Alexander Hamilton Essay

Janice Le
Per. 2
Alexander Hamilton v. Thomas Jefferson Being members of Washington’s cabinet, it is a wonder why our views differ so greatly; so greatly as to develop into opposing political ideologies. I believe that a strong central government will surely benefit these United States, leading to an effective government. In acknowledging and understanding factors such as national debt, bringing this country to the top will not be an impossible feat. Putting power into a central government is similar to a building a sturdy base to a house of cards. If the foundation is weak, the house will eventually fall.
With the strong central government acting in the interests of commerce and industry, this nation shall not crumble. Jefferson, on the other hand, wishes to have a decentralized agrarian republic. He does not want a strong central government, though he recognizes the value of it in terms of situations such as foreign relations. My goal is to create an efficient organization for this country, while Jefferson once said "I am not a friend to a very energetic government."1 Jefferson argues, “Men... are naturally divided into two parties. Those who fear and distrust the people... Those who identify themselves with the people, have confidence in them, cherish and consider them as the most honest and safe... depository of the public interest.”2 On a contrary note, it is not a matter of “distrust” of the people; rather it is fear of the chaos that a decentralized government may very likely bring, thus further igniting my passion for order. Jefferson whimpers at the thought of absolute power, which justifies his thirst for freedom. Order and organization do not undoubtedly produce an outcome of tyranny. If anything, they will be primary factors in allowing us to prosper as a nation.
The House of Representatives’ proposal for an "adequate support of public credit,"3 resulted in my taking action towards an effective government. This included a foundation that helped the public economy. To begin with, I am a founder of the Bank of the United States— modeled after the Bank of England which will be touch on soon— that offered the right to establish branches in different parts of the country. I promoted a national mint, and fought in favor of tariffs. An "infant industry" argument states that temporary protection of new firms can help foster the development of competitive national industries1. These measures— putting the credit of the federal government on a sturdy foundation and giving it all that it required— encouraged commerce and industry. Also, it created a solid phalanx of businessmen who stand firmly behind the national government. This motivation to lower the cost of funding the national debt deals with my desire to make it more practical for the United States to take care of the debts that have been acquired throughout the time of the war, also known as the Revolution.
In order to win the Revolution, the Continental Congress was forced to borrow from the French government and Dutch bankers. And borrow they did— heavily. To follow this theme of financial trouble, in 1786,

Show More