Actually it's not the same argument. The argument has been reframed and today has nothing to do with the system the founders tried to make. The British actually retook the country and now use it as an extension of their empire. The founders were against empire all together. Do you hear anyone questioning the American Empire today? Everything has changed and the oligarchs have retaken the country and the people are to ignorant to know the difference.
I am currently learning about US History all over again for college at the age of 25 and this video was the video that tied everything that I read in the textbook all together and made the words salad make sense!! Thank you for sparking in me a love for US History that I didn't know I needed!
I returned to school and taking a history class. watching your videos I'm Acing it you help clarify what I read for Assignment. most of all I enjoy it and will continue for my own enjoyment. thank u for making me love History at 40.
Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. We fought for these ideals we shouldn’t settle for less. These are wise words, enterprising men quote ‘em DONT ACT SURPRISED YOU GUYS CAUSE I WROTE EM
Stream Fall OWH,BUT HAMILTON FORGES HIS PLAN WOULD HAVE THE GOVERNMENT ASSUME STAEDTLER DEBT PLACE YOUR BETS TO WHO THAT BE IF IT'S THE VERY SEAT OF GOVERNMENT WHERE HAMILTON SITS.
@Kara Webber IN VIRGINIA, WE PLANT SEEDS IN THE GROUND. WE CREATE, YOU JUST WANNA MOVE OUR MONEY AROUND. THIS FINANCIAL PLAN IS AN OUTRAGEOUS DEMAND, AND IT'S TOO MANY D**N PAGES FOR ANYONE TO UNDERSTAND!
@@sorrynotsorry6 stand with me in the land of the free, and pray to god we never see Hamilton's candidacy. Look, when Britain taxed our tea we got frisky. Imagine what's gonna happen when you try to tax our whiskey
+Mlp Melody Strokes Manage to have a goddAMN AFFAIR AND GET HIS SON KILLED AND GET SHOT IN A DUEL AND GOSH DANGIT MAKE US SO DANG EMOTIONAL DURING WHO LIVES WHO DIES WHO TELLS YOUR STORY
Interesting how both of the prominent modern day political parties in America have diluted and bastardized both founders philosophies. Of course it is not the people but instead the corporate interests that have co-opted both parties that have perpetrated this- but the apathy of citizens allows it. Nice summary Mr. Richey.
***** I share your disdain for our current political culture... There aren't many true Jeffersonians left in the halls of government - that's for sure!
The ordinary jackass holds a lot of blame as well. Typical people want "freedom for me, not for thee", and will vote themselves free crap. They don't pay attention to stuff that doesn't effect them. It is impossible to keep up.
One also has to take into account that from the end of the War Between the States and the WW1 the State Militias were basically dissolved into a Federalised U.S. armed forces taking all but a whimper of power from the people and states and morphing right back into the same sort of faction we fought against in the Revolution. States forced to remain in a union by bayonet. When that happens "the apathy of citizens" holds little if any value. At that point all you have left is another Rome awaiting it's Nero.
I'm writing a paper about these two for school and needed an explainer video. Thanks for this it was really helpful! Definitely subscribing and coming back here for future assignments.
The algorithms: you should watch this [eyes glazed over after following the algorithms] [mindlessly clicks this video] Me: Whoa! The rap battles are real! Excellent video, btw.
Hamilton sought power. People who seek power tend to be the ones who get it, so eventually most of his desired measures won out, yeah, even if it took more than 100 years for all of his goals to be realized (with the Federal Reserve and whatnot). People who oppose centralized institutions of power, like the Jeffersonians, tend to get involved in centralized institutions of power much less frequently... It's really quite inevitable.
took notes on what you said, took my final and wrote a paper on these 2 and manged to pull of a B+. Not bad for trying to fit everything you said on a 3x5 note card at 5 am in the morning while studying for 4 other classes. this is fucking life of a college man.
That's for sure about RU-vid. My college professors finally started integrating it in my second to last year of college (2013). It was a great benefit. Keep up the great work of integrating technology with education. It makes it much more real and fun!
