Thomas Jefferson wrote the Declaration of Independence to highlight his sentiments about the colonies remaining under the rule of the Great Britain. Jefferson was particularly against the King’s rule because he believed that the Great Britain was imposing oppressive laws on the colonies. Jefferson believed that the colonies had the capabilities of developing a government that would provide the people with rules that facilitated political, social, and economic liberation (“The Argument of the Declaration of Independence” par. 3). According to the arguments made by Jefferson, he was particularly against three major issues, as discussed in this paper.
Trade Issues
The first argument was that the Great Britain was taking advantage of the communities in the colonies because they could only export their produce to the Great Britain. The king had prohibited trade between the colonies and any other nation in the world; hence, the victimized communities could only sell their surplus products at relatively low prices to the Great Britain. Additionally, the King ensured that the colonies could only receive exports from the Great Britain (Jefferson and Fink 24).
It is also apparent that this arrangement provided the Great Britain with a chance to sell the products at a high profit to continue benefiting financially from the colonies. Jefferson expressed his concern that the King and his administration were exploiting the colonies indirectly (Slade 58).
Unlawful Taxes
The society in the colonies was angry at the Great Britain for being unfair in the imposition of taxes. Jefferson rebuked the fact that the majority of the taxes had been developed without the consent of the people. It is apparent that the society was willing to pay reasonable taxes, but the authorities in the Great Britain were notorious for introducing taxes whenever a commodity was in high demand.
This led to a rebellion on the part of the people in the colonies (Wills 167). For instance, the Boston Tea Party is one of the incidences that clearly highlighted the anger on the part of society. This incidence involved a group of men opposing the high taxes on tea. The men snuck into a ship ferrying tea, and they dumped tons of tea into the Boston Harbor to demonstrate their anger toward the King and his administration.
Unfair Treatment by the Troops
The King had claimed that the many soldiers deployed in the colonies were present to enhance security for the people, but they were the main instigators of crime. Jefferson highlighted the fact that the soldiers were treating the members of the society inhumanely, and they were involved in using violence to have their way in the community (Balko 44).
The protests against the soldiers led to the Third Amendment of the Bill of Rights, which stipulated that soldiers could not barge into homes in times of peace, and even during conflicts, they had to follow some rules to ensure the people were not victimized. However, the soldiers still broke this rule, and the King did nothing to mitigate the activity.
These arguments were valid, and they still apply in the contemporary world, whereby American society is still fighting against the violation of liberties like privacy. As the government fights to mitigate security issues in the nation, there have been many reports of harassment by civilians on the part of the law enforcers (Merill 124). As Jefferson’s argument revealed, when the society is not contented with the ruling strategies and policies of the administration, the people are bound to fight back to form a better government.
Works Cited
Balko, Radley. “How did America’s Police become a Military Force on the Streets.” ABAJ 99.1 (2013): 44. Print.
Jefferson, Thomas, and Sam Fink. The Declaration of Independence. New York: Scholastic Inc., 2002. Print.
Merrill, Thomas. “The Later Jefferson and the Problem of Natural Rights.” Perspectives on Political Science 44.2 (2015): 122-130. Print.
Slade, Joseph. “Thomas Jefferson.” American Literature and Science 1.1 (2015): 58. Print.
Among the outstanding American personalities, Thomas Jefferson has a prominent place. His political views were expressed in the Declaration of Independence of 1776 (Branch, 2018). Jefferson sought to build a new republic in America representing a classical democracy in which human rights would be fully respected, including the right to life, liberty, property, participation in the political life of society. Thomas Jefferson’s main challenge he faced was slavery which he tried to eliminate.
Thomas considered the slavery society’s order unethical and strived to highlight the importance of racial equality. In 1779, as a practical solution, Jefferson supported the gradual emancipation, training, and colonization of enslaved African-Americans (Kern, 2020). He believed that the emancipation of unprepared people who had nowhere to go and no means of subsistence would bring them only misfortune (Jefferson, 2018). In 1784, Jefferson proposed a federal law banning slavery in the New Territories of the North and South (Bickford & Hendrickson, 2020). Moreover, being the author of the Declaration, he proclaimed the independence of the United States, emphasizing the all people’s rights protection issue.
Jefferson’s ethical challenge was built on the theory of moral sentiments. According to this approach, “moral instinct” is an inherent right of all people (Gordon-Reed, 2018). This challenge was resolved personally for Jefferson because the slavery problem was addressed. Even though Jefferson managed to implement the base equality norms in the society’s order, racial discrimination exists even today. However, slavery itself has eliminated thanks to Jefferson’s ideology.
Therefore, Thomas Jefferson considered slavery one of the major sins of society. According to Jefferson’s ideology, ethical attitudes in the activities and behavior of people should become an essential factor in political relations between them. Jefferson personally succeeded in resolving the challenge of slavery. However, this problem still echoes in modern society in racial discrimination. Nevertheless, thanks to the ideology proposed by Jefferson and other outstanding personalities, the American community realized the importance of the protection of human rights and racial equality. Today America is one of the advanced countries in terms of acceptance and tolerance.
Branch, B. (2018). Could Thomas Jefferson have ended slavery: An economic analysis. Business Quest, 1, 1–25.
Gordon-Reed, A. (2018). America’s original sin: Slavery and the legacy of white supremacy. Foreign Affairs, 97, 2–12. Web.
Jefferson, T. (2018). The autobiography of Thomas Jefferson. Musaicum Books.
