George Washington on Political Parties

Excerpts from his Farewell Address of 19 September 1796

George Washington’s Farewell Address is a clear vision as to how the country should best remain true to its original values. He provided clear guidance, particularly, in regards to the dangers of political parties.

Keep in mind the Address was actually a letter that was published in newspapers, as Washington was not a captivating public speaker. It was written by James Madison in 1792, with updates in 1796 by Alexander Hamilton.

My comments are in italics. Here are the relevant passages quoted verbatim:

“In contemplating the causes which may disturb our Union, it occurs as matter of serious concern that any ground should have been furnished for characterizing parties by geographical discriminations—Northern and Southern—Atlantic and Western; whence designing men may endeavor to excite a belief that there is a real difference of local interests and views.”

Here Washington is warning that labeling parties by geography would be a tell-tale sign that “designing men” are attempting to label someone else as an “other” that has polar opposite interests and views from yourself.  This is what we would now call an “us vs. them” mentality.  Washington strongly believed our differences were minimal from region to region.

“One of the expedients of party to acquire influence within particular districts is to misrepresent the opinions and aims of other districts.  You cannot shield yourselves too much against the jealousies and heart burnings which spring from these misrepresentations. They tend to render alien to each other those who ought to be bound together by fraternal affection.“

Here Washington is warning that parties and their politicians would immorally attempt to gain influence by making false claims of other geographic areas and their representatives, knowing it would cause a natural emotional response of envy and jealousy of others.  These feelings, as natural as they are, would be manipulated by immoral politicians to divide the nation’s people who would otherwise have harmonious relations.

“All obstructions to the execution of the laws, all combinations and associations under whatever plausible character, with the real design to direct, control, counteract, or awe the regular deliberation and action of the constituted authorities, are destructive of this fundamental principle and of fatal tendency. They serve to organize faction, to give it an artificial and extraordinary force—to put in the place of the delegated will of the nation the will of a party; often a small but artful and enterprising minority of the community; and, according to the alternate triumphs of different parties, to make the public administration the mirror of the ill concerted and incongruous projects of faction, rather than the organ of consistent and wholesome plans digested by common councils and modified by mutual interests. However combinations or associations of the above description may now and then answer popular ends, they are likely, in the course of time and things, to become potent engines by which cunning, ambitious, and unprincipled men will be enabled to subvert the power of the people and to usurp for themselves the reins of government, destroying afterwards the very engines which have lifted them to unjust dominion.”

This section was quite prophetic.  All of the Founding Fathers, and especially Washington, were well acquainted with human nature, and what it could bring “designing” and ambitious people to do in the quest for power.

Washington is describing the constant “back and forth” of parties, perpetually in and out of power, would lead to a government of incoherence and ineffectiveness as governing philosophies would swing dramatically every four or eight years.  Instead, his hope for the young nation was that cool, calm, level-headed groups would work together in mutual interest away from the stain of political factions that would naturally drive the people to extremes of thought and policy.

Once these extreme political parties were intrenched, it would only be a matter of time before “cunning, ambitious, and unprincipled men (would) be enabled to subvert the power of the people” and take absolute control of the government.  Once achieved, this person would then destroy the very political system they used to ascend to power, in order to maintain their power.  This would be despotism or dictatorship.

“Towards the preservation of your government and the permanency of your present happy state, it is requisite, not only that you steadily discountenance irregular oppositions to its acknowledged authority, but also that you resist with care the spirit of innovation upon its principles, however specious the pretexts. One method of assault may be to effect in the forms of the Constitution alterations which will impair the energy of the system and thus to undermine what cannot be directly overthrown. In all the changes to which you may be invited, remember that time and habit are at least as necessary to fix the true character of governments as of other human institutions; that experience is the surest standard by which to test the real tendency of the existing constitution of a country; that facility in changes, upon the credit of mere hypotheses and opinion, exposes to perpetual change from the endless variety of hypotheses and opinion; and remember, especially, that for the efficient management of your common interests in a country so extensive as ours, a government of as much vigor as is consistent with the perfect security of liberty is indispensable. Liberty itself will find in such a government, with powers properly distributed and adjusted, its surest guardian. It is indeed little else than a name, where the government is too feeble to withstand the enterprises of faction, to confine each member of the society within the limits prescribed by the laws, and to maintain all in the secure and tranquil enjoyment of the rights of person and property.”

Here Washington tells us how to preserve a strong Federal government and how to maintain happiness of the citizenry.  He encourages loyalty to the authority of the government, and to be skeptical of anyone that thinks they can make radical changes quickly.  They would most likely be “selling a bill of goods” and are in reality trying to undermine the government from within.  Instead, when positive change is desired, it must be a slow, natural process, and the habits of the people must also change before any change in law.  The best way to determine the Constitution’s need for change would be this test of time, and allowing the need for change to become self-evident among all of the people before making any permanent change.

Washington acknowledges that the U.S. is a large country (by 1796 standards) and the government must be strong and vigorous to have the best chance of a successful experiment of self-government and liberty.  Liberty would be protected naturally if this government properly distributed powers and adjusted them when necessary.  If the government was allowed to weaken, political factions would inevitably fill the vacuum that was formerly filled by liberty.  People, sensing this feeble government, would then begin to flaunt the laws in their own self-interest, which would destroy any hope for private individuals to live a secure, tranquil life. Washington also frequently mentions “happiness” as one of the most important goals for the government.

