George Washington Ignored

“George Washington Ignored”

The lack of infiuence and disregard for Washington’s policies and character

Justin DuBose

July 28, 2009  

By virtue of being the first President of the United States of America, George Washington set many Presidential precedents that were intended to be followed by all future
Pr e s idents. His Farewell Address virtually gave the outline for Presidents for the next one h¥lfldf e d s t ars. But is his guidance being followed today? Are Presidents now ignoring George
tShlR8tOn? Is his influence still in existence? This is an issue which should be very important to all Americans because many of the things that George Washington warned against more than 200 ye arS £tgo are coming to pass in the realm of American public policy. When was it that Georgi W£fshington began to lose influence with the American people and their government?
Why did th is happen? These are just a few very important questions that research could hope to
shed some light on.

The very Presidency outlined in the United States Constitution was largely influenced by   George Washington. ' It is because of Article 11 in the Constitution that many Americans today
view the President as they do; as a very powerful and benevolent figure. The modern presidency was molded in the image of George Washington. 2 David Abshire, in his article The Character of Genrge Washington, even goes so far as to say that “Many of the members [o1” the Constitutional Convention] cast their eyes towards George Washington as President, and shaped their ideas of the powers to be given to a President by their opinions of his virtue. 3 The Presidency, even in 2009, was modeled upon the character, virtue, and morality of George Washington. One could reasonably conclude then that if it became based on anything other than character, virtue, and morality then it could very easily become a failed Presidency. A great many of the articles
researched and referenced refer to the fact the Washington was the nation’s great moral leader,
and that this was to play a huge part in determining who was best suited to be President. Unfort lJlla te ly, popularity and celebrity now trump character and heroism as qualifications for
 
g e ••R8 f li cked to this great office. 3 When did this change occur? Many historians seem to agree that it was under the presidency of FDR. Roosevelt took over in the midst of the Great
De pr e ssiof1 and alS€ i had control of the Congress. It was during this time that he began to pass
legl slation that wo Uld greatly benefit him and expand his power. Edward Pessen claims that the PO1iCie s of foreign relations outlined by Washington in his Farewell Address in 1796 are most
e * i de ntly ignored in the time since World War II. 4 Speaking of Washington’s Farewell Address, he S£tyS “Paradox ically, for all the public rhetoric glorifying and paying homage to it, the address Of . rn Or e precisely, the important foreign policy principles at the center of the address, have been
large l y F1e g1ected.” He goes on to say that recent examples of the lack of Washington’s
i ll flu ence include Vietnam and the Cold War. Perhaps the most effective argument Pessen makes is when he shows that America has cultivated precisely what Washington warned against:
“Pe e Il t inveterate antipathies against particular nations” — those in the Soviet orbit — and passionate attachment for others” — states led by anticommunist or Anti-Soviet governments. We have exhibited “towards another the habitual hatred” that in Washington’s phrase would make the nation “a slave to its animosity...sufficient to lead it astray from its duties and interests.”

Not only is Washington’s advice ignored, which was earned by hard-fought military service and years of political experience, but even more importantly his character is disregarded. His character, that which established the presidency arid set him apart, is relegated to folklore. In modern Presidential elections, eloquent speech and pleasing looks make for a great Presidential candidate.  This is the recognition of “greatness” in the modern President.  Barry Schwartz argues that what  made George Washington  great was his lack of natural  greatness. 5 1-Ie  points out he was not of great intellect, he possessed no personal magnetism, his military experience
 
=p Ctf1 be ct3ming Commander of the Continental Army was minimal at bes 1, and his c t3lT1pany at dinni t could be as exciting as a funeral at times. ’ Yet it was his ability to overcome these
Ob JaCles that made him great.  What  made  Washington  great  was “...not  the recognition  of Sr e a tnesS btl t the transformation of the Cif dl fl ary into the  he  rt3i  C.  5 Rosemary  Zagarri,  in  her article An American Character, concurs with Schwartz on this subject. 6 To highlight just how great George Washington was, even the British and French, both at odds with America during
£fShi Ftgt Ft’s li fetime, revered this champion of liberty and honored him upon his death. 7 When hearing of Washington’s selection as President of the United States, liberals in England declared thls “bid fair to ensure stability and dignity to the new government.”
What happens then, that causes such a great man to become absent and unobserved in the nation which he made so great? Michael Dunne asserts that one aspect is the selfish ambition of politici ans quoting George Washington out of context. They are simply “perverting the realism Of Washington”. Albert Furtwangler argues that it is the oversaturation of Washington in our
daily lives to the point of uselessness. “Washington can no longer be said to be popular. He is familiar. He is, perhaps, a cultural cliche. But, since nobody knows exactly what he is good for anymore, he can also be confusing, tedious, even annoying.” According to Don Higginbothain, most recent literature on Washington not only downplays his role in America’s founding, but even ridicules his heroism and demeans his very character. '0 Even something as near and dear to George Washington as the issue of religious liberty is often divisive, ignored, and scoffed at. ' 1 The current war in Iraq is another example of blatant disregard for George Washington. '2
With all of the negative news and spiteful partisanship, one would think that George Washingt on wt3uld be examined closer than ever, and revisited at minimum. With copies of his Farewe ll Address more accessible than ever before, government should surely be in better shape.
 
Why i s history relevant, much less imporlant, you may ask? Just look around you at the chaos
>f 1d anxie ty in government and the lack of faith from its constituents and it becomes painfilly bv OHS. The solution is right in front of us, screaming to be looked at. Until we hear its cries,
until we examine where we deviated from the advice and example set by our founding father, the Who saved us from tyranny and gave us the liberty we hold so dear, then we are doomed to
remai n, and plummet deeper, in disarray.
 
   


nhH£ N. I-lolcombe, F/ie Huntingdon Library Quarte rly, Vol. 19, NO. 4 (Jllg., 1956), pp.
317-334
2. iChael Nelson, Mngazine ofHistory, Vol. 11, No. 4, The Presidency (Summer, 1997), pp. 1 0-15

3. David Abshire, The Character of George Washington, Center for Strategic and International S(tidies, 29"i Annual Post-Election Leadership Conference, Alexandria, Virginia, November 7, 1998
4. EdWflrd Pessen, Journal of the Early Republic, Vol. 7, No. 1 (Spring, 1987), pp. 1-25
• B Schwartz, American Sociological Review, Vol. 48, No. l (Feb., 1983), pp. 18-33
6. Rosemarie Zagarri, The William and Mary QuarleFl), Third Series, Vol. 57, No. 4 (Oct., 2000), pp. 873-877
7. RegiIl £tld C. McGrane, The Virginia Magazine of History and Biography, Vol. 63, No. 1 {Inn.,
1955), pp. 3-14
8. Michae l Dunne, Farewell to the Farewell Address’?, The ViF ginia Quarterly Review
9. Albert Furtwangler, American Literary History, Vol. 2, No. 2 (Summer, 1990), pp. 318-327
10. Don Higginbotham, The Pennsylvania Magazine of Hi.story and Biography, Vol. 114, No. 3 (Jul., 1990), pp. 423-437
11. Vincent Phillip Munoz, The Review of Politics, Vol. 65, No. 1 (Winter, 2003), pp. 11-33
12. Matthew Rothschild, No George Washington The Progressive, 2008