snippets of each President.
Thanks.
I was watching it for a while.
Read Jeff Shaara's "The Glorious Cause" if you haven't already done so. It presents an insightful view of the figures of that time -- Washington in particular.
I've read "Gods and Generals" and "The Killer Angels" which were both excellent, I'll have to get "The Glorious Cause." "John Adams" and "1776" by David McCullough are also great books.
Not to mention all his pre-Revolution service.
While I was flipping around the other night, I caught part of a program The War That Made America, that dealt Washington's command, at the age of 23, in the French and Indian Wars.
I'm tempted to tape the series, but the fact that it's a PBS show makes me wary. Despite my interest in reviewing the history of that era and the part Washington played, I'm afraid PBS will inject copious amounts of self hating PC-ness and ruin the experience for me.
Before I became painfully politically self aware, I used to enjoy PBS science and history shows. Now they invariably piss me off.
Maybe I should just find a book about it and save myself the heartburn.
It is amazing how large a part Washington played in the formation of this country, and inspirational in recognizing what a difference a SINGLE INDIVIDUAL can play in history.
He was in the right places, at the right times, doing the right things, for such a very long time, that it almost makes me believe in destiny.
Not just Washington, but also John Adams, Jefferson, Madison and Franklin.
Too bad (dis)Honest Abe screwed up Washington's hard work.
"Washington transformed an underfunded militia into a capable force that, although never able to take the British army head-on . . . ."
Not so. Read about the Battle of Monmouth.
"The mercury mounted to ninety-six degrees in the shade on that scorching Sunday when the battle of Monmouth was fought, and more than fifty men on each side who escaped the enemy's bullets fell by sunstroke. Scarcely fifteen minutes elapsed after Washington reached the front, before the Americans, while under fire, had formed into line of battle. Greene commanded the right wing and Lord Stirling the left, while Wayne held the center, and Knox managed the artillery. The British were soon checked, and then steadily pushed back until the Americans occupied the high ground from which Lee had retreated in the morning."
What a wonderful post! For all of the reasons mentioned here and for all of the others not mentioned, Washington remains my hero! Much more attention, much more study, much more appreciation needs to be given to this man, the father of our country, the man who could have been king, but chose our republic instead.
...And if he ran for President today either of the two major parties would throw him under the bus before his views became too widely known and he became an embarassment...
I consider Washington the greatest man, After Jesus of Nazareth, to have ever lived.
His nobility, fortitude, patience, courage, audacity, manners, intelligence, wisdom, understanding, and curiosity are awesome to contemplate in one single man.
He's certainly up there on my list as well. All of our founders were blessed with qualities you list, and together they established the greatest nation this earth has ever known.
Ping.
And we have rewarded this truly indespensible Founding Father by taking away his birthday as a Holiday. Now we have "president's day" which also celebrates Buchanan, Harrison, et al.
Very sad - the day America stopped celebrating George Washington's birthday.
This man has always been a particular hero of mine.
What a breed of giants bestrode the land then!
Read Team of Rivals. It's a study of the political personalitities and influences of the Civil War era. The expressed intentions and expectations, and how events confounded them or confirmed them. The Civil War was about secession, but secession was about slavery. And secession occured over not over existing slavery but over the expansion of slavery into the southwest and, in principle, nationwide.All very well to put the worst face on Lincoln - but that is precisely what the southern firebrands did, and it led them to create the facts on the ground which produced the chain reaction which killed so many Americans in the 1860s. Easy enough for people to say this thing or that thing wasn't worth it - but prospectively people made different judgements. Surprisingly enough, </sarcasm> not all of those judgements proved out.
thanks G.
Researchers Re-Create Washington's Face
Yahoo News | 2-16-2007 | ASU
Posted on 02/17/2007 1:49:57 PM EST by blam
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1786597/posts
Bravo.
Yes, we fail to realize (aren't taught) that the War Between the States wasn't about Southern slavery.
It was a totally unnecessary war since only a decade or two would have brought all US slavery a natural death. It was simply untenable morally.
Yet, the passions ran so high that war became inevitable. The North would not yield, and the South was determined to have things there way. What an absolute tragedy.
