If we are to go to the fanciful idealism of Jefferson, why not go all the way? No money. Simply work done for its own joy, and to each according to his need and from each according to his ability. Surely, that is the most humane and best system - certainly, it is a biblical one - and no more dependent on the supposed goodness of the individuals involved? Hmm? In fact, with no money economy, it is a good deal less likely to be subverted by greed.
@Prowsky Vice Presidents of back then had nowhere near the influence of modern VPs. They were mainly figureheads. It was only until the Carter administration that VPs gained a respectable amount of influence and input.
@jerzy862 OK, but again: why? Washington was the first President, Adams the first Vice President, meaning their was no "constitutional tradition" they could relie on. Meaning: Washington could have handled the issue diffrent and give the Vice President at least a presence in the cabinet. But he didn't. So my question is still: why didn't he?
@Prowsky two reasons. One, the VP is also the president of the Senate - which places Mr. Adams as a member of the legislative branch and not the executive. Thus Wash. considered it a separation of powers issue. And two, During the Rev. War, Adams and the Lees' of Virginia had formed a cabal to try and remove Wash as commander and chief of the army - Adams was always envious of Wash.'s popularity. Wash never forgot this intrigue, and was certainly not exactly a fan of Adams
Founding Fathers stated before the Constitution was signed that the colonies would not be joined under a Fiat Money System. Unfortunately, this was not stipulated in our Constitution in so many words. Yet, this system of Fiat money was still unconstitutional. Great Movie (Adams-HBO). Brings out much of US History that few really understand or know.
A. Hamilton deserves his own section in 'Plutarch's Lives'. In fact, a strong case can be made that he is the greatest Secular man in the annals of Western world history! His philosophical visions and brilliant pragmatic policies to spring those same visions to fruition serve to justify his life-long noble pursuit of Fame. The greatest of our Founders and the brightest blessing to the Western World - Alexander Hamilton. If anyone deserves a monument in D.C. surely it should be A.H.
We're in a financial crisis because our government's been following Hamilton's ideas. Jefferson's ideas will lead us to prosperity. Jeffersonian forever.
@WintersAscension Jefferson believed in a purely agrigarian economy where slaves were the main work force. If such a system were in place today in the US (not including the slaves) you would have a country with a destitue economy. Not only that but because of the amount of labour that is used in agriculture people will start to resent that life and strive for something more lucrative, which was the commerce system Hamilton favoured. The agrigarian method was fine for the wealthy middle class.
@WintersAscension (cont) such as Jefferson because it was the slaves and the lower class who performed the manual labour which the middle class lived off of their toil.
@Salvysahagun History. Hamilton loved the idea of a central bank and lo and behold we have just that! Printing money backed by nothing and creating artificial interest rates clearly does not work! The economy is in the crapper because the elites have been following Hamilton and not Jefferson and Madison!
@WintersAscension Yes, because an economy based on agriculture will ensure prosperity for a nation with a population of 300,000,000 people. Jeffersonian, always the idealist and never the realist. From following Hamilton's ideas the USA has achieved much both through money and technology, the increase in wealth increases technology and it advancement which increases the quality of life for the people.
@WintersAscension we're in a financial crisis because the gummint gets a hair up its ass about "overregulation" and demands that we forego redundancy in the name of freedom as thought up by some thinktanks that recieve shitloads of money from scuzzfuck business moguls
This country needs a Hamilton today. We have pathetic men running for office and people who think free markets and free trade built America - that could be further from the truth. Hamilton's system of economics, true capitalism, was to build America up and eventually with Lincoln and the original GOP we did. Unfortunately the modern GOP is not Lincoln's GOP. The modern Dem's are more like Hamilton and Lincoln just lack backbone and are socially wrong on Abortion and illegals.
@northmeister Well your sadly mistaken on who Hamilton was it seems, he was totally for the Federal Reserve system you have in place right now, which is your problem, and the western worlds problem, because every western country has a federal reserve central privately owned bank. Seems to me, he was more of a UK Tory. Nothing like a Social Liberal i.e. Democrat.
In fairness, the state debts were crushing the economy, regular people, and had not action been taken there probably would be no United States today. I understand the other side's concerns, and I don't like Hamilton's views on democracy, but his solutions did work to an extent. Jefferson I hold in higher regard, but what was his solution? The only way the South could expand the economy was through slavery and warfare with Amerinds. That's clearly not a view of liberty I subscribe to.
Hamilton built the modern American economy, then we moved away from it, and you see the result. Jefferson wanted an agrarian economy, Hamilton wanted a strong, industrialized, and modernized economy. Not to mention the hidden points of Jeffersons ideas: he did not want women to vote, did not want poor men to vote, he was a defender of Aristocracy and believed democracy was a rich man's game. While Jefferson's civil liberty stripe is honorable, his economic and democratic ideals, not so much...
@TheFederalistVoice WTH are you talking about how can you actually think we have moved AWAY from Hamiltons fascist and elitist views on govt. where he and his bankster freinds tried to rob hard working americans just like we do now and every nation has throughout history.
@taxidrivernwo The First National Bank did not print money like the FED, nor did it artificially inflate currency. The First National Bank spent money on infrastructure and never denied loans to businessmen. It spent money and invested money all on American businesses and industries, and persons. Stop listening to the Radicals and learn some true history over Hamilton's bank, which was a source of lending and investment, vs. the FED and the corporations on Wall Street. Big Difference!