Hamilton's legacy is still around in the form of the Third Bank of the United States, The Federal Reserve. Unfortunately there is very little Jeffersonian philosophy left in American politics. Ron Paul is one I can think of though.
+ClaymoreLinx The war in Iraq against the tyrant Saddam is a splendid example of Jeffersonian policy. Also the war in Kosovo. Then you have the first amendment too.
TroopSwordSkits To the contrary, he believed in spreading the revolution and encouraging it elsewhere. He wanted the US to help France during their revolution, he went to war against the Ottomans in Africa. He liked to stay out when monarchies fought each other but this is not isolationism. It's the blissful state of derivation of joy from the mutual self-destruction of your ideological enemies. Don't forget that the US was in a way already isolated by virtue of being both far away from Europe as well as for its being the only republic at the time.
Mom you need to check your history, and chill92. No one knows how TJ would act in this day and age. Don't claim to know more than you do, it's immature.
How was Virginians able to pay off their share of war debt?... is it due to those farmers owning free labor therefore able to sell their goods without concerns of wages...
@@harmanjotsingh4230 Doesn't matter. This is how liberal white women display their allegiance to the church of wokeness. The funniest day in the world is going to be when , after shitting all over everything to do with the USA for decades, and contributing MIGHTILY to the division and instability that finally topples the country, OP, as well as scores of millions of people just like her finally begin to understand the level of overt racism that will exist now that China is the untouchable global hegemon again. Not only do the Çhin ese greatly dislike .... "African people's," but they're going to exact revenge for a period of time they refer to as the "century of humiliation," for which they view the west as solely to blame for... The blacks will be enslaved all over again, and people like her will count themselves lucky if they're able to just toil in silent fear and regret for the world they helped create... The one silver lining is that THEN her wokeness will finally be cured
not sure if that is relevent, Andrew Jackson got ride of Hamilton's model, so anything that happened after Jackson removed the federal bank, Hamilton had nothing to do with.
@@TNTITAN I don't think your correct, the Hamiltonian Bank system was referred to as the First and Second Bank of the United States, there were two, Hamilton created the first, James Madison charted the second during his presidency after the first's charter was not renewed in 18011 during his presidency, and modeled the second after the first 5 years later during his second term, and James Madison's presidency came after Thomas Jefferson, so it was Actually Andrew Jackson that dismantled the Hamiltonian model by dismantling the second Hamiltonian bank called the Second Bank of the United States with his "Bank Wars". Thomas Jefferson although he disagreed could did not dismantle the bank, the charter actually ended during Madison's first term and then made the second bank during his second term based off the Hamiltonian system.
Can you clarify why you think a Jeffersonian Republican would be closer to a modern-day Democrat than a modern-day Republican? From looking at your chart, the beliefs of a Jeffersonian Republican (limited government, constitutionalism, laissez faire economy, states' rights) ALL align with modern-day Republican views. Not democratic.
There is an instinct to trace political evolution backward from now rather than to start at the beginning. That’s how notions like Conservatism being innately about small government and Liberalism a big one arise. The associations were reversed in fact at the Founding. The Hamiltonian Federalists represented a kind of Classical Conservatism which saw a strong national government as essential to preserving order. The Jeffersonian Republicans espoused a rigorous Classical Liberalism which perceived it to be an oppressive tool of the elite. As liberal teachings had informed the American Revolution, both camps were influenced by them. They reached consensus on recognizing natural rights, constraining government power, abandoning hereditary titles of nobility as well as the separation of church and state. The Hamiltonians, however, maintained conservative attitudes on central banking, protectionism, restricting immigration and property requirements for the vote. The Jeffersonians championed the liberal ideals of laissez-faire, free trade, open immigration and extending political suffrage to the common man. A nationalist versus internationalist divide emerged which shaped a lot of their disagreements. Perhaps the fiercest ensued when looming conflict around England and France aggravated tensions. Contrary to conventional wisdom, the federal over state position was used for conservative purposes when Federalists passed the Alien and