Thomas Jefferson vs. Teddy Roosevelt (Founders vs. Progressives) 

"let's inspect that meat" - Tom Richey, 2019

"trust" and "government" being used in the same sentence. Funny joke

Jeffersonian philosophy is attractive in its idealism, and the best way to bolster freedom during a society's implementation. Roosevelt's philosophy is eventually necessary to preserve that original premise of freedom, when the scale of the market grows to foster monopolies which thwart competition, and turn the concept of the free-market into a fallacy. The free-market cannot truly be free, it must be subject to some level of regulation to keep it even enough to be "free". A bit of an oversimplification there, but that's the basic truth. Anyway, they were two of our greatest presidents, who embodied equally important, contrasting elements to what would constitute a good society.

This was a fantastic video, and I’m glad you spoke with me in the live chat about Reagan’s disarming of americans, specifically the black panthers

One look at the results of the welfare state should answer the questions people have about government's efficacy in solving problems.

Classical Liberal here. Can’t enforce morality without violence.

from what i know of my countrys history (norway) big government leads to forced sterilization taking kids away from their parents for little to no reason (such as potential for future violence). raising kids in public institutions which makes them drug addicts and sellers, constant breaches of the constitution starting with something called konstitusjonell sedvanerett and ending in us giving control of our energy and other sectors to the eu (which we voted against joining twice!) all in the name of what is good. so in my experience big government bad

Jefferson for the win. Roosevelt is totally on the wrong side.

How very timely. I love these table-based summarizations.

Reagan had a contextually late 20th century suspicion of government. Jefferson had an enlightenment, late 18th and early 19th century suspicion of government after having actually lived under a different form of government altogether. They are NOT synonymous...the latter was a savant. Likewise, one was a fundamentalist and the other was often chastised by the tartuffes and parochial society of his day. In conjecture, I'd wager Jefferson would question and challenge the Patrician Republic of the American Confederacy against his agrarian utopia, and who knows what he would think of the ideologies and crises of the mid-19th century to the Cold War. I'm sure he'd also point out the consequences of heavy industry, agribusiness vs the individual farmer, and the squalor of the metropolises of our time. He'd also harbor some colonial preconceived prejudices as the norm of his contextual time and marvel at how the modern world is connected.

Laissez faire doesnt get you equality of opportunity

I'm definetly a small government guy, Austrian School of Economics. Don't intervene as it creates wierd incentives and missalocates resources and capital where it should not be. Would be a great topic for a video, government involment in monetary policy, banking, business, subsidies and regulations in general.

Can we get a Jean-Jacques Russo verses Kipling? Nobel savage against un corrupt paradise type of video??

Please do John Adams vs Alexander Hamilton

I don’t trust government. The proper role of government is to protect right and provide equal things.

How much do I trust government? Far less than an Email from a Nigerian prince...

Thanks for the clear and concise presentation, I appreciate it being under 10 minutes yet helped me understand United States a lot better than before. The following are some aspirations: United States liberated itself from many European foundations, especially religious institutions, and had the advantage of expanding its power of industrial production. But a society can't simply be productive for productive sake; it needs some kind of common value for both self-regulating and moving forward. Without the church institutions having a monopoly on standards of common values like in some European regions, the maintenance and formation of common values were up to either "what people already carry with them", or "The Government promotes some value more focused to answer the need of order". Jeffersonian political tendency could be viewed as respecting "what people already carry with them" and make the best out of them, whereas Roosevelt's political tendency could be viewed as "The government put some extra work since society is changing rapidly and darker side of human nature also grew rapidly". As the video had pointed out, the two tendencies were for quite different conditions of societies with different demographics. I would view both presidents had at least, reasonable and relatively good intentions in their thoughts based on their situations. But both lacked foresight. Jefferson and his contemporaries underestimated the speed of expansion post industrialization also accelerated the expansion of human flaws. But Roosevelt's view also lacked foresight, since the government was made of flawed people, expanding a government's power was merely relocating the expansion of human flaws from private sectors to government public sectors. I believe there is a middle way. In term of law and order, I believe Jeffersonian tendency, which was to limit government's power, would be more beneficial; because once a government becomes too busy making laws and orders, it's difficult to stop it from over-doing things. But in term of forming a common value that maintains social order during expansion, the Roosevelt tendency of actively promoting values through government's power, is more reasonable. Leaving millions of people of different origins all to their own devices and expecting minimal government inputs can still result some natural equilibrium is fantastical. However, the government's promotion of common value is preferably not done through legalistic means. As the Prohibition showed, if people did not freely internalize a moral value like stop drinking Alcohol, but being forced to stop only due to external laws, they would be eager to break the laws secrectly anyways. Legal means are last resorts; it's best that people are convinced of a value and make decisions by their own will. People should own their choices as much as possible, not the government owning their choices.

Very nice summary. BTW, I was recommending your videos to a student the other day and she was already watching them! Jefferson = such a southerner. Roosevelt = such a northerner.

Alexander Hamilton: Classical Conservative Thomas Jefferson: Classical Liberal Theodore Roosevelt: Progressive Conservative Woodrow Wilson: Progressive Liberal

uwu

Been ages since I watched your videos. Subscribed now.

I guess if each one of us is to act the government, can we trust each other to do the right thing for the just cause, as progressives...but we need the governing force of government to curb us all.

Where you think Jeffersonian thought is going with the Republican party going nationalist populism and Trump

"Lazey faire" 🤘🤘🤘

Teddy, the goat

Imagine trusting a government to correct morals

4:00 With Ronald Reagan as POTUS that's very true.

Please talk about Gandhi vs Ambedkar

Lazy fur.

Laws Affair?

teddy roosevelt, Americas first proto-fascist president ffw to today to see this disaster in full swing

I love your videos and I’m not even in AP Euro or APUSH. I’m just really interested in history.

just found this channel, love the content. Please keep up the good work!

Gramsci vs Marx

I trust the government about as much as I trust for Bill Cosby to give me a drink.

... What’d I miss!?

Awesome video! We need more people like you in the media. If you ever need any killer guitar riffs for your videos hit me up.

You are wonderful

Hannah Arendt

This might be my new favorite video of yours. I've been a staunch individualist for some time now, but I've become more pragmatic in my thinking as of late. The agrarian Jeffersonian republic was eaten by industrialization. The percentage of the population involved in agriculture has been on a downward trend since the industrial revolution. This obviously caused workers to lose there jobs. The majority moved to the manufacturing sector leading to the progressive era. Now we have automation already taking the most monotonous manufacturing jobs and coming for the rest. Policy these days is focused on scapegoating rising economies and immigrants when it's the automation that's the primary cause. I'm sort of liking the idea floating around of letting people opt out of the wasteful bureaucracy that is welfare in favor of a universal basic income. That way people don't feel like anyone is getting a free ride at their expense, but nobody dies on the streets. It seems like a practical solution that both sides should go along with. The lefties won't want to give up any existing freebies, and I'm worried about inflation but hey almost anything is better than the wasteful nonsense we got now.

When a branch of government becomes too big it is then the majority and Corruption always takes place. Let every man do what is right in his own eyes, is my philosophy.

In my experience the current administration has its feet on both sides of the question. The Trump government hasn't been quick to act, specifically concerning the gun control issue despite near constant examples of our current laws' inability to prevent mass shootings. On the other side Trump has been seen to needlessly involve himself in the "question" of transgenders in the military. It's a hard question whether the government is too involved or not involved enough but I think its largely dependent on the person occupying the executive seat.