“I have already intimated to you the danger of parties in the state, with particular reference to the founding of them on geographical discriminations. Let me now take a more comprehensive view and warn you in the most solemn manner against the baneful effects of the spirit of party, generally.

This spirit, unfortunately, is inseparable from our nature, having its root in the strongest passions of the human mind. It exists under different shapes in all governments, more or less stifled, controlled, or repressed; but, in those of the popular form, it is seen in its greatest rankness and is truly their worst enemy.”

Washington’s accurate judgment of human nature knew that nothing was inherently different in the American people than from every other group that had lived through thousands of years of civilization.  The strong passions and fervor, or the “reptilian brain” as we would say today, can activate in America just like it had countless times previously in Europe, Mesopotamia, and Asia.  Americans had this natural human flaw too, and it must be guarded against, particularly if it reared its head in the form of populism.

“The alternate domination of one faction over another, sharpened by the spirit of revenge natural to party dissension, which in different ages and countries has perpetrated the most horrid enormities, is itself a frightful despotism. But this leads at length to a more formal and permanent despotism. The disorders and miseries which result gradually incline the minds of men to seek security and repose in the absolute power of an individual; and sooner or later the chief of some prevailing faction, more able or more fortunate than his competitors, turns this disposition to the purposes of his own elevation on the ruins of public liberty.”

Washington is describing what would later be called a dictatorship.  Once again, this could happen in America just like anywhere else.  It would happen in a series of steps.  First, factionalism would lead to political instability.  As life would become more unstable for the people, they would seek safety and security in a savior that claims they can make everything better again.  Next, someone even more skilled and cunning then the savior would replace the savior and a despotic dictatorship would be formed, and nearly impossible for the people to dislodge.

“It serves always to distract the public councils and enfeeble the public administration. It agitates the community with ill founded jealousies and false alarms, kindles the animosity of one part against another, foments occasionally riot and insurrection. It opens the door to foreign influence and corruption, which find a facilitated access to the government itself through the channels of party passions. Thus the policy and the will of one country are subjected to the policy and will of another.”

Here George Washington continues to describe the horrors of political factions and parties.  He also predicts many events of our recent history in 2023.

“There is an opinion that parties in free countries are useful checks upon the administration of the government and serve to keep alive the spirit of liberty. This within certain limits is probably true— and in governments of a monarchical cast patriotism may look with indulgence, if not with favor, upon the spirit of party. But in those of the popular character, in governments purely elective, it is a spirit not to be encouraged. From their natural tendency, it is certain there will always be enough of that spirit for every salutary purpose. And there being constant danger of excess, the effort ought to be, by force of public opinion, to mitigate and assuage it. A fire not to be quenched, it demands a uniform vigilance to prevent its bursting into a flame, lest instead of warming it should consume.”

We have been conditioned by modern political thought that political parties are a required part of a “well-functioning democracy” because they act as another form of a check and balance.  Washington admits this could be somewhat true in a monarchy, but in self-governed elective government, the risk of having paralyzing infighting is much too great.  The system would self-generate the spirit of liberty on its own merits, and it wouldn’t need the artificial stimulant of party strife to generate popular interest in the government.

“It is important, likewise, that the habits of thinking in a free country should inspire caution in those entrusted with its administration, to confine themselves within their respective constitutional spheres, avoiding in the exercise of the powers of one department to encroach upon another. The spirit of encroachment tends to consolidate the powers of all the departments in one and thus to create, whatever the form of government, a real despotism.”

A democratic republic demands an informed citizenry who is willing and able to hold their representatives accountable. If a citizenry becomes weak and passive, or the representatives unreachable, they would not be able to perform their necessary civic duties to the level required to keep government operating at high efficiency. This would also encourage government representatives to act more aggressively in their own best interests, rather than the country’s.

Washington also reminds us that the separation of powers were intentionally allocated and must be maintained to prevent a despotic future President, or a rogue Congress or Supreme Court, from exercising excessive amounts of power that would destabilize the rest of the government.

“A just estimate of that love of power and proneness to abuse it which predominates in the human heart is sufficient to satisfy us of the truth of this position. The necessity of reciprocal checks in the exercise of political power, by dividing and distributing it into different depositories and constituting each the guardian of the public weal against invasions by the others, has been evinced by experiments ancient and modern, some of them in our country and under our own eyes. To preserve them must be as necessary as to institute them. If in the opinion of the people the distribution or modification of the constitutional powers be in any particular wrong, let it be corrected by an amendment in the way which the Constitution designates. But let there be no change by usurpation; for though this, in one instance, may be the instrument of good, it is the customary weapon by which free governments are destroyed. The precedent must always greatly overbalance in permanent evil any partial or transient benefit which the use can at any time yield.”

Washington acknowledges changes in the Constitution will be necessary as conditions change.  The Founding Fathers intentionally created the Constitution to be adaptable and a living, breathing document. But any amendments must be done by the process prescribed in the Constitution.  Any attempt to bypass this would be an attempt to destroy the government.  And it must be done with utmost caution, as every amendment could cause future unintended consequences, that could be worse than the issue that was corrected.

Thank you for reading! What do you think? Do you have anything to add?

-MS

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Washington's_Farewell_Address