The American Vision
Alexander Hamilton and Thomas Jefferson had a strategic vision of an America that was powerful in both the military and economy. While Hamilton’s vision based on the strength of the government, military, and industrialization, Jefferson’s vision maintained the perception of the resilience of agricultural economics, a small central government, and stable state governments.
Although American economic and political strength is defined from the ideology of the two visions, Hamilton’s strategic vision faded after the civil war.
During the end of reconstruction in 1877, Hamilton’s vision was closer to the reality as compared to that of Thomas Jefferson. Alexander Hamilton’s vision-based arguments on a strengthened economy from a stable federal republic. President Bush’s secretary of treasury instituted an economic plan that facilitated a United America under a tight union. The financial system of Hamilton focused on high tariffs, high spending on infrastructure, assumption of the states’ debts as well as a central bank (Bailey). By the end of the reconstruction in 1877, the Federal government had strengthened in terms of the size and scope. As a result, the federal government embarked on the reabsorption of the united states into a strong union. The initiatives of the government to win the civil war were adequate with substantial military power. In particular, a proper income tax system and reliable power were necessary.
However, the Hamilton vision wore out after the end of the civil war. According to Thomas Jefferson, the growth of America could be possible if the country continued to embrace its agrarian tradition. While Hamilton believes that giving absolute power to the federal government could constitute to a successive course, Jefferson’s vision emphasized people like the governors. Jefferson claimed that the Central bank had too much English influence, and thus giving Congress the powers to establish and control the central government was necessary. The south embraced Jefferson’s agrarian ideals by concentrating on agriculture rather than industrialization. The Virginia lawyer was responsible for the disentanglement of the government and the formation of a republican. More so, he proposed the election of the officeholders in either state of the national government. The proponents of Jefferson believed that the agrarian tradition was the most impeccable strategy to enable citizens to have morals and be independent (Kral 131).
Both Hamilton and Jefferson were close to the government’s capital due to their difference but impressive ideologies. Jefferson incorporated religion on his thinking when he argued that “Corruption of morals in the mass of cultivators is a phenomenon in which no age nor nation has furnished an example” (Krall 131). In this case, Jefferson used the notes to highlight the enemies of the country’s growth and development. Contrary, Hamilton feared the masses and stated that “liable to be duped by flattery, and to be seduced by artful and designing men.”(Zimmer 287). The south opted for Jefferson’s ideology due to his take on strengthening the power of the masses in establishing the most robust democracy in the world.
Alexander Hamilton and Thomas Jefferson are great fathers of the United States more robust democracy. Although the arguments from the two theorists have evoked a growing opposition, the formation of a federal republic and the growth of the American economy are based on their strategic visions. After the United States started a process of reconstruction from the aftermath of the civil war, Hamilton’s ideals facilitated the economic and military strength. However, Jefferson’s ideal was necessary for the growth of American democracy.