|
The republican ideology is a facet of the social fabric of the
colonial citizens of America that may, arguably, have had the greatest
affect on the struggle for independence and the formation of a
constitutional form of government in the United States. The birth of
the republican ideology, while impossible to place an exact date on, or
even month, can be traced back more than a decade before the
Revolutionary War. It can also be argued that this social machine began
to function as a result of circumstances which led many colonist to
choose to come to America. The uniformity of this ideology, however,
would change and modify itself as circumstances warranted in the period
between 1760 and 1800.
It is first necessary to understand the exact reasons why the
ancestors of the American revolutionaries chose to live in America, as
opposed to staying in England, where a healthy and prosperous life was
a much greater possibility. America was, in the eyes of its first
English settlers, an open book with no writing on the pages. It was the
foundation of a building that had not yet been built. Many felt that it
was up to them to shape the way this new land would function, as
opposed to the way Parliament or the King felt it should. The memories
of these early pioneering settlers were a common theme for American
revolutionaries before the Revolutionary War. These early settlers were
the creators of the foundation to the building the revolutionaries
would finish.
Another common theme which drove the revolutionary ideology was the
knowledge not only of the monumental significance of the job to be
undertaken, but also the impact a free democracy on a scale as large as
America would have on future generations of Americans who, certainly,
would not take their freedom for granted. The ideology held by most
American revolutionaries was one in which they knew their sacrifices
would be acknowledged and appreciated by future generations of
Americans. There was also the knowledge that America would serve as an
example to God and the rest of the world of what the advantages of a
free society could be.
Religion also played an important role in the establishment of this
ideology. God, in the eyes of the earliest revolutionaries, was on the
side of liberty. There was religious justification for actions
undertaken by both England and America. The English stated that
rebellion was a sin, while the Americans stated that the corruption of
England, as well as its intolerance of liberty to the point of warfare,
was also a sin. War, from the religious perspective of the
revolutionary in America before the outbreak of war with England, was
seen as a necessary evil. God could permit war as a means of escaping
tyranny, such as that which England was symbolic of. God was, in the
eyes of the pre Revolutionary War revolutionaries, without question on
the side of liberty and personal freedom.
The suffering of Americans under the tyrannical hand of English
government was much the same as the suffering undertaken by Jesus at
the cross. He suffered for all the sinful people of the world. He died
for our sins. The revolutionaries felt much the same way about any
suffering that may be incurred throughout the war. They felt that it
would be looked back upon as a sacrifice that they made for the success
of future generations of Americans. On an even larger scale, it would
also be looked upon as a sacrifice for liberty and freedom in all
countries around the world who suffered under the sinful hand of
oppression.
The revolutionaries also had their own ideas about independence as
well. To them independence was a necessity. It was absolutely key to
any further advancement towards their ultimate goal of freedom to enjoy
personal liberties. How exactly independence was physically achieved
was not as important as the fact that it had already, and would always
be, achieved in the minds of Americans. Their thoughts and actions were
already that of an independent people regardless of whether or not
England still had legal domain over them. Independence was a essential
aspect of self-preservation which, according to the revolutionaries,
was their objective. Their motive was not an act of active rebellion
against authority as much as it was one of self-preservation.
As the Revolutionary War continued to wage on longer than had been
expected by many revolutionaries, it became clear that some sacrifices,
or modifications of this ideology would have to be made. One of the
first clear examples of this can be seen with the formation of the
Continental Army. An army went directly against the revolutionary
ideology in that it necessitated a sacrifice of personal freedom and
liberty. While the decision of one to join this army was well within
the boundaries that were deemed acceptable by revolutionaries of the
time, the rules and sacrifices one would have to make to serve in this
institution would go against the ideals set by revolutionaries. An army
was seen by the revolutionaries as a machine of possible corruption, in
that it held power significant enough to wield itself against the
principles of liberty and democracy.
As the war raged on, however, it became clear that some type of
army would be necessary. It was an evil necessary to achieve the ends
envisioned by the revolutionaries. What resulted was an army that, in
many respects, was different from any other army of the time. The
Continental Army became a mixture of traditional military discipline
and republican ideology. The call to fight using an army existed, but
at the same time the suspicions of an army lingered. The Continental
Army would need a special form of discipline, as well as a unique
individual to lead it.