@DH1986 I dont think the federal goverment should have the power to FORCE every individual to use just this one currency they control(and can print on demand) - it is infact establishing a monopoly.
We should have a market like in any other good so customers can choose the best currency(stable) and over time that would be the prevailing currency and that would happen naturaly through peaceful cooperation. Without the goverment bullies.
@Jigssaw1989 I'm opposed to the way the government just randomly prints money. I just think it would be easier if they printed the money based on gold at hand ( or whatever standard they have) then the bartering system. A company or whatever could do it i'm sure, the need for government is very limited at best.
@DH1986 If such a thing were to happen then countries in Africa would have a strong currency and a firm grip on the developed world. And considering that most of Africa's goverments are tyrannical dictatorships or corrupt Republics I am not too comfortable with them having that kind of power. Similar situations with the Saudi's and their oil, it makes them powerful however, the monarchist goverment and radical islamic laws makes them even more dangerous especially with the power of oil.
@TheSirPrise I see what you're saying, but all governments are capable of tyranny. I wish there was a solution to the problem, but I don't know what to do. Governments are after power, corporations are after power, my old fourth grade teacher was after power, that's just how it is I guess.
Brussels policy makers are reading up on their Hamiltonian history as we speak, I am supposed to celebrate this as a portentous act of sanity in the current tumultuous 'solvency' crisis engulfing my continent. This provides me with surprisingly little comfort.
Or perhaps one might wonder of jeffy supporters how they view his role in the Giles Resolutions?: Or perhaps his little talks with Genet? Or perhaps his perpetual debt to bankers, - like most Virginia gentry, Or perhaps his war record as governor of Virginia, or perhaps his using State depart. funds to hire Freneau? or his actions towards the first official British ambassador? I could go on but even I grow weary of so many contradictions between a man's thought & his actions
has all the jeffersonians on this board reconciled themselves to the actual Jefferson versus the Idealistic quotable Jefferson?" If ever there was a walking contradiction I should think of no other man than the sage of monticello. For example, while he was Sec of State how does a Jeffy supporter appropriate or grasp his role; along with lil jemy, in trying to use Congress to force trade away from the British and onto France? Hmmm seems a bit un-libertarian of him now doesn't it?
One reservation I've always had with respect to Thomas Jefferon's character, concerns his support for the monsterous French revolution. If indeed the words he speaks in this clip are taken directly from the historical records, then I find it ironic how he rejoices in the fall of "ancient tyrannies," and at the same time supports one of the worst and bloodiest dictatorship that humanity has ever witnessed.
As vehement as their disagreements and quarrels were, I'd gladly accept it if by an impossible miracle we could have these men running our country nowadays.
@thunderbird4510My comment was directed at Hamilton's idea for a central bank, mercantilism and government control of industry. True, Jefferson wanted an agrarian society, but he advocated minimal forms of economic government coercion. He did think agrarian life tended to be more moral, love-filled and simple(most people who know farmers would tend to agree). Jefferson's model would have allowed capitalism which would include whatever the market demanded. That is what I am for too.
Debt encourages trade if you borrow a bit, and then pay it back, and borrow a bit, and pay it back. This causes other nations to see that they can trust you as a borrower, so they'll lend money to you for investmenst when you actually NEED it.
As your credibility builds up in matters of credit, it makes you look more trustworthy in other areas, too. In this case...trade.
What if we had a sound money and a balanced budget? Then we wouldnt need credit and we wouldnt have debt. imagine that!! Credit and debt is neo-slavery. instead of whips and guns it is called debt and interest.
What makes anyone so sure the dialogue of this cast of characters is on point, in regards to reflecting the ideas they truly represent?
Can a patriot, namely he who places the nation's general Welfare above all else, truly advocate a return to the states rights Articles of Confederation?
Federalists are Democrats. Antifederalists are Republicans. Hamilton wanted a Federal Reserve bank. The Federal Reserve has done nothing but cause depressions and recessions since it's inception.
@ToxicOdiousOne You're wrong, the Republican party was very Hamiltonian in its approach until after WW2 (protectionist, pro-business, pro-central bank). If you get rid of the protectionism, it still is. Just because Ron Paul is claiming that Goldwater is what Republicanism is all about doesn't make it true. Robert Taft was for protection and a central bank. Libertarians are re-writing history.
I am a huge Hamilton fan. I love the philosophy that the Federalist party espoused. I am so tired of the Jeffersonian Ron Paulites trying to take over the conservative movement. Most historians regard the Federalist as the first conservatives and the Republican party itself has been Hamiltonian for most of its history. The party was only isolationist in the 1920s and even then supported a central bank and tariffs. Republicans began as conservative nationalists and I want my party back!
Anti-Federalists gave us the Article of Confederation, Benjamin Franklin and Hamilton, Anti-Free Traders, gave us an enduring Constitution. How can two souls who loathed slavery, not fight on the side of the people?
Good call...Of course, I must go alongside with the Anti-Federalists. The Articles, I believe, would have prevented at least to some extenet, the corruption that we have now with a huge federal gov't and the Constitution. I don't believe the Constitution was what the colonists fought the revolution, but it seems that's how things are now, so be it. By some insane miracle the Articles are ever brough back, well I would say that would be something amazing in America!!!
Firstly, we would most likely have returned to a British Colony. Remember the war of 1812, who was President? Who took down Hamilton's NATIONAL bank (as opposed to the Unconstitutional Federal Reserve Central Banking System now already dead worldwide threatening a new dark age) down a year earlier effectively diminishing America's ability to fight the British attack on our soil.