Sedition Acts. Efforts to thwart radicalism that involved putting foreigners under scrutiny. And the anti-federalist stance, albeit complicated by later battles, was applied for liberal ends when Republicans retaliated with the Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions. Decrying them as violations of civil liberties, they asserted that the states could declare federal laws that they deemed unconstitutional void. A big deal in an age of centralized empires. Though the sectional question of slavery shook up the political landscape in a variety of ways, those concepts carried on in essence as the guiding orthodoxies for the modern Republican and Democratic leaderships. But the distinction has been obscured in memory. Take two icons for limited government types who embodied the competing intellectual traditions. Hamiltonianism in the Republican Calvin Coolidge and Jeffersonianism in the Democrat Grover Cleveland. Cleveland vetoed an immigration bill which featured a literacy test as a barrier in 1897 while Coolidge signed into law such a proposal in 1924. Cleveland ran on reducing tariffs while Coolidge kept tariff rates high. Cleveland opposed national banks while Coolidge let the Federal Reserve be. Cleveland set in motion the landmark antitrust lawsuit known as the Sugar Trust Case while Coolidge ended a string of administrations that had launched many of them. Cleveland put into place the Interstate Commerce Commission to protect consumers by overseeing trade while Coolidge appointed to it and the subsequent Federal Trade Commission hands-off commissioners to facilitate economic growth. It is their shared commitment to individualism, low taxes, sound money, balanced budgets and fiscal restraint that attracts the overlapping fans. Increasing demand for government intervention ignited during the Progressive Era blurred the line between the old-fashioned conservatives and liberals weary of it. Their ideas, regardless of the historical rivalry, now tend to get lumped together in the conservative category and pit against Progressivism. It also treated as one thing, usually under the name Liberalism, despite the initial disharmony there as well. The Republican Theodore Roosevelt and Democrat Woodrow Wilson were the first progressive presidents from their parties. Though it was their successors who coined the terms Progressive Conservatism and Progressive Liberalism for their ideologies, each described himself with the pair of labels. Both differed from their classical counterparts with respect to the scope of government, but there are parallels in how they contrasted each other. Comparing Roosevelt and Wilson helps in differentiating between them. Roosevelt akin to Coolidge signed off on measures to curb immigration which included a literacy test in 1903 while Wilson like Cleveland before him rejected legislation of that sort in 1917. As expressed in his 1902 State of the Union Address, Roosevelt advocated protectionism. Wilson, on the other hand, favored free trade. A goal propounded in his Fourteen Points. Both pursued economic regulation. But though dubbed the Trustbuster, Roosevelt was not hostile to monopolies on principle. Approving of what he called good trusts like U.S. Steel. Wilson pushed for the Clayton Antitrust Act in a bid to level the playing field by breaking them all up. The argument between nationalism and internationalism gained a new dimension with their foreign policy opinions. TR believed in the superiority of Anglo-Saxon societies and, as affirmed by his Roosevelt Corollary to the Monroe Doctrine, their duty to police the world. Conversely, Wilson claimed that no nation was fit to sit in judgement of another. His ultimate aim was global governance through the League of Nations. Much like Classical Liberalism, Progressive Conservatism is largely overlooked in these discussions. Observing them can illuminate trends which go back to the First Party System. Conditions created by the Second Industrial Revolution prompted the re-examination of accepted conservative and liberal precepts. Elements of both parties became convinced that government action was needed to remedy escalating unrest. Especially after the rise of the Populist Movement which fought for agrarian and industrial labor interests. The Populists coalesced into the People’s Party until rallying to the Democrat William Jennings Bryan to defy the rich and aid the poor. Republicans such as Roosevelt concluded that reform was necessary to prevent the country from descending into chaos. The key difference was that Bryan’s party selected him as its presidential candidate three times while Roosevelt’s gave him the vice presidency because it was thought that he couldn’t rock the boat there. Only taking office by chance after the assassination of William McKinley. And a greater number of delegates lent their support to the moderate William Howard Taft instead when he attempted to go for a third term. Admirers of Cleveland left to form the National Democratic Party when Bryan came out on top in 