Kern, S. (2020). Restoration and slavery: Two new exhibits. Buildings & Landscapes: Journal of the Vernacular Architecture Forum University of Minnesota Press, 27(2), 106–110. Web.
Thomas Jefferson has a special place in American history as a proponent of democracy, a founding father, and the third president. Jefferson played a crucial role in shaping America into what it is today (Boyd & Jefferson, 2018). He drafted the Declaration of Independence at 33 and worked extensively to make it a reality in his home state of Virginia. Jefferson held various positions in the government, championing various ideals and goals. He navigated various conflicts and disagreements before taking his place as president. Jefferson was a very religious individual that believed in the inalienable fundamental rights every human being has. This stern belief in rightful conduct can be seen in the various movements and conflicts he was involved in, most notably the abolishment of slavery.
The abolishment of slavery was one of the main themes in Jefferson’s political career. His various beliefs made him see slavery as one of the main ills the country was involved in that would lead to significant consequences. As such, it was imperative that America refrained from the practice (Oberg & Jefferson, 2018). The push for the abolishment of slavery was embodied in Jefferson’s proposed federal law looking to ban slavery in the new territories of the North and South. Slavery was a capital sin to Jefferson, and America could only be saved by refraining from the same. He presented his opposition to slavery as an ethical challenge based on the theory of moral sentiments, indicating an in-depth study of morality and what is right.
Above everything, Jefferson was a stout upholder of fundamental human rights, as shown by his proclamation of the independence of the United States. It then emerges that he saw all human beings as truly equal, and no one should have dominion over others (Boyd & Jefferson, 2018). it turns out that Jefferson was also very interested in the French revolution and only took a step away from it momentarily as he handled internal matters. Jefferson’s works live to this day, although total racial harmony is yet to be achieved. America is in good global standing on racial matters largely because of Jefferson’s vision.
The completion of this portfolio was wrought by several challenges. The main obstacle standing in the way of a successful project was the necessity of sifting through a huge amount of data. Creating a successful portfolio necessitated using search engines to get to the requisite information, which needed extensive work to be narrowed down to what was needed. Further, I had to compare data from multiple reputable sources to ensure I had the correct information. This meant extra work as I had to be sure that the information presented could be verified by different parties.
Another big problem I had to contend with was coming up with the correct structure that would serve the purposes of the assignment. There is a wealth of information available on such an important American idol and finding the right approach that would touch on all important elements was challenging. Coming up with an introduction was the hardest part as there are several ways one could attack such a rich topic. The last obstacle encountered was selecting the final list of sources that would make the response to the assignment. The research yielded several texts and articles that gave an in-depth account of Jefferson’s life and career, and it was difficult to pick those that would get listed in the references. Jefferson worked extensively and was involved in several activities that are well-covered in many sources, so it was hard to choose which ones to go with. These challenges were tackled by conducting patient and extensive research. The researcher was able to come up with a text that covered all essentials by taking the needed time to complete the assignment.
References
Bickford, J., & Hendrickson, R. (2020). An inquiry into liberty, slavery, and Thomas Jefferson’s place in American memory. The Social Studies, 111(1), 1–10. Web.
Boyd, J. P., & Jefferson, T. (2018). The Papers of Thomas Jefferson, Volume 1: 1760 to 1776. Princeton University Press.
Branch, B. (2018). Could Thomas Jefferson have ended slavery: An economic analysis. Business Quest, 1, 1–25.
Gordon-Reed, A. (2018). America’s original sin: Slavery and the legacy of white supremacy. Foreign Affairs, 97, 2–12. Web.
Jefferson, T. (2018). The autobiography of Thomas Jefferson. Musaicum Books.
Kern, S. (2020). Restoration and slavery: Two new exhibits. Buildings & Landscapes: Journal of the Vernacular Architecture Forum University of Minnesota Press, 27(2), 106–110. Web.
Oberg, B. B., & Jefferson, T. (2018). The Papers of Thomas Jefferson, Volume 39: 13 November 1802 to 3 March 1803. Princeton University Press
This article offers a guided investigation into Thomas Jefferson’s legacy in American memory by focusing on Jefferson’s libertarian articulations and his involvement in slavery, which are contradictory when viewed together (Bickford & Hendrickson, 2020). The investigation is founded on secondary sources and evocative primary sources. For example, the stages of inquiry are guided by discipline-specific strategies where historical thinking, literacy, and argumentation are intertwined with informed action, close reading, and text-based writing. The source is scholarly as Hendrickson is a professor at Eastern Illinois University and the text is peer-reviewed in Social Studies. The article is valuable because it provides Jefferson’s libertarian articulations and involvement in slavery. For example, Bickford and Hendrickson (2020) present that Jefferson proposed a federal law banning slavery in the New Territories of the North and South in 1784. I will use this source to validate my findings on the position held by Thomas Jefferson in stopping slavery in the United States.
Branch (2018) argues that even though the sums are large, the economics of freeing slaves with funds derived from the Louisiana Purchase would have been feasible and that the country would have been much better off if this path had been taken. The source is scholarly, written by an expert in bankruptcy management, bankruptcy investing, and valuing distressed assets and a university faculty. Furthermore, the text is peer-reviewed in An Economic Analysis. This text is valuable because it offers details on the economics behind freeing slaves accounting for the feasibility of the approach suggested by Jefferson. For example, Branch provides the feasibility of the proposal by Jefferson to use the western lands, purchased at a steep discount, to bring about an end to slavery (Branch, 2018). Throughout my paper, I will cite this source to support Jefferson’s role in stopping slavery and his political views expressed in the Declaration of Independence of 1776.