Let's be real here today Rand Paul and Paul Ryan, represent faschism in America today,not Anti-federalism
A philosophy is a serious thing; that certainty becomes raised magnitudes more when we consider a government can be destroyed by their own ignorant doings, If that Philosophy is indeed an erroneous one! This is the context Rand Paul and Paul Ryan's Murderous Cuts take today.
If you ask yourself what a Government requires in order that it may ensure the future condition of society surpasses the current one, just because any and any philosophy is proposed, does not spell success
The states rights notion was understandable because we rejected the crown. Had we continued in such a vein we would have returned into the hands of the British Empire, opposite our intentions. Hamilton's actions ensured our Repuplic stood out of the ashes of the Articles of Confederation. That "Credit" system as opposed to the British "Monetary" System was "how" Hamilton did it, that is with a Credit generating. "National Bank", and not a Monetary policy driven "Central Bank".
This farce of a characterization of Hamilton falls flat on it's face when history is considered. Hamilton stated exactly the opposite of trade, i.e. manufactures, as well as the development of the minds to bring about new Discoveries, as the sole basis of societies advancement. These guys did not do their homework for this feature, it's clearly stated in the report on manufactures.
I'm with the anti-federalists. Banks have been pushing the importance of credit line for long. Big banks want big government. Thomas Paine was right, just as we don't need big government we don't need central bankers owning us and our country either.
Just to make things clear: Hamilton did NOT want anything like the Federal Reserve, which controls the money supply and interest rates. He wanted a Central Bank, that would ensure one measure of currency and use National Debt as a MEANS to trade. That...was...IT.
Over all, Adams and Madison are right, in my opinion: the whole idea of America is to BALANCE the central government with the localities of the states and so forth. There are problems, but usually only occuring when this balance is disrupted, not due to it.
Thusly, both Jefferson and Hamilton had good ideas...but took them a little too far and a little too to one side of the equation.
James Madison was the one who actually wrote, "if men were angels, no government would be necessary", and who was the moderate voice between Jefferson and Hamilton. It is sort of sad he was left out of this (otherwise brilliant) HBO special.
If we would have listened to Hamilton int he beginning we wouldn't be the empire of today. We would have been a small tadpole in a pond of big fish. Jeffertson's idea of agriculture and power to the people allowed a build up to the industrail revolution, you can't have one with out an adequate food supply to start it. Jefferson smaller government ideas are well ideal for long term wher Hamilton only cares for short turn.
Andrew Jackson saved us from the tyranny of a national bank for for nearly eighty years; ironically, all of the men who opposed the idea except the appalling Woodrow Wilson and the imperial Alexander Hamilton got their portraits on our worthless U.S. paper money!
I have never believed that we need people on our money. It invites hero worship. I am not convinced that the First Nationa Bank was that evil, since it was 70% owned by stockholers, and 30% by our Treaaury. But Wilson and his band of brigands have been bilking the American people in the name of Congress.
@NolanD Do you have trouble stating your ideas much? I have no idea why you would resort to an insult without even stating your point of view. How juvenile to just go around hurling insults without even giving a reason! Of all the anti-Hamilton comments left here, I see that mine is the only one that porvoked a response from you; I must be doing something right.
Politicians putting some citizens in dept for the benefit of others is immoral but then again, so is Statism, Fascism, Socialism, Communism and Corporatism!!
I'm not so sure about that. Having occured some debt myself, extends my leverage power. Having too much debt like we have today, would sink investments.
how is the labor and land of americans the property of european bankers? if the european bankers want to loan their labor and land to americans, that is their choice. however, the americans should work for themselves. the money should be the people's money because it is their land and labor. they should not have to borrow themselves for others.
it's all aout money. These men fought the Revolution so that they wouldnt have to pay taxes to Britian, who rightfully demanded them after succesfully defending the colonies from the French and Indian agressors in that war. Jefferson seems to be the exception who genuinely believed in freedom and the power of the independent colonies, now states, but even that is called into question with the Louisiana purchase and the increase of the governments role in that.
Hamilton was an economic ignoramus compared to Jefferson. We never needed a central bank then and we still dont today. A central bank is not characteristic of capitalism, freedom or liberty, but it is characteristic of tyranny, imperialism and centrally planned economies. I am thankful for Aaron Burr and his well aimed pistol.
@joshbrainard Where did you read that horseshit, an Ayn Rand novel? Jefferson wanted nothing more than a balanced budget and an agrarian nation [good look achieving global power with that :) ] Jefferson was a Utopian dreamer, with the views of a French revolutionary. His economic views were simplistic and ridiculous. Reasonable and deregulated capitalism is beautiful, but not your libertarian radicalism. Hamilton, Adams and Washington were the true conservatives.
@joshbrainard Yes, because Jefferson's economic program of an agrarian nation was so 'edgy' at the dawn of the industrial revolution. No, man, his idea for high, high tariffs was so much better than Hamilton's insistence on moderate tariffs. And yeah, the central government would be so effective if it hadn't assumed the debt of the states. The sad thing is that people thumbs upped your ridiculous post.
@joshbrainard hahha are you fucking kidding me Jefferson under his presidency put on us in an economic depression... lol Hamiltons economic plan saved us and established the roots for the US to become a global industrial economic power house.
One of my favorite parts of this mini-series. Kind of makes one wish that more was documented regarding the complaining and debating between Jefferson and Hamilton.
