The American Revolution of 1800
Knopf, 1974 - 468 páginas
In this brilliant historical classic, Dan Sisson argues that Thomas Jefferson thought democratic revolutions would be necessary from time to time to break the grip of autocratic factions on the government. That is how Jefferson saw the election of 1800—and the lessons for today couldn’t be more obvious. Most historians celebrate Jefferson’s victory over Adams in 1800 as the beginning of the two-party system, but Jefferson would have been horrified by this interpretation. Drawing on the understanding of faction, revolution, and conspiracy reflected in the writings of the Founders, Sisson makes it clear that they, like Jefferson, envisioned essentially a nonparty state. Jefferson believed his election was a peaceful revolution by the American people overturning an elitist faction that was stamping out cherished constitutional rights and trying to transform our young democracy into an authoritarian state. It was a transfer of power back to the people, not a change of parties. Sisson maintains Jefferson would regard our current two-party system as a repudiation of his theory of revolution and his earnest desire that the people as a whole, not any faction or clique, would triumph in government. The ideals of the American Revolution were in danger until this “Revolution of 1800,” to which we owe the preservation of many of our key rights.
Resultados 1-3 de 51
We ought to note , too , that Jefferson assumes a “ probable ” connection of the revolutionary ideology of his time— “ republicanism " -to the successful outcome of revolution . This would imply that Jefferson , like revolutionaries in ...
... by audacious falsehoods to destroy the confidence of the people in all those who are in any degree conspicuous among the supporters of the government - an engine which has been employed in time past with too much success , and which ...
While Hamilton recognized the growing success of Jefferson's constitutional approach to revolution , his demand for counterrevolution implied that he and his cohort , in pressing the Sedition Act , had gone too far .
Comentarios de la gente - Escribir un comentario
LibraryThing ReviewCrítica de los usuarios - wagner.sarah35 - LibraryThing
A very academic history, in which the author spends a great deal of time defining what "revolution" and "faction" meant to the typical 18th-century person. Once the reader is thoroughly convinced of ... Leer comentario completo
A Note on the Historians
The Idea of a NonParty State
The Idea of Revolution
Derechos de autor
Otras 5 secciones no mostradas