Dubois (2020) argues that the abolition of the slave trade is so inextricably linked to questions about its origins, the system of American slavery, and the entire eighteenth-century colonial policy that it is hard to isolate it. According to abolitionists at the Constitutional Convention, the end of the foreign slave trade was a necessary first step toward abolishing slavery in America. The book is academic as it got published by Oxford University Press, which is reputable for producing scholarly work. The text is helpful for my research as it validates my research on the role played by Thomas Jefferson in stopping slavery in America. For instance, Du Bois presents that President Thomas Jefferson advocated for the passage of anti-slavery legislation in his 1806 State of the Union address. He had advocated for action on slavery since the 1770s. I will utilize the source in my research to support my standpoint that Thomas Jefferson considered slavery one of the major sins of society, and he attempted to eliminate it.
Gordon-Reed (2018) argues that the Declaration of Independence was written with the specific goal of severe ties between the American colonies and Great Britain and establishing a new country that would take its place among the world’s nations. Therefore, the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution present the problem of reconciling the values espoused in those texts with the country’s original sin of slavery, the flaw that warped the country’s prospects, marred its creation, and eventually plunged it into civil war. The text is academic as it is a HeinOnline, a scholarly resource center article. Furthermore, the author is a Harvard University professor, and the text is peer-reviewed by Foreign Affairs. The source is valuable as it provides the moral sentiments depicted by Jefferson. For instance, according to Gordon-Reed (2018), the self-assured declaration that “all men are created equal,” with “unalienable Rights” to “Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness” placed freedom and equality at the heart of the American experiment. I will use this source to outline the ideology presented by Thomas Jefferson as he addressed the issue of slavery.
Jefferson’s autobiography briefly mentions his early years before focusing on when he wrote the Declaration of Independence. Besides Jefferson’s comments on the Articles of Confederation, this edition includes the first draft of the document. Furthermore, Jefferson (2018) presents his firsthand observations on the early stages of the French Revolution while serving as Minister to France and insights from his many other public roles, including wartime Governor of Virginia, Secretary of State under Washington, and Vice President under John Adams. This source is scholarly because it is published by Dover Publications, an academic organization, and has included detailed info on the author. The book is valuable as it validates the findings of my other sources by presenting Jefferson’s comments on the Articles of Confederation as depicted in the first draft of the document. I will cite the source in my text as supporting evidence that Thomas Jefferson considered slavery one of the major sins of society.
Kern (2020) argues that active interpretation of slavery has been a part of Virginia’s historical sites since 1979 when Colonial Williamsburg committed to a division of African American interpretation and the development of sites for telling those stories. As a result, Mount Vernon, Monticello, Jefferson’s Poplar Forest, Montpelier, and James Monroe’s Highland established robust agendas for archaeological and architectural research, oral history, site interpretation, and community engagement projects with descendant communities. For example, the Thomas Jefferson Foundation (TJF) opened Monticello to the public with the restoration and tour storyline centered on Jefferson and his vision for building and altering his neoclassical home. The article is academic because the author is an architectural history expert. Furthermore, the University of Minnesota Press published the text in the peer-reviewed Buildings & Landscapes: Journal of the Vernacular Architecture Forum. The source is useful as it presents data from the standpoint of Jefferson on slavery. For instance, it shows that Thomas considered the slavery society’s order unethical and strived to highlight the importance of racial equality. I will use this source to validate Jefferson’s stand on the slavery of African-Americans.
Pirzadeh (2017) holds that Jefferson truly meant that all people were human beings with God-given rights that could not be eliminated, whether or not the law recognized them, rights that slavery violated. Jefferson outlined principles to defend the abolition of slavery in the Declaration of Independence. Despite the prevalence of slavery in society and the world, Jefferson made it clear in hundreds of personal correspondences and public statements that he was opposed to the principle of slavery. The article is scholarly because the text has been peer-reviewed in the Undergraduate Research Journal at UCCS. The text is valuable as it validates my other sources and provides detailed accounts of Jefferson’s position on the issue of slavery. For instance, Pirzadeh (2017) states that Jefferson fought for the liberties of slaves throughout his political career through court cases, bills, and ordinances. I will use this source to support my other sources on Jefferson’s opposition to slavery.
Jefferson, T. (2018). The autobiography of Thomas Jefferson. Musaicum Books.
Kern, S. (2020). Restoration and slavery: Two new exhibits.Buildings & Landscapes: Journal of the Vernacular Architecture Forum University of Minnesota Press, 27(2), 106–110.
Pirzadeh, H. B. (2017). Thomas Jefferson: The Fight Against Slavery. URJ-UCCS: Undergraduate Research Journal at UCCS, 11(1), 8-27.
Scientists will never seize to carry out their diverse research and experiments that have changed many ideologies of life. Thanks to their undying efforts because today it is possible to confirm the biological identity of a child through DNA tests. In other words, one can test whether a child belongs to him or her through a DNA test. Owing to this fact, the article E-Reserves is about DNA tests that were taken to prove the identity of a slave’s child. Jefferson a former Ambassador to France had fathered his slave’s child. The story continues as Jefferson denies having any relationship with his slave. Following this accusation, DNA tests were carried out to verify the allegations. Essentially, there was the need for Jefferson to clear his name which was at stake bearing the fact that he had a role in the anti-slavery movement. The objective of this paper is to discuss the findings of the article provided in light of Jefferson’s views as shown in his original version of the Declaration. About this, the paper discusses how Jefferson was a hypocrite regarding his affair with Sally.