I think their is a book called "Hamilton and Jefferson" or "Jefferson and Hamilton", I have read so much about Jefferson that it is hard to keep track.
@Blucius13 You're calling all Democrats today who favor a strong central government tyrannical monarchists. Hamilton favored a strong central government because he saw it would best meet the needs of the people. His National Bank was a genius plan that allowed our country to expand in its early, fragile days. Both Hamilton and Jefferson were great men. Ironically, Jefferson acted like a complete Federalist during his presidency.
Why did Washington kick out john adams
Viper1Squad 2 weeks ago
@Viper1Squad The Vice President isn't officially a member of the Cabinet, and Washington said he had "Cabinet" matters to discuss
rsheldon86 2 weeks ago
If we are to go to the fanciful idealism of Jefferson, why not go all the way? No money. Simply work done for its own joy, and to each according to his need and from each according to his ability. Surely, that is the most humane and best system - certainly, it is a biblical one - and no more dependent on the supposed goodness of the individuals involved? Hmm? In fact, with no money economy, it is a good deal less likely to be subverted by greed.
caitsidhe 1 month ago
fuck hamilscum and the bankers
hardstyle905 1 month ago 2
What movie is this?
jerzy862 2 months ago
"Mr. President. And nothing more." What does this mean? What is the beaf between Washington and Adams?
Prowsky 2 months ago
@Prowsky Earlier in the series, John Adams wanted to refer to Washington as "His Majesty" or some such nonsense.
Pilaf1984 2 months ago
@Pilaf1984 OK, but why does it piss him off? Why doesn't he let the VP take part in the "cabinet matters"?
Prowsky 2 months ago
@Prowsky Vice Presidents of back then had nowhere near the influence of modern VPs. They were mainly figureheads. It was only until the Carter administration that VPs gained a respectable amount of influence and input.
jerzy862 2 months ago
@jerzy862 OK, but again: why? Washington was the first President, Adams the first Vice President, meaning their was no "constitutional tradition" they could relie on. Meaning: Washington could have handled the issue diffrent and give the Vice President at least a presence in the cabinet. But he didn't. So my question is still: why didn't he?
Prowsky 2 months ago
@Prowsky No idea man. Keep in mind also it could be a personality clash. As talented and brilliant as John Adams was, he was hard to get along with.
jerzy862 1 month ago
@Prowsky two reasons. One, the VP is also the president of the Senate - which places Mr. Adams as a member of the legislative branch and not the executive. Thus Wash. considered it a separation of powers issue. And two, During the Rev. War, Adams and the Lees' of Virginia had formed a cabal to try and remove Wash as commander and chief of the army - Adams was always envious of Wash.'s popularity. Wash never forgot this intrigue, and was certainly not exactly a fan of Adams
Kierkegaard73 1 month ago
Is this a movie if so what's the name of it
jonmi28 2 months ago
@jonmi28 This is the HBO mini series John Adams A MUST SEE!!!!
tonyocch1 2 months ago
Founding Fathers stated before the Constitution was signed that the colonies would not be joined under a Fiat Money System. Unfortunately, this was not stipulated in our Constitution in so many words. Yet, this system of Fiat money was still unconstitutional. Great Movie (Adams-HBO). Brings out much of US History that few really understand or know.
echobiz 2 months ago
wheres alexander hamilton when you need him? :(
GOCHICOAPRODUCTIONS 2 months ago
@GOCHICOAPRODUCTIONS You have plenty of Alexander Hamiltons in power, in fact they are the predominent overtone of your two party system.
Baldwynmayhem 2 months ago
Is it just me, or does Jefferson in this look more like Hamilton (in paintings and such) than Hamilton does?
McCathcon 3 months ago
A. Hamilton deserves his own section in 'Plutarch's Lives'. In fact, a strong case can be made that he is the greatest Secular man in the annals of Western world history! His philosophical visions and brilliant pragmatic policies to spring those same visions to fruition serve to justify his life-long noble pursuit of Fame. The greatest of our Founders and the brightest blessing to the Western World - Alexander Hamilton. If anyone deserves a monument in D.C. surely it should be A.H.
Kierkegaard73 3 months ago
@Kierkegaard73 The greatest monument to AH is the one we are living in. He needs no monument as we are apart of it everyday.
eastcoastartist 2 months ago
We're in a financial crisis because our government's been following Hamilton's ideas. Jefferson's ideas will lead us to prosperity. Jeffersonian forever.
WintersAscension 4 months ago 2
@WintersAscension Jefferson believed in a purely agrigarian economy where slaves were the main work force. If such a system were in place today in the US (not including the slaves) you would have a country with a destitue economy. Not only that but because of the amount of labour that is used in agriculture people will start to resent that life and strive for something more lucrative, which was the commerce system Hamilton favoured. The agrigarian method was fine for the wealthy middle class.
TheSirPrise 4 months ago
@TheSirPrise it worked in china. for some people at least
redpunk 3 weeks ago
@redpunk Yes, the social elite, that's who it worked for.
TheSirPrise 3 weeks ago
@TheSirPrise well obviously the local warlords were superior human beings to the peasants they held dominion over
of course derm fuggen commies had to come along and ruin it all....
redpunk 3 weeks ago
@redpunk I'm not sure if the first part of your comment was meant to be facetious or sarcastic.
TheSirPrise 3 weeks ago
@WintersAscension (cont) such as Jefferson because it was the slaves and the lower class who performed the manual labour which the middle class lived off of their toil.