George Washington became the man for this job. Having past military
experience in the French and Indian War, as well as political
experience in the Virginia House of Burgesses, he was to make an ideal
general for the task at hand. Throughout his military duties in the
Revolutionary War, he was always under the command of Congress. This
insured that there would be no way for him or his army to grow beyond
the smallest size necessary. Washington was faced with many
difficulties, however, in his term of military service during the
Revolution. He had to respect the personal liberties his soldiers
possessed as Americans, as well as keep some form of effective
discipline, and constantly plead with Congress for essential equipment
for his army. His handling of all of these problems is what kept the
Continental Army cohesive and effective throughout the war.
Another military figure in the Revolutionary War who serves to show
the unique nature of the Continental Army was the Prussian general
Baron von Steuben. It is he who formed a uniform system of discipline
that catered to the soldiers revolutionary beliefs, while at the same
time making an effectively disciplined military machine. The separation
of the officers from the common soldiers, which in traditional military
discipline was deemed absolutely necessary, was discarded in the
Continental Army. Officers were to eat, train, and drill their soldiers
personally. Von Steuben knew that this would be a more effective means
to discipline an army whose members fought not for an officer, or for
fear of an officer, but for a much larger cause which did not even
necessitate their participation in an army anyway. The result of Von
SteubenÕs methods was the development of a sense of professionalism in
the Continental Army which, coupled with the ideologies of the men, was
sufficient motivation to fight until the end.
One of the most significant challenges to the original republican
ideology didnÕt come from the formation of an army, but came after the
war in the political arena which was, at the time, under construction.
Faction in the system of government, which can be seen as an enemy of
liberty and personal freedom and as potentially destructive to the
original republican ideology, developed in the newly formed government
after the war.
The faction developed, in some respects, along social lines. Many
merchants and businessmen had different ideas about how the government
should be run, than did rural agrarian farmers which made up a large
percentage of the voting population. It is these rural farmers and
small scale merchants who tended to cling to the original republican
ideology more than urban merchants and businessmen. What was developing
was a party system consisting of two parties that had much the same
objectives, but differed greatly on the means necessary to reach these
objectives. What made this situation so volatile, was the fact that a
party system, according to the original interpretation of republican
ideology, was a breeding ground for corruption. The reasons for this
assumption can be clearly seen in the English Parliament, which
consisted of three parties.
The way in which the American people responded to this can be seen
in several different ways. Although parties were looked upon as a bad
thing according to the original version of the republic ideology, as it
became clear that they were here to stay, many Americans were forced to
modify their opinions. One man whose personal struggle with this issue
is well documented is James Madison. Madison, at first, supported a
multiplicity of parties over a system of only two parties. The reasons
for this clearly coincide with the ideals of the Americans at the time.
There should be many parties for Americans to choose from because each
person has the right to believe whomever he or she wants. For this
reason, there should be many parties in which people could freely
choose to follow.
As time and circumstances progressed however, Madison opinion on
the subject changed drastically. Madison came to believe that parties,
while a possible enemy of a free government, are inevitable and
unavoidable. He then realized that the best response to the problem
would be to control the affects. He also realized that a multiplicity
of parties would not be conducive to stability in a government which,
in the case of the United States at the time, was a necessity. The
specific advantage to having only two parties, as seen by Madison, was
that given equal power and representation, they could keep each other
in check. This would make it nearly impossible for any one party to
take too much control of the government.
It can clearly be seen that the ideology in which the American
people subscribed to prior to the Revolutionary War did go through
several challenges and modifications by 1800. Although parties did not
arise until after the Revolutionary War, there were still modifications
and challenges much earlier, as can be seen in the Continental Army.
What is also unique is, despite the numerous challenges and slight
modifications, the ideology was able to persist through these traumatic
years and shape a nation and a government in ways that history had not
before seen done with such ease. This is a true testament to the
fortitude and durability of the republican ideology and America as a
whole.
|
|
|
(0 vote)