DNA Tests
Jefferson was a widower who got himself into a relationship with his slave Sally Hemings who was also a sister to his late wife (Dinitia and Wade 1). This started when Sally went to stay with Jefferson because she was taking care of his daughter Maria. By that time Jefferson was an ambassador to France when he had summoned his daughter to live with him. According to Madison, Sally’s son, her mother was Jefferson’s concubine who gave birth to at least one of the ambassador’s children. Sally also claimed that she had a relationship with her master although Jefferson denied all those accusations (Dinitia and Wade 3).
Initially, tests proved that there was no connection between Sally’s children and Jefferson. This however changed when other tests confirm that indeed there was a relationship between Sally and Jefferson. Sally had several children although two of his sons namely Thomas Woodson and Eston Hemings were suspected to be Jefferson’s sons. Tests were therefore carried out to confirm whether there was any relationship between the descendants of Jefferson and his slave Sally. DNA tests showed that the Y chromosomes of Eston Hemings were similar to those of Jefferson. Thus, the tests proved that indeed Jefferson fathered Hemings. On the other hand, the chromosome test differed from that Of Jefferson which means he was not his son. The results were enough evidence to prove that Jefferson had an affair with his slave Sally. This is the hypocrisy of the highest order because Jefferson was preaching water but drinking whine himself. Jefferson was a person who talked about ending slavery which he feared could lead to racial mixing. Jefferson’s actions were different from what he said. This was also justified by Dr. Ellis who said, “He plays hide and seek within himself.” Dr. Ellis further says, “The urge to regard him as an American icon will overwhelm any desire to take him off his pedal” (Dinitia and Wade 4).
Conclusion
Logically, Jefferson could not continue with his lies since there was firm evidence that he had an affair with his slave. Probably he thought he would get away with it although the DNA tests did not hesitate to unmask him. If it was during the olden days when there was no DNA, then most likely he would have succeeded with his hypocrisy. Ideally, there was no need of speaking against slavery which would lead to amalgamation yet he went ahead and did the opposite (Smith and Wade 4).
Works Cited
Dinitia, Smith and Wade, Nicholas. DNA Test Finds Evidence of Jefferson Child by Slave. Nov.1998.The New York Times: NY. Web.
In today’s world the role of United States Presidents is of tremendous importance. The way they relate to different issues can determine the way that issue will develop. And here we are talking not only to issues confined within the United States but also to issues of international importance, impacting different countries and societies. Such importance has the United States presidency in this era.
We tend to forget that many of the ideas and ways on how to resolve issues originate in the early years of the presidency. Many of the presidents of the twentieth century, including President Bush and President Obama, have used concepts and ways of responding to problems that originate from the writings and actions of the first presidents of this country. Such two presidents are President Alexander Hamilton and President Thomas Jefferson. These two are considered to be among the so called ‘founding fathers’ of American nationhood. In this short essay we will tend to make a comparison of the way how these two presidents viewed a certain issue and how they responded to them. What were their ideas concerning specific issues. We will compare their views not only between them but also with the ideas and actions that the United States Administration has undertaken during these last two or three decades.
This way we will try to see if many of the policies today are conducted according to the principles and morals of the founding fathers of this nation. We have listened time and time again the presidents of this country to reference their actions to past actions of previous presidents.
Now we will attempt to test this statements and see whether how would have responded Hamilton and Jefferson to those issues (Cunningham, 4).
On financial issues
Alexander Hamilton was the first United States Secretary of Treasury under the presidency of George Washington. During last year there has been a financial crisis of proportions not seen since the financial breakdown of 1929 and the subsequent Great Depression. Public credit has been shaken and crediting of new businesses also. The stakeholders of this financial shock has been, foremost, the above two mentioned categories; the public and new and small businesses. The office of the Secretary of Treasury responded to this crisis by a series of ‘bail out’ programs in which it relocated taxpayers money to ‘save’ the needy companies and corporations. This was seen as a controversial policy and had many critics. Many thought that this was a kind of ‘state ownership’ policy which would significantly increase the financial and economic importance of the federal government of the United States not only on the national market but internationally also.
But Hamilton as secretary of treasury had done a similar proposition and envisioned a similar plan. In his famous ‘Report on Public Credit’, Hamilton made a very controversial proposition. He argued that the federal government should assume responsibility for state debts incurred during the Revolution. This would, in effect, give the federal government much more power by placing the country’s most serious financial obligation in the hands of the federal, rather than the state governments (Taylor, 34).
Another interesting proposal of Secretary Hamilton was that to cut the rate of interest and postpone payments on federal debt. But these propositions encountered on harsh criticism from other leaders of the time. Two of them were James Madison and the Secretary of State at the time, Thomas Jefferson. Jefferson argued that many of the member states of the Union, like his home state Virginia, had paid almost half of their debts. He felt that their taxpayers should not be assessed again to bail out the less provident. According to Jefferson this would be immoral and unethical as well as illegal since It would mean that this portion of the population (the less provident) would live on the sweat of other hard working people (Joyce & Terence, 66).