TheSirPrise 4 months ago
@WintersAscension
Could you provide a source for that slander?
Salvysahagun 2 months ago
@Salvysahagun History. Hamilton loved the idea of a central bank and lo and behold we have just that! Printing money backed by nothing and creating artificial interest rates clearly does not work! The economy is in the crapper because the elites have been following Hamilton and not Jefferson and Madison!
WintersAscension 2 months ago
Comment removed
Salvysahagun 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@WintersAscension
what in gods name makes you think the 1st National Bank was a Central bank?
Following a Hamiltonian Policy?
Free trade? Hamilton was a protectionist.
Monetary system? Hamilton supported a Credit System.
Perhaps you should read some history
Salvysahagun 2 months ago
@WintersAscension we could always do like ron paul says and be poorer than eritrea by relying solely on our gold reserves
redpunk 3 weeks ago
@WintersAscension Yes, because an economy based on agriculture will ensure prosperity for a nation with a population of 300,000,000 people. Jeffersonian, always the idealist and never the realist. From following Hamilton's ideas the USA has achieved much both through money and technology, the increase in wealth increases technology and it advancement which increases the quality of life for the people.
TheSirPrise 1 month ago
@WintersAscension we're in a financial crisis because the gummint gets a hair up its ass about "overregulation" and demands that we forego redundancy in the name of freedom as thought up by some thinktanks that recieve shitloads of money from scuzzfuck business moguls
redpunk 3 weeks ago
This country needs a Hamilton today. We have pathetic men running for office and people who think free markets and free trade built America - that could be further from the truth. Hamilton's system of economics, true capitalism, was to build America up and eventually with Lincoln and the original GOP we did. Unfortunately the modern GOP is not Lincoln's GOP. The modern Dem's are more like Hamilton and Lincoln just lack backbone and are socially wrong on Abortion and illegals.
northmeister 4 months ago
@northmeister Well your sadly mistaken on who Hamilton was it seems, he was totally for the Federal Reserve system you have in place right now, which is your problem, and the western worlds problem, because every western country has a federal reserve central privately owned bank. Seems to me, he was more of a UK Tory. Nothing like a Social Liberal i.e. Democrat.
Baldwynmayhem 2 months ago
In fairness, the state debts were crushing the economy, regular people, and had not action been taken there probably would be no United States today. I understand the other side's concerns, and I don't like Hamilton's views on democracy, but his solutions did work to an extent. Jefferson I hold in higher regard, but what was his solution? The only way the South could expand the economy was through slavery and warfare with Amerinds. That's clearly not a view of liberty I subscribe to.
Atombombmother 4 months ago
you know Jefferson could have fucked up that fascist if he wanted to.
taxidrivernwo 4 months ago 2
@taxidrivernwo hes no fascist. they were BOTH brilliant men. this nation was built on compromise and can only have prosperity with it.
tecnokid 1 month ago
like Hamilton actually sat there and had this discussion. LOL
LouieDaProtectionist 4 months ago
Hamilton built the modern American economy, then we moved away from it, and you see the result. Jefferson wanted an agrarian economy, Hamilton wanted a strong, industrialized, and modernized economy. Not to mention the hidden points of Jeffersons ideas: he did not want women to vote, did not want poor men to vote, he was a defender of Aristocracy and believed democracy was a rich man's game. While Jefferson's civil liberty stripe is honorable, his economic and democratic ideals, not so much...
TheFederalistVoice 4 months ago
@TheFederalistVoice WTH are you talking about how can you actually think we have moved AWAY from Hamiltons fascist and elitist views on govt. where he and his bankster freinds tried to rob hard working americans just like we do now and every nation has throughout history.
taxidrivernwo 4 months ago
@taxidrivernwo The First National Bank did not print money like the FED, nor did it artificially inflate currency. The First National Bank spent money on infrastructure and never denied loans to businessmen. It spent money and invested money all on American businesses and industries, and persons. Stop listening to the Radicals and learn some true history over Hamilton's bank, which was a source of lending and investment, vs. the FED and the corporations on Wall Street. Big Difference!
TheFederalistVoice 4 months ago
I agree that we should have one currency, and you need a bank. I still hate the idea of borrowing money, to build wealth at the federal level.
DH1986 7 months ago
@DH1986 I dont think the federal goverment should have the power to FORCE every individual to use just this one currency they control(and can print on demand) - it is infact establishing a monopoly.
We should have a market like in any other good so customers can choose the best currency(stable) and over time that would be the prevailing currency and that would happen naturaly through peaceful cooperation. Without the goverment bullies.
Jigssaw1989 5 months ago
@Jigssaw1989 I'm opposed to the way the government just randomly prints money. I just think it would be easier if they printed the money based on gold at hand ( or whatever standard they have) then the bartering system. A company or whatever could do it i'm sure, the need for government is very limited at best.
DH1986 5 months ago
@DH1986 If such a thing were to happen then countries in Africa would have a strong currency and a firm grip on the developed world. And considering that most of Africa's goverments are tyrannical dictatorships or corrupt Republics I am not too comfortable with them having that kind of power. Similar situations with the Saudi's and their oil, it makes them powerful however, the monarchist goverment and radical islamic laws makes them even more dangerous especially with the power of oil.
TheSirPrise 4 months ago
@TheSirPrise I see what you're saying, but all governments are capable of tyranny. I wish there was a solution to the problem, but I don't know what to do. Governments are after power, corporations are after power, my old fourth grade teacher was after power, that's just how it is I guess.
