Political Beliefs of Thomas Jefferson and George Washington

Introduction: Founding an American Political Vision

The founding of a nation represents one of the most consequential moments in a country's history. It lays the foundation of the government, shapes the political ideas to be engaged, and, most importantly, determines the general direction in which the country will evolve. From this perspective, the era of George Washington and Thomas Jefferson was crucial in the creation of the American state as it is known today.

One of the most important books written for a better understanding of that era is John Lauritz Larson's Internal Improvement. The book provides an essential view of the way in which, after the turbulent historical events of the mid-eighteenth century, the initiatives of figures such as George Washington aimed at uniting the country through internal improvement works — most notably a new infrastructure system. However, the infrastructure system is merely a case study for the broader political and ideological struggles that took place after America had overcome the Revolutionary War and was on the road toward becoming a new, united nation.

Washington, Federalism, and Internal Improvement

The major debate of the era surrounded the question of sharing power and responsibility. At the time, it was rather difficult to determine the appropriate balance between a strong central government and shared power with the state governments. In this context, George Washington's role was immense. He was a strong believer in the power of an active republican government that would take the lead in creating unified and reliable internal improvement works, which would in turn drive major changes across the colonies.

The historical background was such that it could barely support steady improvement without clear central initiative. Before the Revolutionary War, the colonies were very distinct in their character. They followed different paths of development largely because of their geographical positions. While the East Coast of the American state was fully dependent on the power its harbors provided — cities such as Boston or Baltimore — the inland colonies relied heavily on their ability to trade and to grow crops and livestock. It was therefore rather difficult to create uniformity and to ensure that the needs of all colonies were met through wide, national-scale projects.

From this perspective, Washington's approach of focusing on infrastructure as a domain of improvement was essential. He envisaged a government that would provide the necessary means to ensure all colonies were linked, connected, and ready to function eventually as a single state.

The Federalist–Republican Debate over Central Power

At the same time, debates over the capacity and power of the central government intensified during this period, with initiatives for internal improvements only fueling the controversy. The discussions centered, as noted above, on how the central government should act in relation to state and local authorities. The general concern — shared by Republicans opposing the Federalists — was that a strong government, as Washington and the Federalists advocated, provided far greater opportunities to engage in corrupt activities and misuse of funds.

An illustrative example involved the Potomac River, one of the most important arteries of navigation and commerce, which required improvement works to increase its efficiency. Washington proposed such a plan, but it was later attacked by Republicans because the improvements would also benefit, tangentially, Washington's own estate at Mount Vernon. Over time, this type of controversy weakened the grip the Federalists held on political power and on the public image of their leaders.

The era of George Washington was one of great political struggle, particularly because the country was in its infancy. The important debates taking place between the Federalists and the Republicans had, at that time, become focused on the infrastructure projects proposed by the Federalists. However, such projects demanded substantial fund allocations that would not have been possible without increased taxation and a greater influence of the central government over the colonies. According to Larson, this was the starting point of the Federalists' struggle. The Republicans, in opposition, managed to construct a powerful anti-federalist argument that provided the basis for their electoral victories at the turn of the nineteenth century.

Bibliography

Larson, John Lauritz. Internal Improvement: National Public Works and the Promise of Popular Government in the Early United States. Chapel Hill and London: University of North Carolina Press, 2001.