Both, he and Madison further argued that the plan passed beyond the scope of the federal government (Sloan, 46). In fact, these are the critics made even today for the governmental bail outs made during 2008 and this year. Unfortunately, this debate, this criticism, has been going on outside of Congress and the political spectrum in general. At the time of Hamilton and Jefferson this was the debate going on in Congress sessions. This is an argument in favor of democracy at the time and of the lack of democratic expression in today’s political spectrum of our society.
Foreign relations
Both Jefferson and Hamilton agreed on the policy that the United States should remain neutral to all matters that pertained to foreign powers and that did not directly threaten the United States (Lefkowitz, 8). They were both patriots of the ‘neutrality’ doctrine of the American government.
Even in the quasi war period of 1796 with France they still did not make the first move but waited for the other party to do it. In fact, they did not initiate any war on their behalf. If we compare this policy of neutrality of the government and of ‘restraint’ of the United States armed forces, we will find it completely contradictory to the existing policy. Since World War Two, the policy of the United States government has not been that of neutrality but that of military intervention all around the world. During the years that Both Hamilton and Jefferson were in office they never sent the army to fight a preemptive war, on a far situated ‘enemy’ that threatened the national interest of the United States. But they had their controversies on foreign policy. For example, during the great war between France and Britain, the Federalist with Hamilton leading them, were in favor of trade increase with Britain in order to gain more from the trade tariffs. On the other hand, the Democrat-Republican were in favor of a boycott of trade with Britain until it changed its attitude and pretentions toward the American soil and remove its bases as established by the Paris Treaty (Rahe, 122).
On slavery
Slavery was an important issue at the time of Jefferson and Hamilton. In the southern states of the United States it was the principal mode of conduct for social and economical affairs. Slaves provided a cheap source of labor among other things. But slavery was not viewed only in terms of the relations of ‘white’ to ‘non-white’ Americans. “Hamilton’s first polemic against King George’s ministers contains a paragraph which speaks of the evils which “slavery” to the British would bring upon the Americans.” (Chan, 12)
In continuing his points of view regarding slavery Hamilton argued that natural faculties of black people were as good as those of white people. Later he even attacked his political opponents as demanding freedom for themselves and refusing to allow it to blacks (Chan, 13).
On the other hand Jefferson was a controversial figure on the issues of slavery. He had publicly declared he was an abolitionist and yet had owned many slaves during his life.
“We have the wolf by the ears; and we can neither hold him, nor safely let him go. Justice is in one scale, and self-preservation in the other.” (Miller, 146)
But he took concrete steps in the freeing of slaves in America. For example, in 1769, as a member of the House of Burgesses, Jefferson proposed for that body to emancipate slaves in Virginia (Perry, 14).
Conclusions
As a conclusion I can say that both of the figures analyzed above have had significant impact on the political arena of American society. As we might have seen from the above presented facts they had a conduct quite different from the late presidents of this country. It might be the case that we learn more from our founding fathers and not just cite them when it is more appropriate for us.
Works cited
Cunningham, Edward. Jefferson vs. Hamilton: Confrontations that Shaped a Nation. New York, Penguin Press, 2000.
Chan, Michael. “Alexander Hamilton on Slavery”, Review of Politics 66, 2004.
Joyce, Arti. & Terence, Boil. (eds.) Thomas Jefferson, Political Writings. Cambridge, MA.: Cambridge University Press, 2002.
Knott, Stephen F. Alexander Hamilton and the Persistence of Myth, Kansas: University Press of Kansas, 2002.
Lefkowitz, Andre. George Washington’s Indispensable Men: The 32 Aides-de-Camp Who Helped Win the Revolution, Stackpole Books, 2003.
Melton, Buckner F.: The Quotable Founding Fathers, Potomac Books, Washington D.C. 2004.
Miller, John Chester. The Wolf by the Ears: Thomas Jefferson and Slavery. New York: Free Press, 1977.
Perry, Berry. “Jefferson’s Legacy to the Supreme Court: Freedom of Religion.” Journal of Supreme Court History, 31(2). 2006.
Rahe, Philip. “Thomas Jefferson’s Machiavellian Political Science”. Review of Politics 57(3): 449–481, 1995.
Sloan, Joan. Principle and Interest: Thomas Jefferson and the Problem of Debt, 1995.
Taylor, George Rogers, ed., Hamilton and the National Debt, New York, Penguin, 1950.
Both Paine and Jefferson advocated for freedom from Great Britain and for all people to have equal rights under a democratic system of government. Still, their written works express their ideals in quite different ways, even though they championed for their states to be liberated.
Discussion
In Common Sense, Thomas Paine adopted an informal tone to influence his audience; in the Declaration of Independence, Thomas Jefferson adopted a formal manner to express his thoughts. Paine is more of a salesperson who tries to persuade his audience to agree with his opinions on the British government even though he does not fully establish himself as an authority on the subject. According to (Jefferson 1), however, Jefferson is quite direct throughout, overloading his audience with instances and a vibrant tone before offering the ultimate judgment.
As a commentary, Paine provides a check on the relationship between Great Britain and the United States. He informs his fellow Americans about this issue through the paper. According to him, “a long habit of not thinking a thing wrong which gives it a superficial appearance of being right.” He refers to the relationship and describes it as abusive use of force (Paine 13). This phraseology echoes Jefferson’s claim that the king had created an unquestionable dictatorship over the states.