DH1986 4 months ago
Brussels policy makers are reading up on their Hamiltonian history as we speak, I am supposed to celebrate this as a portentous act of sanity in the current tumultuous 'solvency' crisis engulfing my continent. This provides me with surprisingly little comfort.
justnotcricket 7 months ago
Does anyone know what the name of this movie is?
Mayhem84 8 months ago in playlist The US Revolution - 1776 Style
Or perhaps one might wonder of jeffy supporters how they view his role in the Giles Resolutions?: Or perhaps his little talks with Genet? Or perhaps his perpetual debt to bankers, - like most Virginia gentry, Or perhaps his war record as governor of Virginia, or perhaps his using State depart. funds to hire Freneau? or his actions towards the first official British ambassador? I could go on but even I grow weary of so many contradictions between a man's thought & his actions
Kierkegaard73 8 months ago
has all the jeffersonians on this board reconciled themselves to the actual Jefferson versus the Idealistic quotable Jefferson?" If ever there was a walking contradiction I should think of no other man than the sage of monticello. For example, while he was Sec of State how does a Jeffy supporter appropriate or grasp his role; along with lil jemy, in trying to use Congress to force trade away from the British and onto France? Hmmm seems a bit un-libertarian of him now doesn't it?
Kierkegaard73 8 months ago
Thomas Jefferson was a radical in his time, the guy is straight up Libertarian. He would piss if he was alive today at both republicans and democrats
Dumpstermuffin1 8 months ago
Hamilton was right, and Jefferson was wrong. It just goes to show that philosophers often make the poorest governors.
YNot1989 9 months ago 2
One reservation I've always had with respect to Thomas Jefferon's character, concerns his support for the monsterous French revolution. If indeed the words he speaks in this clip are taken directly from the historical records, then I find it ironic how he rejoices in the fall of "ancient tyrannies," and at the same time supports one of the worst and bloodiest dictatorship that humanity has ever witnessed.
regelemihai 9 months ago
As vehement as their disagreements and quarrels were, I'd gladly accept it if by an impossible miracle we could have these men running our country nowadays.
freakybuzz 10 months ago
My heart is for Jefferson but my brain is for Hamilton.
Thx1138d 10 months ago
@Thx1138d My heart is for Jefferson but my brain is for Mises.
BIackOp 10 months ago 6
Jefferson was right.... again.... I swear im gonna clone that man... Sci-fi style.. with memories intact somehow
ORACLE063 1 year ago
The U.S. Treasury has its nose in the Pardon Process as well.
wwe107 1 year ago
These two men truly hated each other.
WiseGuy5674 1 year ago
So the revolution was all about usury. Financial freedom is true freedom.
blackbolt75 1 year ago
Youtube for "zeitgeist addendum"
boumar19721972 1 year ago
What movie is this from? I would like to watch the whole thing. Where can I find it ? anyone know ?
ShortBusTrading 1 year ago
@thunderbird4510My comment was directed at Hamilton's idea for a central bank, mercantilism and government control of industry. True, Jefferson wanted an agrarian society, but he advocated minimal forms of economic government coercion. He did think agrarian life tended to be more moral, love-filled and simple(most people who know farmers would tend to agree). Jefferson's model would have allowed capitalism which would include whatever the market demanded. That is what I am for too.
joshbrainard 1 year ago 4
I like how dude plays Washington like the colossal douchebag he was.
MoneyIsSilver 1 year ago
Hamilton>Jefferson
Karzaveer 1 year ago
JEFFERSON GOT IT RIGHT....2:14 to 2:32
esoberanis1 1 year ago
@esoberanis1
i was gonna type the same comment. I agree.
Jononutoob 1 year ago
I hope this country never erects an Obama statue. I hope Americans would topple it as they did with the statue of King George III.
ToxicOdiousOne 1 year ago
Hamilton is wrong as Obamanomics is wrong. Incur debt so other nations will lend money? This makes no sense. Hamilton must be a liberal.
ToxicOdiousOne 1 year ago
@ToxicOdiousOne No, you must be retarded.
It's called a line of credit.
Doodoorump 1 year ago
@ToxicOdiousOne
Debt encourages trade if you borrow a bit, and then pay it back, and borrow a bit, and pay it back. This causes other nations to see that they can trust you as a borrower, so they'll lend money to you for investmenst when you actually NEED it.
As your credibility builds up in matters of credit, it makes you look more trustworthy in other areas, too. In this case...trade.
RushLimborg 1 year ago
@RushLimborg
What if we had a sound money and a balanced budget? Then we wouldnt need credit and we wouldnt have debt. imagine that!! Credit and debt is neo-slavery. instead of whips and guns it is called debt and interest.
Jononutoob 1 year ago
@ToxicOdiousOne Paul Krugman thinks we can print our way out of depression and debt to China. I wonder what Hamilton thought of sound currency?
yojimbo81 1 year ago
@ToxicOdiousOne
What makes anyone so sure the dialogue of this cast of characters is on point, in regards to reflecting the ideas they truly represent?
Can a patriot, namely he who places the nation's general Welfare above all else, truly advocate a return to the states rights Articles of Confederation?
Ascendyourthinking 9 months ago
Federalists are Democrats. Antifederalists are Republicans. Hamilton wanted a Federal Reserve bank. The Federal Reserve has done nothing but cause depressions and recessions since it's inception.
