The Demise of the Federalist Party

To understand the Demise of the Federalist Party you need to make sure you understand how it was formed.  It was the very first American political party.  Prior political parties were actually English political parties – the Whigs and the Tories which originated during reformation era in England.  The Whigs wanted Parliament to have more power than the king, they were anti-Catholic and pro-Protestant, and called themselves the ‘Country’ party as opposed to the ‘Court’ party.  The Tories, the ‘Court’ party, were for the king and believed in his ‘Devine Right’ to rule.  They were in favor of the Church of England (the Anglican Church) and hated non-conformists all of which made the protestant Whigs think they were pro-Catholic.

While during the American Revolution I think that neither party was opposed to protestant ideas (I’m not certain of this however), the terms Whig and Tory were used to differentiate people who were for American Independence (Whigs) and people who were still loyal to the crown of England (Loyalists or Tories).

Most of the Tories fled to England or Canada or other places during the Revolution.  There was a large group who fled to Florida and later resettled in Georgia.  Some of them however stayed and suffered persecution and indignities during the war, had property ceased and confiscated, etc.  Since most of the Tory political leaders left, though, there was no longer a Tory political powerbase and because many of the Tories were wealthier citizens during Colonialism – merchants and the like, when they left it destroyed the hierarchy and class stratification that was very prominent during colonialism in New England. 

This removal of a previous power base allowed the rise of a new class of wealthy men and smaller merchants to grow in standing, but these men did not hold the same views of aristocracy and elitism as the loyalist Tories.  Their ideas were very ‘Republican’ meaning Democratic/Republican of the variety of Jefferson who saw their fellow men as equal.  Here’s an interesting quote from a rich patriot in Boston in 1779:  "fellows who would have cleaned my shoes five years ago, have amassed fortunes and are riding in chariots."

So at the end of the Revolution and the beginning of the United States there was really only one political power – the Whigs.  So how did the Federalist Party begin?  It was begun by Alexander Hamilton.  Remember that he was a member of Washington’s cabinet – he served as Washington’s Secretary of Treasury and Washington relied on his financial knowledge.  While serving under Washington Hamilton amassed a group of supporters for his fiscal ideas – remember that he urged that the Federal government assume the states Revolutionary War debts (which created our very first national debt) but he also had a plan for paying it off.  He also advocated for a National Bank, was in favor of tarriffs, and saw that we would need to have good relations with Brittain in order to survive.  In esssence they believed in a very strong, centralized Federal government that had powers above that of the states.  Do you remember Hamilton’s argument for ‘energy in the Executive’?  (This was the same argument that threatened to boil over during the writing of The Constitution, remember?  States Rights vs. Federal rights?  It was part of the reason why some states refused to ratify the constitution without a Bill of Rights.  Their ideas were laid out in detail in 'The Federalist Papers'.) 

That group of supporters that Hamilton gathered around him?  They were rich merchants and bankers and centered around larger cities and was much more prominent in New England.  John Adams allied himself with the Federalist party and was the only Federal U.S. President.  Washington was sympathetic to some of their ideas but never joined the party choosing to remain ‘independent’.  Jefferson’s followers, the ‘Jeffersonians’, came to be known as the ‘Republicans’ because they were opposed to mainly the fiscal policies of the Federalists.  Jefferson was vehemently opposed to the idea of a National Bank, and there seemed to be a sense of elitism associated with the Federalists that rankled more people than just Jefferson.  Remember that how Washington ‘held court’ while president had ranlked Jefferson and he made a pointed effort to put everyone on equal footing in the White House when he became president.  He called Hamilton and Adams and their supporters ‘Monocrats’ referring to monarchists.  (Remember the debaucle Adams had while VP over what to call president Washington?  I made up a little rhyme ‘too long gone and a royalist tone’ to describe Adams.  He had spent to much time in London and came back talking more like a Brit than a patriot!  Refer to the dinner conversation with Washington, Adams, Hamilton and Jeffeson on page 152 to see more of these ideas and how shocked Jeffeson was by them.