The bulk of the Declaration of Independence differs conceptually from the core of Common Sense. In his writing, Jefferson adopts a sloppy method, choosing to explain his thoughts in the first few lines before moving on to enumerate his complaints in the body of the essay. In contrast, Paine writes his thoughts more persuadingly throughout his writing by convincing readers across the U.S. that they needed to liberate themselves from colonialism.
Conclusion
In contrast to Jefferson’s Declaration of Independence, which sought independence alone, Thomas Paine wrote Common Sense, a book created primarily for the educated elite, where he argued that America was connected to all of Europe, not only England, and that the country needed to engage in free trade with countries like Spain and France.
Works Cited
Jefferson, Thomas. The Declaration of Independence of The United States of America. Prabhat Prakashan, 2021.
Paine, Thomas. Thomas Paine: Common Sense. epubli, 2019.
Thomas Jefferson is one of the most remarkable political leaders of the 18th and 19 centuries. He is mostly known as an American Founding Father and the third president of the United States for two terms in 1801-1809. Thomas Jefferson had a fascinating political career, but he was also a profound author of his time. His words and ideas have both inspired, confused, and horrified readers for over 200 years. Jefferson coined out the official writing style and brought excellence to political and government papers.
His major contributions to american literature are the Declaration of Independence, the Notes on the State of Virginia, and his letters. In his works, Jefferson mostly touched upon the values of political and moral equality and the complexity of nature and society. Thomas Jefferson’s writings are crucial for understanding the themes and values of American literature and history of the 18-19 centuries, as they have tremendous political, social, and literary value.
The Main Themes
Thomas Jefferson is a philosopher of his era since he touches upon many universal issues that are central at all times. Jefferson ponders upon the nature of humans and states that the happiest state for people is between what is savage and what is refined (Holowchak). The writer also draws parallels between natural laws and the laws that should guide a civil society. These basic beliefs are framed into the Declaration of Independence, which rests upon the principles of all men being equal by nature and by rights. It is worth mentioning that by the word “equality” Jefferson referred to the equality of opportunity and moral equality (Holowchak). In brief, the American Founding Father shows in his writings that the laws of nature are crucial for understanding what civil society principles should be.
Other pivotal themes of Jefferson’s writings include religion and morale. The natural human right to pursue his or her happiness implies that all persons are free to worship as they choose (Holowchak). However, according to Jefferson, religion should stay personal and avoid interfering with the government’s affairs (Holowchak). Such interventions may result not only in restricting the civil rights of the US citizens but also in restraints of religious freedoms. Jefferson saw similarities in the political tasks of tearing down the old forms of authority and the intellectual tasks of eliminating superstition (Klinghard and Gish 18).
Consequently, he believed that moral is God-given and that is similar to human senses like sight and hearing. Holowchak states that Thomas Jefferson thought the sense of virtue to be tied to an organ, like a heart. Hence, morality can be made better or worse depending on the actions a person performs. In short, while not opposing the church, Jefferson practiced a rational approach towards the questions of religion and morale.
While contemplating the eternal questions, Jefferson provided a significant base for the abolitionists while discussing the problem of slavery. While Jefferson remained a slave owner, he insisted on all men being created equal and, consequently, on abolishing slavery (Crow 151). However, Holowchak points out that Jefferson considered African Americans being equal only by moral, as the slaves were not intellectually comparable with the white population. Jefferson insisted that the abolition of slavery should be a steady process, as it could only be possible by a gradual transformation of the states’ policies and the people’s minds (Klinghard and Gish 60). In summary, Jefferson in his works created the legal and moral basis for the future elimination of slavery in the United States.
Jefferson’s Style
Thomas Jefferson published only one full-length book, The Notes on the State of Virginia, during his lifetime, while the central portion of his literature heritage consists of letters and notes. Thomas Jefferson’s works are rhetorical and belong to the epistolary genre (Hitchens 115).
Even his only book is more a collection of works concerning politics, religion, and human nature rather than a book in a conventional way of understanding (Crow 132). However, “the rhetorical style of the Notes weaves connections between and among these seemingly disparate essays in knowledge, inviting readers to explore, examine, and discover” (Klinghard and Gish 84). In short, Jefferson preferred writing in the form of essays and letters rather than in belles-lettres.
Jefferson’s language seems to be complicated and exalt for a contemporary reader, however, in comparison with other authors of the time, his works are concise and coherent (Klinghard and Gish 73). This is especially true for the Notes on the State of Virginia, and for the Declaration of independence, as these works were aimed at a wider audience than his letters. The American Founding Father believed that all literary Americans should understand political principles, as it is central for organizing a republic. In short, while Jefferson’s word may appear to be comprehensive for a present-day reader, it is a notable step towards the overall apprehensibility of the legal language in the United States.
The Significance of Jefferson’s Writings
The importance of Jefferson’s works can be hardly overstated as he provided the theoretical, political, and moral basis for the future development of civil society in the US. First, the American Founding Fathers provided the theory for authors to base upon in their philosophical searches. For instance, most abolitionists mention Jefferson’s notes on the State of Virginia in one way or another while promoting the elimination of slavery in the United States (Klinghard and Gish 109).
Jefferson is one of the pioneers in proclaiming that slavery is outdated; thus, he created a political and philosophical ground for future writers to ponder upon the issue. In short, Thomas Jefferson set up central themes for the forthcoming generation of writers and politicians.