1896. Likewise, Roosevelt and his followers walked out to organize the original Progressive Party after Taft received the nomination in 1912. Each split benefited the other major party and they quickly declined. Internal debates persisted, but precedents were set. Though Bryan never won, Wilson acted on several of his causes. And Franklin Roosevelt actually endorsed Wilson, not Teddy, in 1912. He built on his prototypical administrative state with the New Deal. An agenda of then unmatched government activism. In keeping with Warren G. Harding and Coolidge’s Post-Wilson Return to Normalcy, Republicans led by Robert Taft worked at rolling it back. The election of Dwight Eisenhower marked a truce. His philosophy of Dynamic Conservatism made peace with the New Deal zeitgeist, but he sought to rein in any excesses. The further turns within the Democratic and Republican parties are clear-cut. The New Left and New Right adopted by George McGovern and Ronald Reagan both challenged the popular assumptions of their day. Focusing on social issues and government control. The Third Way and Compassionate Conservatism advanced by Bill Clinton and George W. Bush both moved toward the center. Reflecting upon the free market and social justice. Each establishment now confronts a populist wave. Democratic Socialism and National Conservatism are embraced by those that Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump have emboldened. Fed up with the ruling class, both aspire to tilt the balance of power. Granted, each from early on housed factions that spanned the political spectrum. Of note are those epitomized by the Democrat John C. Calhoun and Republican Horace Greeley. Calhoun defended the status quo for Southern planters while Greeley promoted Utopian Socialism. The two served as prominent party figures up until they, alongside other dissidents, were faced with critical disputes which drove them apart. Calhoun set up the Nullifier Party after a bitter falling-out with Andrew Jackson due to him standing by the federal government in a mounting crisis with South Carolina over the Tariff of 1828. Greeley ran as the Liberal Republican Party nominee against Ulysses S. Grant in the election of 1872 in protest of scandals in his administration tied to big business. But not even allying with their partisan adversaries, the Nullifiers with the Whigs and the Liberal Republicans with the Democrats, was enough to defeat Jackson or Grant. Most of their members soon dispersed among them both. Friction lingered between right-leaning Republican and left-leaning Democratic national parties and the left-wing Republicans and right-wing Democrats holding considerable sway at the state level with whom they compromised. The La Follette Wisconsin Republican and Talmadge Georgia Democratic machines were examples which came to blows with the Coolidge Campaign and FDR Administration. More infrastructure development coupled with gradual modernization led to the regions converging economically and culturally. That resulted in Republicans and Democrats amassing vast majorities of conservatives and liberals. Broadly speaking, along small town and big city lines. Both have indeed changed with time, quibbled over details and contained shifting coalitions. But their values remain fundamentally rooted in Hamiltonian pro-business conservative nationalism and Jeffersonian anti-elitist liberal internationalism.
Very good. It has always confused me that Alexander Hamilton has said some good things concerning the role of government and man, yet stood for all these centralized powers that in many ways were the root of the problems to which they were rebelling against.
Hamilton feared Civil War. He was right about that. Jefferson knew slavery was like "holding a wolf by the ear", yet he did nothing to move Virginia away from it.
Álvaro Lopes Jefferson inherited his father's plantation when he was just 14. He hadn't even gone off to William & Mary yet and he was already in charge of a plantation and ownership of slaves was still considered the norm at that time. He's quoted as calling slavery 'moral depravity'. In 1778, he drafted a Virginia law that prohibited the importation of enslaved Africans. In 1784, he proposed an ordinance that would ban slavery in the Northwest territories. It seems clear that although he was born into it, he saw slavery as a threat to the future of the country because it was a glaring contradiction in the face of liberty; something he fought for all his life. Maybe cut him some slack.. The man was obviously far more libertarian than what we would call a Democrat or a Republican by today's standards.
He also never freed his slaves. He even had many children with one of his slaves and on his death bed he freed them (because yes, his kids were still slaves) but not the woman he "loved". He's a complete hypocrite.
He was deep in dept and at the end of his life, the debt transfers to his family. The only way out was to sell the slaves so he wouldn't screw his wife and kids. Also he did free that woman.
