The Political Revolution: America

Made by “new men,” new money created new forms of power for the newly educated and newly educated professionals and businessmen who began to chafe under the old-fashioned notion of “the divine right of kings.” Looking back, it is clear that the aristocratic class—an anachronistic class that produced nothing—was doomed to extinction.  In some nations, the dinosaur elite faded gently into the good night, but, in other countries, a revolution was necessary to dislodge the ancien régime. The social revolution would inevitably be followed by a political revolution.  It is worth noting, however, that these so-called “revolutions” did not include women, people of color, or the poor.  Only white men with a certain amount of property and income were eligible for the enormous cultural changes that marked the beginning of the Nineteenth Century.  The first of these political revolutions was in America and had a limited effect, at first, perhaps because America was such a great distance from Europe.  The French Revolution, which was inspired by the War of Independence in America, was far more impactful upon European politics and society.

Even before the revolution in industrialized production, several important political revolutions cemented the middle class into power.  In 1776, the American Declaration of Independence from England had resulted in a successful Revolutionary War in which the American Colonies freed themselves of the hereditary monarchy of Great Britain.  The American politicians, from George Washington to Thomas Jefferson to Alexander Hamilton, were well born, well educated, and well bred, but they were not European aristocrats.  As “colonists,” they, like all Americans, were subjects of a King and, as such, could never be the nobility.  Colonists could be only two classes, middle or lower, regardless of social prominence or income.  Like the philosophers of England and France, American leaders were socially ambitious middle class men who were sensitive to the winds of change.  Influenced by the British Philosopher, John Locke, and the French philosophers, (François-Marie Arouet) Voltaire and Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Americans began to question their subservient roles and to challenge the British right to rule them. Britain was the strongest maritime power in the world, well on its way to becoming a huge colonial empire, but England was far away, and the Americans had become accustomed to taking care of themselves and ran their affairs.  The resulting revolution was predictable and inevitable.

In comparison to the horrors of the French Revolution, the American Revolution was a civilized affair.  Based upon philosophical ideals that, by the end of the Eighteenth Century, were widely accepted, the Americans fought for their “natural right” to freely determine their own social contract.  The role of the state was to ensure the happiness of the inhabitants, and, according to Rousseau, had a rather limited role as protector.  The concept of “natural rights,” put forward since the Seventeenth Century, clashed with the imperial and mercantile desires of the British Empire.  The clash between natural rights and economic imperatives was a bellwether of things to come.  Writing in 1776, while Thomas Jefferson was penning the Declaration of Independence, Adam Smith wrote An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations and saw capitalism as a juggernaut that cared much for economic imperatives and little for “natural law.”  The British, naturally, felt that the American colonies must play their proscribed role in the mechanism of imperialism.  The Americans had other ideas: freedom, independence and the pursuit of happiness.  The conflict was between competing philosophies—Rousseau against Smith.  Inspired less by the noble ideas put forward by the beleaguered colonists and more by the opportunity to avenge their failure in the Seven Year’s War, the French lept to the defense of their American ally.  Baffled by the unreasonable demands of their subjects, the British found themselves in a new kind of war, an unequal war, that any occupying power must confront: insurgency and guerilla (“little war”), complicated by long supply lines.  That said, the Revolutionary War itself was fought according to the traditional rules of warfare and the British were outflanked and outsmarted by the combination of a stubborn native army and its determined French partner.  The defeated British withdrew to establish their Empire elsewhere but invaded once more in 1812, attacking America, now an ally of Napoléon, but the young nation held firm, even when the White House burned.

To the astonishment of Europeans, many of whom shuddered at the though of “democracy,” the upstart American colonies had not only won their freedom but had also written a very serviceable Constitution by 1789.  To the amazement of Europeans who dreamed of equality but seemed unable to achieve it, the “American Experiment” worked. Because the American Revolution was so unique, it was difficult to appreciate how remarkable the victory of the Thirteen Colonies was.  The Thirteen Colonies were fortunate in their leaders and their philosophy.  The men who composed the Declaration of Independence (re-writing Thomas Jefferson’s original draft) and the Constitution wanted to create an entirely new Social Contract, based upon principles of equality, democracy, and a balance of powers.  In contrast to the democratic system devised by the Americans, most revolutions are fought to replace one power source with another, for a revolution is essentially a “revolving” of power, not a change in the way power is distributed.  Americans accepted self-governance with equanimity.   Although about one third of the population did not care who ruled America and one third were loyal to the English, there was no civil war and no social disorder, only a need to establish a firm legal foundation for the new nation.

Using the rational thinking of the Enlightenment, people like John Adams and Benjamin Franklin guided the nation to the concept of a government by consensus and based that agreement upon enduring documents, from the Declaration of Independence to the Constitution to the Bill of Rights. Only when the American Revolution is contrasted to other upheavals in power can one appreciate the value of a George Washington, who refused to be King and agreed to be President reluctantly and only temporarily.  Power was to be handed off after an election of a successor.   Rarely in history does a group of good people come together with good intentions and create a good thing.  A far-flung colony somehow managed to produce a large number of astute political thinkers guided by Enlightenment philosophy, Christian religion, and something the expatriate Englishman and revolutionary upstart, Thomas Paine, called “Common Sense.”  The American democracy was far from perfect and was, indeed, incomplete.  The rights of democracy—government by the people and for the people—were extended only to white men with property.  The contradictions of Eighteenth Century America are obvious today, but the conflict between demanding democracy for the few while limiting democracy for the many were not unknown to the Founders.  The rights of women and slaves were debated in Europe and America, and yet, despite the existence of the discourse on human rights, the writers of the Constitution decided, deliberately, to leave women out and to postpone the problem of slavery for the next generation to solve.  The result was a delayed democracy for women and people of color.  But even this limited democracy was a source of wonder for all outsiders who observed the United States with amazement.  A social revolution had become a political revolution.

If you have found this material useful, please give credit to
Dr. Jeanne S. M. Willette and Art History Unstuffed.  Thank you.
info@arthistoryunstuffed.com