ToxicOdiousOne 1 year ago
@ToxicOdiousOne Antifederalists are not Republicans, unless you're talking about the RLC.
DimeLivesInUs 1 year ago
@ToxicOdiousOne You're wrong, the Republican party was very Hamiltonian in its approach until after WW2 (protectionist, pro-business, pro-central bank). If you get rid of the protectionism, it still is. Just because Ron Paul is claiming that Goldwater is what Republicanism is all about doesn't make it true. Robert Taft was for protection and a central bank. Libertarians are re-writing history.
TylerHinds 1 year ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
I am a huge Hamilton fan. I love the philosophy that the Federalist party espoused. I am so tired of the Jeffersonian Ron Paulites trying to take over the conservative movement. Most historians regard the Federalist as the first conservatives and the Republican party itself has been Hamiltonian for most of its history. The party was only isolationist in the 1920s and even then supported a central bank and tariffs. Republicans began as conservative nationalists and I want my party back!
TylerHinds 1 year ago
Anti-Federalists gave us the Article of Confederation, Benjamin Franklin and Hamilton, Anti-Free Traders, gave us an enduring Constitution. How can two souls who loathed slavery, not fight on the side of the people?
Ascendyourthinking 1 year ago 12
@Ascendyourthinking
Good call...Of course, I must go alongside with the Anti-Federalists. The Articles, I believe, would have prevented at least to some extenet, the corruption that we have now with a huge federal gov't and the Constitution. I don't believe the Constitution was what the colonists fought the revolution, but it seems that's how things are now, so be it. By some insane miracle the Articles are ever brough back, well I would say that would be something amazing in America!!!
sawzaw203 9 months ago
@sawzaw203
Firstly, we would most likely have returned to a British Colony. Remember the war of 1812, who was President? Who took down Hamilton's NATIONAL bank (as opposed to the Unconstitutional Federal Reserve Central Banking System now already dead worldwide threatening a new dark age) down a year earlier effectively diminishing America's ability to fight the British attack on our soil.
Let's be real here today Rand Paul and Paul Ryan, represent faschism in America today,not Anti-federalism
Ascendyourthinking 9 months ago
@sawzaw203
A philosophy is a serious thing; that certainty becomes raised magnitudes more when we consider a government can be destroyed by their own ignorant doings, If that Philosophy is indeed an erroneous one! This is the context Rand Paul and Paul Ryan's Murderous Cuts take today.
If you ask yourself what a Government requires in order that it may ensure the future condition of society surpasses the current one, just because any and any philosophy is proposed, does not spell success
Ascendyourthinking 9 months ago
The states rights notion was understandable because we rejected the crown. Had we continued in such a vein we would have returned into the hands of the British Empire, opposite our intentions. Hamilton's actions ensured our Repuplic stood out of the ashes of the Articles of Confederation. That "Credit" system as opposed to the British "Monetary" System was "how" Hamilton did it, that is with a Credit generating. "National Bank", and not a Monetary policy driven "Central Bank".
Ascendyourthinking 9 months ago
This farce of a characterization of Hamilton falls flat on it's face when history is considered. Hamilton stated exactly the opposite of trade, i.e. manufactures, as well as the development of the minds to bring about new Discoveries, as the sole basis of societies advancement. These guys did not do their homework for this feature, it's clearly stated in the report on manufactures.
Ascendyourthinking 1 year ago 3
I'm with the anti-federalists. Banks have been pushing the importance of credit line for long. Big banks want big government. Thomas Paine was right, just as we don't need big government we don't need central bankers owning us and our country either.
mrgerbeck 1 year ago
3:03 Washington looks uncomfortable. xD
LadyVella 1 year ago
Just to make things clear: Hamilton did NOT want anything like the Federal Reserve, which controls the money supply and interest rates. He wanted a Central Bank, that would ensure one measure of currency and use National Debt as a MEANS to trade. That...was...IT.
RushLimborg 1 year ago
@RushLimborg AMEN! FINALLY SOMEONE SAID IT!
TylerHinds 1 year ago
Funny how Jefferson and Hamilton share a glance at 3:13-3:14 after Adams gives his two cents.
T.J.: Do you have any idea what he was trying to say?
A.H.: Not a clue.
RushLimborg 1 year ago
Over all, Adams and Madison are right, in my opinion: the whole idea of America is to BALANCE the central government with the localities of the states and so forth. There are problems, but usually only occuring when this balance is disrupted, not due to it.
Thusly, both Jefferson and Hamilton had good ideas...but took them a little too far and a little too to one side of the equation.
SaturnineOranges 1 year ago
Comment removed
SaturnineOranges 1 year ago
James Madison was the one who actually wrote, "if men were angels, no government would be necessary", and who was the moderate voice between Jefferson and Hamilton. It is sort of sad he was left out of this (otherwise brilliant) HBO special.
SaturnineOranges 1 year ago
If we would have listened to Hamilton int he beginning we wouldn't be the empire of today. We would have been a small tadpole in a pond of big fish. Jeffertson's idea of agriculture and power to the people allowed a build up to the industrail revolution, you can't have one with out an adequate food supply to start it. Jefferson smaller government ideas are well ideal for long term wher Hamilton only cares for short turn.
batman93oo 1 year ago
jeepndesert's comment is excellent. Hamilton should be taken off of the $5 bill. But Hamilton is the god of the federal reserve. Unlikely chance.