Second, Thomas Jefferson penned the main portion of the Declaration of Independence that is central for the American nation is it was the first official document of the United States. Apart from having an obvious political significance, the Declaration of Independence implies great literary importance, as it sets the gold standard for the style of future legal and political documents. While being eloquent and somewhat wordy in comparison with the contemporary literature, Jefferson set the norm for official documents to be concise, precise, and easy to comprehend (Klinghard and Gish 73).
Conclusion
Thomas Jefferson is an outstanding politician and ideologist of the American way of life. Moreover, Jefferson is a prodigious writer who left a rich philosophical legacy in his letters, messages, bills, and public papers. He wrote about every philosophical aspect of life including religion, morality, human rights, and slavery. These themes became central in the works of his followers and set the basis for the abolitionists’ movements. Jefferson’s tone establishes the standard for the official style of the US political and legal documents. In conclusion, Jefferson as a writer is equally significant for American history as Jefferson as a politician, as he made an immense contribution towards all the spheres of American life.
Works Cited
Crow, Matthew. Thomas Jefferson, Legal History, and the Art of Recollection. Cambridge University Press, 2017.
Hitchens, Christopher. Thomas Jefferson: The Author of America. Atlas & Co., 2009.
Holowchak, Andrew. “Thomas Jefferson”, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. 2015. Web.
Klinghard, Daniel, and Dustin Gish. Thomas Jefferson and the Science of Republican Government: A Political Biography of Notes on the State of Virginia. Cambridge University Press, 2017.
One of the Founding Fathers of the United States of America and its most distinguished personalities, Thomas Jefferson was the author of the Declaration of Independence and later served as the third president of America. Being such a prominent figure in the history of the US, Jefferson has a great deal of researches and publications covering his biography, ideas, and his personal life. Although Jefferson’s endeavors are not the first topic of interest for historians, it has also received excessive coverage over the decades. However, what interested most of the authors were Jefferson’s relationships with an African American woman Sarah “Sally” Hemings, which developed after Jefferson’s wife tragically passed away in 1782. The significance of this topic in the cultural context of the America of that time is the subject of this paper. The romance of Jefferson and a young African American girl was rather controversial and to some extent influenced the president himself and the political course that guided him.
Jefferson and Hemings’ Relationship in the Cultural Context
To understand why this relationship resulted in such attention, one would have to understand the peculiarities of the cultural context in which Jefferson lived. The America of those days was a country with highly developed slavery. Needless to say, it resulted in various forms of infringement of rights. African American people were treated by their social status, which was significantly less respected than that of the White American people. Therefore, such a distinguished figure as Jefferson could not avoid a certain backlash for his close relation to black population in any form. Ponterotto1 states that “any still surviving ancestors of Jefferson and Hemings have little grounds to argue that the identity interests of their ancestors have been harmed,” which demonstrates what influence Jefferson’s affairs with Hemings have created.
What made this situation even more disputable is the misrepresentation of some facts and different opinions presented by various authors. For example, a book by Jon Meacham2 is considered one of the highly-respected sources of information of Jefferson-Hemings relationships and their children. However, it is just a perspective, and some other authors may perceive the topic differently while presenting their perspective on the subject matter. Taking it into account, an article by Thompson3 confirms the description given by Meacham stating that Jefferson’s relationship with the Hemings family was close enough.
President’s Relation to Slavery
Another position that many authors take is represented in the article by Thompson3 that claims that “Jefferson’s place in history is compromised and constantly under scrutiny.” It is the result of the fact that although Jefferson created the Declaration of Independence, he still owned slaves as many others did at that time, which completely contravenes the president’s statement that “all men are created equal.” Needless to say, that it created a lot of controversies and resulted in sharp criticism of Jefferson’s work. However, relationship with Hemings became an ultimate acquittal of Jefferson’s history of owning slaves. In the end, it is rather natural that Jefferson treated many African Americans differently. Since he stated that all men are equal, each person would be evaluated based on their actions sooner or later. The difference in reception that Jefferson demonstrated comes with this evaluation.
What gives the topic more attention is the fact that Jefferson may have unintentionally created inequality even amongst African Americans. As Lee4 puts it, “post–civil rights era biographers could marginalize race when discussing Hemings’ and Jefferson’s genders and sexualities and, what is more, could even declare irrelevant the racial differences between the two.” Thus, researchers have a dispute: on the one hand they have the fact that Jefferson treated Hemings as his equal, despite her race; on the contrary, Jefferson owned slaves and probably did not treat them similarly to Hemings.
Jefferson’s Offspring
After the death of his wife, Jefferson, who had six children, was on an official visit to France, where he began an affair with his African American servant Sarah Hemings. Their relationship did not last very long, but there are some reasons to believe that the father of at least one of the eight Hemmings’s children was Jefferson. Quite a significant age difference may have become one of the main grounds why their relationship received a large amount of criticism and caused a public outcry.
Finally, one of the most important aspects of Jefferson-Hemings relationships is presented by Jones5. It was the fact that “while Sally Hemings would not have thought of herself as white, she may not have thought of herself as simply black or considered her identity regarding black solidarity with African Americans of varied skin tones.” After the death of Jefferson’s wife, he had some relationships with other females but ultimately traded them all to stay with Hemings. It may be the key factor to understanding how Jefferson approached relationships with women after his wife passed away.
