6 ms·
The Immigration-Obsessed, Polarized, Garbage-Fire Election of 1800
- M_Grey 10y ago...Of course a revolutionary war had just been won, and civil war would later be fought, so maybe this isn't terribly comforting.
- brudgers 10y agoThe time of the incident was a generation on from the American revolution and the war that was brewing over the issues of citizenship and British naval practice was the War of 1812. The US Civil War was predicated on internal 'international relations' between states and the citizenship of native born persons and the conundrum of the 3/5ths clause in the US constitution and the political power it provided agricultural interests.
- M_Grey 10y agoI'm not claiming a causal relationship, I'm pointing out just how fresh and unstable the country was, by bracketing the period in question.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- sologoub 10y agoI find this subtitle, trying to draw the parallel with the current election, quite distasteful: "A madman versus a crook? Unexpected twists? Fake news? Welcome to the election of 1800." These were the very people that fought for our freedoms and independence. Neither party in the current election has even an iota of such an accomplishment. Even the purported civil nature of private communications between the two is at a level of cordiality not seen these days.
- maxpupmax 10y agoIt sounds like you're making the mistake of looking at the 1800 election through our modern lens. At the time, there was no promise that the U.S. would succeed to the degree it has today. The "founding fathers" were not deified quite to the degree we hold them in our culture (assuming you're in the US). As such, the subtitle isn't a literally calling Jefferson and Adams a madman and a crook. If that was the case, then yes I agree it would be distasteful and a difficult argument. Of course there are major differences. It's pointing out that someone at the turn of that century might have experienced something similar to what we saw this past year and that maybe we could learn something from knowing that.
- mcguire 10y agoBy historical standards, the recent election was relatively tame.
- sologoub 10y agoTheir contemporaries were certainly able to call them such and worse. However, I do not see that we can compare these figures to Clinton and Trump. Neither has the accomplishments or the potential for accomplishments that could compare.
- maxpupmax 10y agoYeah, it sounds like we're talking past eachother a bit then. I agree that you can't compare the four figures. That is not what the author is attempting to do, however. The argument isn't that IF there are similarities between political rhetoric now and in 1800 THEN you may make a comparison between historical figures. It's that IF there are similarities between political rhetoric now and in 1800 THEN similar political problems may have existed in the year 1800 that we are facing today. The author is highlighting his premise, not making a character comparison.
- sologoub 10y agoNot sure how that precludes me from finding the comparison to be offensive. In the end, that is a personal view and an emotional reaction at that.
- FailMore 10y agoSorry to be a lazy HN member but that article is HUGE! Does anyone have a TLDR / are there any insights of note that are worth discussing / learning? No problem if no one can be bothered to answer!
- bobwaycott 10y agoWell, it is longreads.com.
- ckarmann 10y agoWhat is interesting is that a bit more than a decade later, the US entered the "Era of Good Feelings" where bitter partisanship went down and people worked mostly together for the common good, at least on surface. Let's just hope it happens again.
- hprotagonist 10y agoand then we killed a whole pile of cherokee. good times.