As I wind my way through to the thrilling conclusion of Ron Chernow’s “Alexander Hamilton” (I understand that, as in “Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince,” a major character is killed off in the end!), I continue to be amazed at how much America and its politics today resemble the politics of our nation in our founding years. For example, see if this description of 1798 politics between the then-Federalists and the then-Republicans resembles anything we’re witnessing here in 2007…
“The period of John Adams’s (think George W. Bush) presidency declined into a time of political savagery with few parallels in American history, a season of paranoia in which the two parties surrendered all trust in each other. Like other Federalists (think modern-day Republicans) infected with war fever, [Alexander] Hamilton increasingly mistook dissent for treason and engaged in hyperbole. In one newspaper piece, he blasted the Jeffersonians (think modern-day Democrats) as ‘more Frenchmen than Americans…”
Sacre bleu!
Does that not sound like recent years under George the 43rd? And while there may have been few parallels to the “paranoia in which the two parties surrendered all trust in each other” prior to the book’s publication in 2004, it certainly exists today.
But following up a point I made recently about modern day politics not really being all that more harsh or hostile than in the founding days, recall this little historical loss of decorum in the House back then…
“An episode at Congress Hall in January 1798 symbolized the acrimonious mood. Representative Matthew Lyon of Vermont, a die-hard Republican, began to mock the aristocratic sympathies of Roger Griswold, a Federalist from Connecticut. When Griswold then taunted Lyon for alleged cowardice during the Revolution, Lyon spat right in his face. Griswold got a hickory cane and proceeded to thrash Lyon, who retaliated by taking up fire tongs and attacking Griswold. The two members of Congress ended up fighting on the floor like common ruffians.”
Wouldn’t you just LOVE to see a similar C-SPAN-covered dust-up today between Sen. Elizabeth Dole and Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton? I mean, I’d pay darned good money to see that smackdown!
And get this: Immigration was a huge issue in the “old days,” as well, with the Federalist majority party in Congress serving as that era’s nativists. “Federalists wanted to curb an influx of Irish immigrants, who were usually…natural adherents to the Republican cause,” write Chernow.
Change Federalists to Republicans, Irish to Mexicans, Republican to Democrat…and viola!
Ironically, Alexander Hamilton, the nation’s first bona fide big-government liberal, “wanted to throttle the flow of immigration (think Rep. Tom Tancredo), writing, “My opinion is that the mass [of aliens] ought to be obliged to leave the country.”
Many today, from both parties, would agree with that sentiment.
This also brings to mind President George Washington’s thoughts on the subject: “My opinion with respect to immigration is, that except of useful mechanics and some particular description of men and professions, there is no use of encouragement.”
Those today who say that those today who are calling for stricter immigration control are “un-American” because of their opinion on the issue are, by extension saying that the nation’s first and most-revered president was un-American. That, itself, seems to me un-American.
Anyway, to wrap up this string of thought, compare the situation we face in today’s post-9/11 world with the passage of the Alien and Sedition Acts during the Adams’ administration - legislation designed to crush dissent…
“The Alien Act of June 25 gave the president the power to deport, without a hearing or even a reasonable explanation, any foreign-born residents (think Muslims) deemed dangerous to the peace,” Chernow notes. This was followed by the Alien Enemies Act which “granted the president the power to label as enemy aliens (think “enemy combatants”) any residents of a country at war with America.”
We haven’t yet quite gotten as far along regarding aliens and enemy combatants as the Federalists under Adams…but the rhetoric from the Bush administration over the last few years has often come dangerously close.
In addition, the sedition part of the Sedition Act made it a crime “to speak or publish ‘any false, scandalous, or malicious’ writings against the U.S. government or Congress.”
Think…McCain-Feingold. Only with McCain-Feingold, you can’t even speak about or publish the TRUTH about a congressman’s voting record within 30 days of an election.
I’ll close with this quote from Thomas Paine: “He who dares not offend cannot be honest.” It is my sincere hope, then, that I have honestly offended at least a few of you with this column.
Posted on August 26th, 2007 by Chuck Muth
Filed under: National
Leave a Reply