Having previously mentioned Alexander Hamilton in connection with his Federalist views and opposition to Thomas Jefferson, I am reminded of the fact that this man was much more than a supporting cast member in the drama of the early years of American Independence, much more than the casualty of his duel with Aaron Burr. Indeed, the very fact that Hamilton’s face graces every currently issued ten-dollar bill (together with Benjamin Franklin, he is one of only two non-presidents, featured on the American money) points to his far greater importance to history than any standard pieces of historical trivia might suggest.
Beyond doubt, Hamilton’s influence on American politics was very significant in his time, and it continued after his death. Recognized as a preeminent political economist, lawyer, and political philosopher, he started his career as an active participant in the American Revolution, secretary and aide-de-camp to Washington ipse. Showing a remarkable perspicacity in the emerging government’s administrative and financial affairs, he authoritatively criticized the Articles of Confederation, and called for a strong effective central government. Having written most of the Federalist Papers, advocating the national Constitution, his work remains up to this day the primary source for Constitutional interpretation. The Federalist Party was built around him.
As the first US Secretary of the Treasury (1789-1795), he was a true trailblazer, and his ideas, policies, and institutions (at least some of them) have had a lasting effect on how the US Government operates up to this day, although considering today’s economic woes, that effect has perhaps not been great enough.
What I find most fascinating about Hamilton’s political and economic philosophy, are the socialist elements of his thinking. As a matter of fact, early federalism (not to be confused with the more recent strains) shows an affinity with state capitalism, which in my book is the capitalist’s ‘socialist envy.’ (As for the Russian idea of state capitalism, it is, in my view, just a particular model of state socialism, plain and simple.) In Hamilton’s case, whenever his policies bow to specific capitalist practices, I see that as his pragmatic compromise with the capitalistically-minded opposition to his ideas, while the specter of socialism is always at the back of his mind. After all, socialism is the most natural environment in which big government which he advocated can thrive. Look at modern corporate capitalists: the more they cry about the horrors of socialism, the more they expect unequivocal socialist protection from the federal government!
It would be very instructive to end this Hamilton entry with two opinions of him, given by two exceptional personalities of the time. Thomas Jefferson, his political opponent (whom Hamilton, however, preferred to support against John Adams in 1800), thus summed up his strong federalist tendencies, in a 1811 letter, written seven years after Hamilton’s death: “Hamilton was honest as a man, but as a politician believed in the necessity of either force or corruption to govern men.” (Ironically, this last part strongly reminds me of my entry title Buy Them Or Bomb Them As The Foundation Of American Foreign Policy, which, however, focuses on the more recent developments.)
Talleyrand, during his stay in America from 1794 to 1796, allegedly said this: “I consider Napoleon, Fox (William Fox was a popular radical American pamphleteer of that time, now hopelessly forgotten), and Hamilton, the three greatest men of our epoch, and if I were forced to decide between the three, I would not hesitate to award first place to Hamilton.”
It must be kept in mind that Talleyrand said this in 1794, that is, before Napoleon would become Napoleon, and before Fox would cease to be Fox, but no matter what, regarding Hamilton, the salient evidence of his outstanding historical legacy is the fact that today he is known to the whole world, including the cultural illiterates, as the face on the $10 bill.
Beyond doubt, Hamilton’s influence on American politics was very significant in his time, and it continued after his death. Recognized as a preeminent political economist, lawyer, and political philosopher, he started his career as an active participant in the American Revolution, secretary and aide-de-camp to Washington ipse. Showing a remarkable perspicacity in the emerging government’s administrative and financial affairs, he authoritatively criticized the Articles of Confederation, and called for a strong effective central government. Having written most of the Federalist Papers, advocating the national Constitution, his work remains up to this day the primary source for Constitutional interpretation. The Federalist Party was built around him.
As the first US Secretary of the Treasury (1789-1795), he was a true trailblazer, and his ideas, policies, and institutions (at least some of them) have had a lasting effect on how the US Government operates up to this day, although considering today’s economic woes, that effect has perhaps not been great enough.
What I find most fascinating about Hamilton’s political and economic philosophy, are the socialist elements of his thinking. As a matter of fact, early federalism (not to be confused with the more recent strains) shows an affinity with state capitalism, which in my book is the capitalist’s ‘socialist envy.’ (As for the Russian idea of state capitalism, it is, in my view, just a particular model of state socialism, plain and simple.) In Hamilton’s case, whenever his policies bow to specific capitalist practices, I see that as his pragmatic compromise with the capitalistically-minded opposition to his ideas, while the specter of socialism is always at the back of his mind. After all, socialism is the most natural environment in which big government which he advocated can thrive. Look at modern corporate capitalists: the more they cry about the horrors of socialism, the more they expect unequivocal socialist protection from the federal government!
It would be very instructive to end this Hamilton entry with two opinions of him, given by two exceptional personalities of the time. Thomas Jefferson, his political opponent (whom Hamilton, however, preferred to support against John Adams in 1800), thus summed up his strong federalist tendencies, in a 1811 letter, written seven years after Hamilton’s death: “Hamilton was honest as a man, but as a politician believed in the necessity of either force or corruption to govern men.” (Ironically, this last part strongly reminds me of my entry title Buy Them Or Bomb Them As The Foundation Of American Foreign Policy, which, however, focuses on the more recent developments.)
Talleyrand, during his stay in America from 1794 to 1796, allegedly said this: “I consider Napoleon, Fox (William Fox was a popular radical American pamphleteer of that time, now hopelessly forgotten), and Hamilton, the three greatest men of our epoch, and if I were forced to decide between the three, I would not hesitate to award first place to Hamilton.”
It must be kept in mind that Talleyrand said this in 1794, that is, before Napoleon would become Napoleon, and before Fox would cease to be Fox, but no matter what, regarding Hamilton, the salient evidence of his outstanding historical legacy is the fact that today he is known to the whole world, including the cultural illiterates, as the face on the $10 bill.
No comments:
Post a Comment