Set them free or what? Give them a pocket of jangle(they can't really use) and out them on the streets. Where they were (in many cases) no more than cattle. Yea brilliant. Smh...
thanks...your video was shown in class and really helped me but then I forgot by the time I got home and went on a search for your RU-vid account so I could see your video again
Nice breakdown. As far a tariffs go, there’s a different between picking winners and losers and protecting American businesses who pay taxes from foreign businesses who don’t pay taxes.
I believe that our country is actually a bit of a mixture of both Hamilton’s and Jefferson’s visions. Probably mostly Hamilton’s vision but also has some of Jefferson’s belief as well.
Hamilton: He was the mastermind behind the Federalists, who pretty much wrote the Constitution, he centralized the government by assuming state debts, set up the economy by creating a national bank, nationalized the army, and predicted the industrial revolution by nearly 100 years while Jefferson believed industry was bad and all Americans should be farmers. He was kind of power-hungry, believed in government way too much, but he was a real genius and a financial wizard. His policies pretty much kick-started the American economy into what you see today. Without his financial plan and brilliant success obtaining foreign loans and managing that debt the government would have collapsed and the nation would have ceases to exist as a unified entity. His vision was absolutely fundamental to the nations existence in the short run and prosperity in the long run. A good argument can be made that he is the most consequential founding father of Washington and Adams. (Yes, more consequential than Jefferson.)
Yes, I mean it as a neutral objective kind of way, it is definitely more federal today than the almost libertarian utopia of Jefferson, but who knows, they are the two voices for America for a reason~
Thank you for clarifying! I’m a college student who as a essay base on this topic and sometimes when I’m reading the chapters I have trouble understanding what’s going on. I’m reading American Horizon vol 1 edition 4
When you don't live in America or France, have no reason to watch this and have as little as 0.001% chance of having to know this for school. But you're a Hamilton fan so you watch anyways while humming the songs.
"and anotherthing,mr.age of enlightnment,dont lecture me about the war,you didn't *fight* in it.you think im frightened of you man? *we almost died in a trench* while *you we're off gettin' high with da french*
Jefferson inherited slaves with his slow brother at the age of 21? And it was known as debt. He also was against slavery, and against blacks being in America; but yeah, let's talk about how awesome Hamilton was. Burr was against slavery, for the right of everyone to vote, and never owned a slave. He shot Hamilton who was an enemy of Jefferson until Burr was going to be PRESIDENT. Jefferson warned American about African slavery which had not become a thing until(look up secret relationship between blacks and jews or prof. tony martin on youtube even), a certain year. Sir Francis Bacon is rolling over in his grave at this New Atlantis. Andrew Jackson also freed the slaves if they'd fight for the United States against our enemies... and we had that war of 1812. The White House got burned down while Napoleon also fought the Rothschilds. He made usury illegal for Jewish bankers, and passed laws where they had to pay Christians back and could not be creditors to their Christian brothers. So yeah, he was awesome. Civics, right? Hamilton had a slave, and was hated by almost everyone. Burr was a bigger scoundrel though, and a dangerous man. It's funny how Thomas Jefferson died in DEBT. Oh yeah, he was against banks. When Jefferson died on July 4, 1826, he left a debt of $107,000, over a million dollars in today’s money. Despite his efforts, the plantation was unprofitable, and his expenses were heavy. Hamilton was an elitist and wanted a monarchy after the revolution. Three percent of the evil whites of the South and Confederacy (men who fought in the civil war)owned slaves. Judah P. Benjamin is not your friend. Look him up. When you have slaves, you feed and house them especially when you spend all your time in France or dealing with that scoundrel Burr! He read and wrote more than anyone since him, and never whipped a slave. Let me guess, you believe Hamilton and Burr were black? Hamilton was the first sex scandal guy in America, but yeah, civics lessons are important! Jesus was killed by the Pharisees. What's their book of religion?
