The American Experiment: An Act of Prudence
The founding fathers were not a group of like minded individuals, all united by a shared vision of liberal democracy in America. They were individual men with unique perspectives on religion, politics, and government. Differences that often clashed with one another, not the least of which was the debate of the extent to which individual states held sovereignty over their own segments of the country. An understanding of the differing opinions of the founders teaches us that there is no predetermined “American” amount of power either inherently moral or immoral for the federal government to hold, the founders didn’t waste time on precarious philosophy revolving around “right reason” or partisan politics consistent with their own ideological doctrine, instead they were bound to the pursuit of forming a long lasting system of government free of tyranny and capable of ensuring the Liberties of the people. They were devoted to prudence and pragmatism, not ideology and dogmatism. And after much political debate, they found the best system of government for the American people was one built on shared power between the state and federal governments. Neither powerful enough to overtake the other, and in the same manner the separate branches of government serve different purposes and check the powers of the others, the state, local, and federal government serve different roles in defending the American republic and ensuring the prevention of tyranny.
John Adams, the wisest of our founding fathers, understood America was not created as an experiment of ideas, but as a real country devoted to a higher good. He understood prudence, not ideology, should guide American politics, he is quoted as saying: “[Government] … should be … for the preservation of internal peace, virtue, and good order, as well as the defense of their lives, liberties, and properties.”
Adams did not argue from natural origins, but from practical politics. He believed government was meant to Conserve that which is good in the most efficacious way possible. Not to be the creators of good, or to stand beholden to any predetermined ideology indifferent to the practical needs of society. Similarly, in Federalist paper no. 10 James Madison says in regards to limiting the detriments of impulsive partisanship: “To secure the public good and private rights against the danger of such a faction, and at the same time to preserve the spirit and the form of popular government, is then the great object to which our inquiries are directed.” Notice a striking similarity between Madison and Adams arguments. Not necessarily the substantive prescriptions, but the type of arguments they make. Neither makes claims founded on abstract grounds of political theory, but on the solid framework of prudence. They argue their positions because of the fruits of their substance, not the glimmer of its philosophy. Understanding this is critical to understanding the mindset that created the American system of government and our constitution.
Such pillars of American thought has, to the dismay of the sophisticated philosophy of Thomas Paine, lead to the American system of government being remarkably complex. There is a neatly woven share of power between three branches of governments, 2 chambers of congress, 50 state governments, 13 appellate courts, and thousands of local governments. America’s system of government is not simple, is not universal, and is not even logical. But it is practical. The entire constitution was designed to check the power of each branch, granting the legislature the power to impeach, the executive the power to veto, and the judiciary the power to declare acts unconstitutional. The founders did not wish for direct democracy, or anything close to it, to rule America. They feared tyranny of all kinds, and as James Madison warned “In all very numerous assemblies, of whatever characters composed, passion never fails to wrest the sceptre from reason.” And even more explicitly, “Had every Athenian citizen been a Socrates, every Athenian assembly would still have been a mob.” Clearly, the founders believed tyranny was more than the illegitimate seizure of power, but that tyranny could come even through popular government through the people. Which meant, even the power of the masses had to be checked in order for Liberty to be preserved, leading to the creation of an ambitious and complicated government bound to a binding constitution.
That ambitiously complex government was founded on federalist principles, federalist principles born out of prudent politics and a proper understanding of human nature and its relation to government. Our founders understood that an overreaching federal government would be incapable of understanding the unique circumstances and needs of individual states, while also understanding that a federal government too weak wouldn’t be effective in uniting the country under one common identity. George Mason put it this way “ Is it to be supposed that one National Government will suit so extensive a country, embracing so many climates, and containing inhabitants so very different in manners, habits, and customs? It is ascertained by history, that there never was a Government, over a very extensive country, without destroying the liberties of the people: History also, supported by the opinions of the best writers, shew us, that monarchy may suit a large territory, and despotic Governments ever so extensive t a country; but that popular Governments can only exist in small territories — Is there a single example, on the face of the earth, to support a contrary opinion?” and Alexander Hamilton as so: “Though the ancient feudal systems were not, strictly speaking, confederacies, yet they partook of the nature of that species of association. There was a common head, chieftain, or sovereign, whose authority extended over the whole nation; and a number of subordinate vassals, or feudatories, who had large portions of land allotted to them, and numerous trains of INFERIOR vassals or retainers, who occupied and cultivated that land upon the tenure of fealty or obedience, to the persons of whom they held it. Each principal vassal was a kind of sovereign, within his particular demesnes. The consequences of this situation were a continual opposition to authority of the sovereign, and frequent wars between the great barons or chief feudatories themselves. The power of the head of the nation was commonly too weak, either to preserve the public peace, or to protect the people against the oppressions of their immediate lords.” These views, though seemingly contradictory, are not incapable of coexisting, as John Jay put it “ America was not composed of detached and distant territories, but that one connected…country…” A federal government is, by definition, more detached from the common people and the liberties thereof, but a federal government is also necessary to create unity amongst the states and serve as the head of the Nation. There is no room for question, America is a unified country. Not a confederation of states. But, America is a country of states. Grounded in the belief that states are more qualified to govern the particularities of their own circumstances than the federal government, while also understanding the federal government is more capable of handling international affairs and instilling a sense of unity and pride amongst the people. The state and federal government are not meant to constantly war with each other for power, but to work together, serving in different roles, in achieving the common good, and, creating a more perfect union.
The American government, founded on federalism born of prudence and wisdom, through an understanding of human nature was built to be a long lasting preserver of freedom. America was designed so that even if one branch became tyrannical she could still ensure the Liberties of the people. But it is that pursuit of Liberty, through tradition, deliberation, and prudence, that America is what it is today. America is not a blackboard, erased and rebuilt by each generation, but a delicately manicured garden, passed down through posterity, and though it may change and adapt to its circumstances, it is the same garden, of the same history, of the same plant, and of the same ideals.