SunshineRedH 2 years ago
Hamilton is no God of the Federal Reserve. He didn't create it, it was Morgan, Rockefeller, some crooked Politicians Loeh and Wilson.
dons123111 1 year ago
@SunshineRedH Hamilton is on the 10 DOLLAR BILL!
Hamilton is an american hero.
NolanD 1 year ago
@SunshineRedH I share this computer and my roommate didn't log out to make this comment. This is NOT my discussion.
SunshineRedH 1 year ago
Andrew Jackson saved us from the tyranny of a national bank for for nearly eighty years; ironically, all of the men who opposed the idea except the appalling Woodrow Wilson and the imperial Alexander Hamilton got their portraits on our worthless U.S. paper money!
billyguns2 2 years ago
I have never believed that we need people on our money. It invites hero worship. I am not convinced that the First Nationa Bank was that evil, since it was 70% owned by stockholers, and 30% by our Treaaury. But Wilson and his band of brigands have been bilking the American people in the name of Congress.
dons123111 1 year ago
@billyguns2 head up your ass much?
NolanD 1 year ago
@NolanD Do you have trouble stating your ideas much? I have no idea why you would resort to an insult without even stating your point of view. How juvenile to just go around hurling insults without even giving a reason! Of all the anti-Hamilton comments left here, I see that mine is the only one that porvoked a response from you; I must be doing something right.
billyguns2 1 year ago
Read: Hamiltons Curse!
Politicians putting some citizens in dept for the benefit of others is immoral but then again, so is Statism, Fascism, Socialism, Communism and Corporatism!!
Hamilton was a TRAITOR!
yakyakyak69 2 years ago
I'm not so sure about that. Having occured some debt myself, extends my leverage power. Having too much debt like we have today, would sink investments.
dons123111 1 year ago
how is the labor and land of americans the property of european bankers? if the european bankers want to loan their labor and land to americans, that is their choice. however, the americans should work for themselves. the money should be the people's money because it is their land and labor. they should not have to borrow themselves for others.
jeepndesert 2 years ago
Land and labor are not the only means of production, the grandaddy of them all is thought.
dons123111 1 year ago
Comment removed
jeepndesert 2 years ago
Jefferson > Hamilton
Claytrainor 2 years ago 2
Hamilton was a POS.
KaptainKaka 2 years ago
I really admire Thomas Jefferson, but there was something great about George Washington. He appeared to be such a good man, at least from this clip.
TylerHinds 2 years ago
Please let me know who played Alexander Hamilton in this video?
88hcnan54 2 years ago
Comment removed
TenTonHorse 2 years ago
it's all aout money. These men fought the Revolution so that they wouldnt have to pay taxes to Britian, who rightfully demanded them after succesfully defending the colonies from the French and Indian agressors in that war. Jefferson seems to be the exception who genuinely believed in freedom and the power of the independent colonies, now states, but even that is called into question with the Louisiana purchase and the increase of the governments role in that.
alexgomez83 2 years ago
Jefferson was a great philosopher but even he couldn't resist the temptation of power when it was granted to him.
"Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men." - John Acton
Claytrainor 2 years ago
Hamilton was an economic ignoramus compared to Jefferson. We never needed a central bank then and we still dont today. A central bank is not characteristic of capitalism, freedom or liberty, but it is characteristic of tyranny, imperialism and centrally planned economies. I am thankful for Aaron Burr and his well aimed pistol.
joshbrainard 2 years ago 2
@joshbrainard Where did you read that horseshit, an Ayn Rand novel? Jefferson wanted nothing more than a balanced budget and an agrarian nation [good look achieving global power with that :) ] Jefferson was a Utopian dreamer, with the views of a French revolutionary. His economic views were simplistic and ridiculous. Reasonable and deregulated capitalism is beautiful, but not your libertarian radicalism. Hamilton, Adams and Washington were the true conservatives.
TylerHinds 1 year ago
@joshbrainard Yes, because Jefferson's economic program of an agrarian nation was so 'edgy' at the dawn of the industrial revolution. No, man, his idea for high, high tariffs was so much better than Hamilton's insistence on moderate tariffs. And yeah, the central government would be so effective if it hadn't assumed the debt of the states. The sad thing is that people thumbs upped your ridiculous post.
Doodoorump 1 year ago
@joshbrainard hahha are you fucking kidding me Jefferson under his presidency put on us in an economic depression... lol Hamiltons economic plan saved us and established the roots for the US to become a global industrial economic power house.
Karzaveer 1 year ago
One of my favorite parts of this mini-series. Kind of makes one wish that more was documented regarding the complaining and debating between Jefferson and Hamilton.
HypetInflate 2 years ago 3
I think their is a book called "Hamilton and Jefferson" or "Jefferson and Hamilton", I have read so much about Jefferson that it is hard to keep track.
TylerHinds 2 years ago
Jefferson was right. Hamilton may have been correct to a point but he was a tyrannical monarchist.
Blucius13 2 years ago 8
truth!
scientistwriter 2 years ago
@Blucius13 You're calling all Democrats today who favor a strong central government tyrannical monarchists. Hamilton favored a strong central government because he saw it would best meet the needs of the people. His National Bank was a genius plan that allowed our country to expand in its early, fragile days. Both Hamilton and Jefferson were great men. Ironically, Jefferson acted like a complete Federalist during his presidency.
DrDrake93 1 year ago
@Blucius13 No he wasn't. That's such a nonsensical statement.
TheSirPrise 4 months ago