+TexasPsychoK Hamilton didn't own a slave, he almost received one by inheritance, but never claimed it and he played a key role in emancipation of slavery in New York (Even though he was dead before he could see it)
Oh, my friend who was related to him told me the slave story. He said he had him for a day and was pissed off that he ruined his fancy suit he paraded him around in.. not kidding. I do like Hamilton now. His realistic vision of no immigration, a decent banking system compared to today's Babylon, and his belief in manifest destiny only for US BY US... much cooler. Hamilton was the first sex scandal guy... though Christian and saved. All those guys were better men than we've had in... a hundred years.
Thank you very much. I am doing a homework assignment where I have to choose one or the other and this helped me decide. On an irrelevant note.. You have really nice skin lol. You speak very well also. Thanks again!
holy crap, 2014 is so long ago. anyway, i'm having a presentation about hamilton tomorrow and i'm really not good at history nor politics, so i really needed this, it helped a lot.
Democrats destroy their own communities both financially and physically and want everyone else to bail them out.. then they move to red areas to destroy them too.. that's all they do is make our country worse.. and they all love eachother for it.
I’d say that roughly speaking the modern Democrats seek Jeffersonian ends by Hamiltonian means while the modern Republicans seek Hamiltonian ends by Jeffersonian means. Even if many haven’t put it together yet.
@Tom Richey, can you do a video on leaders who were down the middle of the chart you showed? I find myself enjoying both traits depending on the circumstance and it may be beneficial to have something showing that. Thanks for the video!
I’m studying early American history on my own, and expect to find out why Madison became a Jeffersonian. His stance before, during the 1787 Constitutional Convention, and in the ratification process was that of the Federalists.
He was a member of the Jeffersonian Republican Party he was a, in their context, centrist that philosophically occupied the space between Jefferson and Hamilton. Perhaps he could be described as a “states’ rights unionist”.
Alexander Hamilton loved the British mercantilist system. The reason he fought in the revolutionary war was that back then the colonies weren’t at the receiving end of the profits garnered by the British system. He loved the corporate welfare, the system produced. Hamilton couldn’t care less about ideas of enlightenment. He loved the wretched Parliamentary style of govt. and most probably would have had a British styled constitutional monarchy instituted in the American democracy.
Politics is generally very nuanced when not taught from a bias perspective. There's a reason people had their opinions. I wish people could understand this concept today lol.
Wow. Awesome teacher. Visual cues help explain terms and are memorable. They both have good points and it would be hard to choose a particular side but I identify with Jefferson more than Hamilton. I'd be interested in hearing your opinion regarding which party you agree with and why.
Ladies and gentlemen...you could have been anywhere in the world tonight but you're here with us in New York City. Are you ready for a Cabinet Meeting?!
The opposed each other so god damn much. He only backed Jefferson when he ran for president because he considered him the lesser of two evils when it came down to him or burr for prez.
The thing that seems to be throwing a lot of people off is that while some prominent Jeffersonian orthodoxies are held by conservative today his ideas were Left-Wing for their time which is where the connections with the modern Republicans and Democrats tricky to properly discern.
Filipinogenetics Glad I could help you! I was planning on waiting until I could do something more elaborate for this topic, but this seems to be hitting the spot for a lot of people.
Ahaha I've been sleeping in and missing my U.S. History college course and on this was on the powerpoint notes, so this video really helped me out since I learn topics for every course better on RU-vid aha
You allude to this in your video, but this is a dramatic oversimplification of the two groups stated positions on these issues. In practice, Jefferson presided over the largest expansion of federal power in US history (a mechanism for the Louisiana purchase is not in the constitution) and his embargo of European goods in response to the harassment of American sailors by European powers was the most severe protective tariff that could possibly be conceived. I would also argue against the use of the term Laissez Faire to describe Jefferson's economic preference. He wanted agrarian focused economic policies out of his desire for a nation of independent farmers, not an "unregulated" market dominated by monopolies. economicsRepublican PartyabhorredtyrannyagrarianJefferson
Agreed, the conditions threatening the new republic back then required a stronger central government. In addition, the economy was better tuned for trade with England rather than France. Today, even Hamilton would shudder with the abuses of the central government.
Hamilton: Hey Virginia would you mind helping New York with its war de-- Jefferson: %$&* off, Alexander. Don't tax the south; we got it made in the shade.