Summarizing all of the presented facts, any person can figure out why the topic is so polarizing. The nature of Jefferson-Hemings relationship itself was controversial in many ways. This and the fact that Jefferson was one of the distinguished figures in America’s history prove that their communication played a vital role. Despite the fact that some people consider Jefferson’s ideas controversial, everyone should pay tribute to his active work. His relationship with people around him deserves attention since all the decisions he made were sometimes directly dependent on such correspondence. It is hardly worth considering Jefferson’s contacts as one of the most obvious political motives, but his relationship with women, however, played a role and to some extent influenced the development of society.
Works Cited
Jones, Suzanne. “Black and White.” Keywords for Southern Studies, edited by Scott Romine and Jennifer Rae Greeson, University of Georgia Press, 2016, pp. 155-165.
Lee, Fred. “Reconsidering the Jefferson–Hemings Relationship: Nationalist Historiography without Nationalist Heroes, Racial Sexuality without Racial Significance.” Political Research Quarterly, vol. 66, no. 3, 2013, pp. 1-16.
Meacham, Jon. American Gospel: God, the Founding Fathers, and the Making of a Nation. Random House, 2009.
Ponterotto, Joseph. “In Pursuit of William James’s McLean Hospital Records: An Inherent Conflict Between Postmortem Privacy Rights and Advancing Psychological Science.” Review of General Psychology, vol. 19, no. 1, 2015, pp. 96-105.
Thompson, Sarah L. “Thomas Jefferson, Slavery, and the Language of the Textbook: Addressing Problematic Representations of Race and Power.” Language Arts Journal of Michigan, vol. 32, no. 2, 2017, pp. 18-26.
Footnotes
1 – Ponterotto, Joseph. “In Pursuit of William James’s McLean Hospital Records: An Inherent Conflict Between Postmortem Privacy Rights and Advancing Psychological Science.” Review of General Psychology, vol. 19, no. 1, 2015, pp. 96-105.
2 – Meacham, Jon. American Gospel: God, the Founding Fathers, and the Making of a Nation. Random House, 2009.
3 – Thompson, Sarah L. “Thomas Jefferson, Slavery, and the Language of the Textbook: Addressing Problematic Representations of Race and Power.” Language Arts Journal of Michigan, vol. 32, no. 2, 2017, pp. 18-26.
4 – Lee, Fred. “Reconsidering the Jefferson–Hemings Relationship: Nationalist Historiography without Nationalist Heroes, Racial Sexuality without Racial Significance.” Political Research Quarterly, vol. 66, no. 3, 2013, pp. 1-16.
5 – Jones, Suzanne. “Black and White.” Keywords for Southern Studies, edited by Scott Romine and Jennifer Rae Greeson, University of Georgia Press, 2016, pp. 155-165.
America is the melting pot of the whole world, the New World, seen by the rest of the world as the land of opportunity, the land of the free, the green pastures, and the crossroads where virtually all nationalities and races meet. This problem would not have aroused studies and researches a few centuries ago. This study would not have been conducted in other countries because almost all the world’s countries and their people possess unifying attributes that make them distinct and unmistakable for any other nationality, race, culture, and language. “Modern Americans broadly share a sense that members of the revolutionary generation of the 1770s-90s brought about something pre-ordained by the gods: a nation marked by popular government and a market economy.
Some of those leaders, indeed, spoke prophetically, but the fact was that they also knew their movement could have failed and they would surely have hanged together as traitors. Had the British army commanders prosecuted the war more vigorously, they could have nipped the uprising in the bud, and evolution rather than revolution would have kept the colonies within the Empire” (Founding Brothers: The Revolutionary Generation Study Guide). Only America possesses the probability of encountering this problem because of countless causes – immigration, preservation of heritage of immigrants, racial and ethnic differences, and cultural differences to name a few. This is due to the fact that Thomas Jefferson’s contradictions cannot be valid because being contradictory is an American trait.
Being an American individual does not necessarily mean that you are of white, black, red, brown, or yellow complexion, which signifies race. The term “American” has no racial insinuations for virtually all Americans trace their roots from distinct nationalities, races, and ethnic groups and this complication alone can cause innumerable perplexing things. But because of the fact that America had evolved into its present status, all sorts of studies need to be carried out for the purpose of solving the problem. With that, it is apparent within America, there is a contradiction due to the fact that we allow many races to live here, however, there is still prejudice around us. The analysis of the contradiction of Thomas Jefferson is only one of the countless implications brought about by the evolution of America itself.
Thomas Jefferson as a private citizen and public intellectual embodied a wide spectrum of contradictions in his opinions and behavior. He drafted the Declaration of Independence, served as a foreign Ambassador, was elected President of the United States, founded a major university among many other luminous achievements even as he inherited, owned, bought, and sold slaves, wrote and spoke in contradictory ways about the “problem” of slavery, solutions to it, and the irrefutable inferiority of blacks was constantly in debt, likely maintained decades-long concubinage with his slave Sally Hemings, fathered several illegitimate children with her who consequently became his property, and ultimately failed in his promise to free the vast majority of his slaves (Deas, 2004).
People cannot make sense out of Jefferson’s contradictions because they are flawed. If he truly believed slaves should be freed, he would have let his own slaves go free (Ellis, 2000). However, it seems that having contradictions in life is an American trait because we are the land of the free but not everyone has equal rights. With that, Jefferson’s contradictions were flawed due to the fact having them was a part of an American trait that we cannot control.
References
Deas, Michael. (2004). The Radical Mind of Thomas Jefferson. Web.