|
To me, politics seems to be less about getting along and bringing folks together, then it is about bitching. Folks don't
like this policy or that law or this other practice, they want to change things and have less of this or more of that, It's
just exhausting and pointless.
And it also seems, as much as folks in any state of the union bitch about things, saying they don't like the direction
the country is going, or protesting the war, that hardly any of them ever talk about not being part of the U.S. There are
some right wing reactionaries in South Carolina who mumble about secession (and this is going on now, not 150 years ago), and some left wingnuts in Vermont who want to establish a Republic, but so far that's all been just a bunch of noise. As much as folks complain, everyone
still seems to recognize that there are benefits to being one of the United States of America.
Politics, for about the last 150 years or so, has not been really complicated. Everyone seems to accept that we have
this big federal government, with all the revenues and the departments and far-reaching powers; the arguments we have now
are about what to do with it all.
This was not always so.
Part I: The Old-Timey English Days
Back in the old-timey days of the American Revolution, folks didn't so much argue about what the federal government should
do, but really about whether or not there should even be a federal government. Probably most everyone saw the benefits of
strong military and economic ties - back then there were threats all over the world, even the Native Americans who lived right
there with them - but, having just thrown off the yoke of British tyranny, folks in, say, New England or the Deep South weren't
exactly standing in line to sign up for what probably seemed like more of the same. To them, Philadelphia and D.C. were as
far off as London. They talked about union, the fought for a union, but there's an old saying that you can throw two cats
in a gunny sack and have a union: What you don't have, in that case or in this one, is unity.
Part II: Washington
Washington believed in a strong union with one central government, even as he set about fighting a war to establish one.
Washington was old money and very uptight, real sniffy and formal and proper, and for all his strength and his character,
he wasn't the kind of guy you'd see at a kegger and walk up to, slap him on the back and call him an old bastard. Back then
he might have just been considered a regular dude, but today he'd rate at least an 8 on the dickhead scale.
Contrary to what you might think, George Washington was not a brilliant military strategist. He lost as many battles
as he won, and even his victories seemed to almost happen by accident. One thing Washington was good at, though, was writing
letters. He wrote letters to Congress asking for more money and supplies and munitions, he wrote letters to governors and
even to the British.
At one point it got so bad that one of his aides de camp had to take over for him, drafting letters and screening
Washington's mail. His name was Alexander Hamilton.
Part III: The Federalists
Hamilton was the first real American rags-to-riches story. He was born in the Carribean somewhere and was probably a
bastard, he was orphaned and had to teach himself to read and write and went on to graduate from Princeton, joined the army
at 19 and caught the attention of General Washington.
And the rest is history.
Well, technically, it's all history.
Like Washington, Hamilton was a Federalist and in his lifetime he not only founded the Federalist Party but also co-authored
the Federalist Papers, which was kind of like the Federalist Manifesto.
When you say the word "Federalist" enough, it starts to sound menacing.
Hamilton was at odds, naturally, with the Republicans who favored stronger State and local governments, like when Hamilton
tried to establish a National Bank, and Jefferson opposed him.
Or during the election of 1796.
In the old-timey American Revolutionary days, there were no political parties, every Presidential delegate had two votes,
which they had to cast for two different dudes. Hamilton's plan was to get all the Federalists to vote for John Adams
and Thomas Pinckney, and to get the Southern delegates to vote Thomas Jefferson and Charles Pinckney. This would
have had Adams remain as Vice President, and given most of the votes to Charles Pinckney. It didn't work, but it did piss
off Jefferson and his good friend, Aaron Burr
Part IV: Aaron Burr
Aaron Burr, despite how history remembers him, was not all bad. For his day he was a pretty progressive thinker, an abolitionist
and a feminist. But, while Hamilton favored a strong central government, and Jefferson advocated that political power be distributed
to local and State governments, Aaron Burr seemed to believe that all political power should rest with Aaron Burr.
I've read in different places that Hamilton and Burr started off as friends, though I don't see how that could be so.
Burr ran for political office once against Hamilton's father in law. While Hamilton served under and befriended Washington,
Burr was marching through Canada with Benedict Arnold. It was Hamilton's influence that kept Burr from being elected President
in 1800. So however they started off, they wound up hating each other's guts. They were like Clark Kent and Lex Luthor.
In 1804, it all blew up.
In New York, some newspaper published a letter recounting something that Hamilton may have said at some point critical
of Burr's candidacy. Burr was pissed, and challenged Hamilton to a duel. And if it seems insane that a national political
leader and sitting Vice President would get pissed enough at secondhand rumors that he would want to kill somebody....well,
it really is insane.
Even then, dueling was illegal, but I suspect that it was illegal in the same way that pot is illegal in California or
driving fast is illegal in Europe
Part V: The Duel
Hamilton was faced with a choice.
He could refuse to duel and be branded a coward, not only sacrificing his own political future but strengthening Burr's
reputation, or he could kill Burr and be accused of murder and ruin his political future.
Or he could lose.
Losing, of course, would mean that he would be dead, which on the face of it would suck, but it would also mean an end
to Burr's career. There would be no legacy, there would be no presidency - hell, no one would even remember Burr after that.
It's a fact that Hamilton's shot missed Burr by like 20 feet, and not just by 20 feet but 20 feet over his head. It's
also a fact that, the night before, Hamilton wrote about his intentions to throw that shot away. People debate about
why he did it, but the fact is, as everyone knows by now, Hamilton died. Burr was tried for murder, acquitted, and moved out
west, where he went crazy and tried to start his own country and named himself Emperor.
And that was that.
Now you can debate about how insane Aaron Burr really was and how bad his eventual Presidency might actually have been,
and you can disagree about how and why Hamilton lost the duel with Burr. But I think Burr's actions later in his life, when
he moved out west and tried to set himself up as Emperor of a new country carved out of the Louisiana Territory, pretty much
speak volumes about him. And the fact is that Hamilton's death pretty much put an end to Burr's influence and reputation and
spared the country the insanity and chaos that Burr would have wrought. And I like to think Hamilton was insightful enough
to know what he was doing, but even if it was all stupidity or dumb luck, when I look at a ten dollar bill I don't think about
what happened on that day in 1804, but what might have happened if Hamilton hadn't acted.
|