Not belittling President Washington's contributions but if memory serves a little pamphlet by Thomas Paine helped stir quite a few even to begin the move toward final indpendence. From what I've read as late as Winter '75/Spring '76 Washington, among others, saw a possibility of an eventual reconciliation with Great Britain
And ...*gag* ...Carter.
interesting ping
Actually, we did exactly that, perhaps most notably at the Battle of Cowpens where the size of the forces was evenly matched. We also took on and defeated the Hessians at Bennington. And, of course, we took on and defeated the British army at Saratoga.
Washington's greatest contribution to mankind was saying that President should not serve more than two terms.
In setting this precedent, Washington established that the US would always be a democracy. Without it, some Napoleon would have come along and hijacked the democracy at some point in the past.
So, by keeping the US as a democracy, allowing its example to spread around the world, and setting the example that the Presidents and Prime Ministers should not be in power for life (and then pass the mantle on to their sons), Washington established the modern democratic government which is now being adopted slowly worldwide.
The day of the Kings and dictators and tribal chiefs and totalitarian governments is over. The human race now has a better way of governing itself thanks to Washington.
It was a totally unnecessary war since only a decade or two would have brought all US slavery a natural death. It was simply untenable morally.
Yet, the passions ran so high that war became inevitable. The North would not yield, and the South was determined to have things there way. What an absolute tragedy.
Hard as it is to imagine the US without the territories it took from Mexico in the Mexican War, that war was morally questionable if rather inevitable considering the osmotic pressure of the dynamism of the US economy/population on the porous (yes, even more porous then than now) Mexican border. But having taken the territory, the US had to decide the question of slavery in those territories - and it was utterly unable to do so peacefully.The moral issue of slavery is a fascinating issue since, as Thomas Sowell points out, slavery was an ancient and global institution with which Christianity, from its inception, had always coexisted (see St. Paul's letter to Philemon in the Bible). Yet, Sowell points out, when Christendom became dominant (as expressed in the global span of the British Empire, encompassing a third of the globe both geographically and in population) Christendom became militant against slavery. And only then was the institution suppressed - to the extent that it has been.
The slaveholding Christians of the South were becoming anachronistic. They were at the top of the food chain so long as they did not accept the paradigm of equality, and they were at risk of a race war if they did accept it. They were uniquely situated to resist the change, and they resisted it aggressively by pushing to extend the domain of their "peculiar institution." Had the politics gone differently in the border states, they might have prevailed. And gradually become more anachronistic. Interesting times, as the Chinese would put it.
Washington was the only one of the Founding Fathers to free his slaves. They were to be freed upon the death of Martha. However, they were freed before she died because fears arose for her safety.
But long before that Washington had prohibited corporal punishment and would not break up slave families.
Though his estate was in financial trouble before his death, when the slaves were freed it completely bankrupted his estate. He was land rich, but money poor.
Being a freed slave was no easy life. At any time they could be re-enslaved, they had great difficulty finding employment or housing. A freed slave in the South was a square peg trying to fit into an socio-economic round hole.
Many chose to remain where they were on the land.
However, Jefferson, for all the grandeur that history has accorded him as being a true "democrat" (mostly because of his marvelous words in the Declaration of Independence) never freed his slaves. He, too, was bankrupt.
Thanks, wags
The Washington Family Coat of Arms
The RevWar/Colonial History/Gen. Washington ping list.
Freepmail me if you want to be ON or OFF this list.
bttt
Bump for the General.
Washington will always rank number 1 in my book. Ronald Reagan will always be number 2. The rest can draw lots...
And in some ways, I can agree with them but for my own reasons. If the holiday is now to be known as Presidents Day, then there are several Presidents not worth celebrating.
I will also note that Washington was not the first to turn down continuous power. The Puritan leader John Winthrop would step down from office from time to time, "an intermission designed principally to guard against a precedent, which might lead to a governor for life."
bttt
The Roman farmer Lucius Quintus Cincinnatus relinquished his army after saving Rome and retired to his farm. According to some, Washington was a great admirer of the Roman Republic and modeled himself after Cincinnatus.
The Society of the Cincinnati was formed by Washington's former officers and Washington served as its first president. Their motto was, "He gave up everything to serve the republic."
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.