Jeffeson gave in to Hamilton though on this issue when he ‘log-rolled’ or voteswapped, exchaging support for Hamilton’s ideas and influencing is more southern power base to favor them in exchange fore buildig the capital on the Potomac (which put it between two slave states).  Hamilton’s Department of Treasury quickly became the largest portion of the federal governmet with close to 500 employees while all the others all together only had 22!  This idea of ‘big government’ and ‘small government’ is not a new disagreement!!   

All of this background brings you to the moment of the election of 1800 and the beginning of the demise of the Federalist party.  It began actually at the end of Chapter 5 (pp 171-176).  Here are some questions to ask yourself and help you answer this opportunity question:

            #1 Why/how did Adams lose this election?

            #2  Look at the election of 1802 on p 181.   What did they use in order to attack Jefferson and gain votes in the House during that election?  What does that say about the focus of their political ideas and actions?

            #3 On pp 184-185 look at how Federalists acted toward Jefferson sending Monroe to France to help Livingston in his dealings with Napoleon.  How did the deal that Jefferson actually made reflect on the Federalists?

            #4 Look at how the success of Jefferson as president despite their attacks on him from all sides made the Federalis feel (p 186).  These fears and ideas played out with VP Burr (pp 189-191) and influenced the results of the 1804 election.  Even after Jeffeson’s less successful 2^nd term what were the results of the 1808 election? (p. 196-197 – yes, I know this is beyond what you read this week, but I just thought I could use it to underline the point.)

Keep all of these things in mind as we continue reading this chapter.  The term ‘Federalsit’ will become almost as detested as the term ‘Tory’!

Asking the right questions...

I have several goals in teaching this class and one of those goals is in encouraging you to struggle to find the right questions that we as Christians living in America should be asking.  I began the year with that idea when I asked you to read your very first article on American Exceptionalism.

Yesterday during our online class I briefly spoke about my goals for you in the Current Event component of the class.  I'll post a summary of those goals at a later point, but I was surprised when I mentioned the Occupy Wallstreet movement in relation to the First Ammendment and no one had even heard of it.  I hope that you take the time this week to find out what is going on in this movement.  Take a look at their demands HERE.  

Early this morning I watched a documentary film called 'The One Percent'.  (This is available as an Instant Play selection on NetFlix.)  It is not in any way I don't think a part of the Occupy Wallstreet protests - it was released in 2006.  It was made by a grandson of the Johnson and Johnson corporation as he is grappling with being from one of the wealthiest families in our nation and yet he sees the disparity between the wealthy and the poor and realizes that he's a part of that.  I don't know that this film presents any clear answers and I think that's why I like it.  It causes one to ask questions and to struggle with what are the right questions?  There are viewpoints in this film that I clearly disagree with, there are one maybe two viewpoints in this film that I find I do agree with, but that's not the point really.  I like it because it's not propoganda - someone else telling us what we should think - I like it because it's a painful portrayal that puts us face to face with a struggle in our nation and forces us to think about what we believe.  I also like it because of it's relation to a conversation we were having just this week. 

This week we were talking about the struggle that John Adams had in the first congress and what his role in the government was going to be as Vice President.  We talked a bit about why others felt he was making an argument for aristocracy and why America  and Americans were so opposed to the idea of aristocracy.  This film talks about aristocracy, and one of the questions we might ask is, is the idea of aristocracy still a repugnant idea in America?

This film plays into our economic discussions as well.  We will talk more about free markets and more about the differences between capitalism and socialism.  There is a reference in this film to 'Progressivism'.  That is an idea that we will begin next year with - as we look at Roosevelt's 'New Deal'.  I'm still struggling to figure out exactly what it means and what the implications of it are.

If you do watch it (and I hope you will) keep in mind it's POV (point of view) - who it was made by, why it was made, and what do you think he's trying to accomplish.  Do you think he answered any of his own questions - how is it going to change how he lives his life?  There are several men in this film that he could use as role models (sons born into wealthy corporations) - who do you think a good one might be?  Does it change how you view your future at all?  What's the goal of your education?  What's the responsibility of being a Christian in America?

You could look at the drastic contrast between this film and his life and choices with those of this young girl who has written a book that has been on the NY Times Best Seller list for 12 weeks now: