Wednesday, April 19, 2006
Friday April 21 lecture cancelled -- discuss the Whiskey Rebellion here
I have to go out of town on Friday for a last-minute meeting. Because of the small amount of time we have left, I am posting the complete lecture notes for the next topic, "1794: The Year of the Gun." Please read these along with Thomas Slaughter's book on the Whiskey Rebellion. Those who need to boost their participitation/attendance scores may post comments or questions on the book and lecture here. Consider the question: Do you find the Whiskey Rebellion to be the crucial turning point in American history that Slaughter makes it out to be? Why or why not?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
No, I don't believe the Whiskey Rebellion to be nearly as instrumental an historical event as Thomas Slaughter claims.
To his credit, Slaughter does not frame the Rebellion as an independent event. For if that were the case his argument would be even weaker. He should be commended for connecting the Whiskey Rebellion with other insurrections and revolts of the time
One assertion by Slaughter that I found particularly intriguing was the notion that frontiersmen were seeking independence from Britain, but their own life and economic experiences--quite different from those experienced by residents of the East coast--meant they also wanted independence from the domineering eastern part of the country as well.
Some basic questions I have about Slaughter's effort might explain why I don't give preeminence to the Whiskey Rebellion in the shaping of American political society. First, were non-egalitarian taxes forever abolished as a result of the Pennsylvanian insurrection? Second, could Slaughter have made a stronger connection between the antitax (and thus anti-big government) sentiments and the American citizenry's historic tradition of autonomy? Third, did participants of the rebellion ever truly gain ground economically as a result of their efforts? While that may not have been their aim, if if had occurred it would have given greater credence to the centrality of the Whiskey Rebellion's role in the development of American political and economic society.
In the end, Slaughter does deserve kudos for his book. It removes the creation of America out of the hands of men like Franklin and Jefferson and gives agency to the many in America who also felt oppressed, be it by a far away colonial power, or the economic imperialists who resided under the same democracy. He also does an excellent job of thematically describing the ideological lineage between the Stamp Act, the battle over internal vs. external taxation, and the sense of helplessness expressed by participants in the Whiskey Rebellion.
Slaughter was convincing in his attempt to show that the Whiskey Rebellion was a turning point in American History. He shows the continuity of the struggle for autonomy among Americans past the Revolutionary war and into Washington’s presidency. He traces the Whiskey Rebellion’s tradition to the opposition to Stamp Act which was supported by revolutionaries like Washington, and beyond that to the radical Whigs of England. But he shows that in the 1790s there was a shift America’s revolutionary tradition, and that the nation was split between those who wanted to continue the revolution and gain more autonomy, and those who wanted to consolidate their new power.
He shows that Washington and Hamilton saw the west as one of the most important factors in the survival of the United States. He dispels the myth that the west was a land of freedom of opportunity, and shows that those who traveled west looking for this myth found a land of deadly hazards and abject poverty. Whiskey was one of the main commodities in this harsh environment, and a tax on it was a central obstacle to their livelihoods. They headed west in search of autonomy and found the same taxes that the British had imposed on them before the revolution. But their resistance was disorganized and easily put down by what the lecture notes describe in detail as “armed force against internal enemies”, and Washington and Hamilton were eager to use the situation as an example to discourage further rebellions.
It was a turning point because it demonstrated that the American revolutionary spirit was officially over as far as the federal government was concerned, and that it would now be a time of strong central authority and power consolidation through brutal means if necessary. It also set the tone for the activities on the frontier, which moved ever westward toward manifest destiny over the following decades. And it foreshadowed the kind of treatment the Native Americans would receive from the United States military when they resisted westward expansion.
The definition of Empire is a political authority that rules over a large amount of territory from a centralized location. This book was useful to the course in that it showed how quickly the American government shifted from rebelling against imperial authority to becoming an imperial authority itself. It reinforced Gordon Wood’s argument that the Revolutionary War was more about the Creole elite gaining power over their own territory than it was about empowering the people. It also gave us a chance to take the focus away from the coast and look out west to see what was going on out there at the time.
Sean Maguire asked me to post this comment:
I do find the Whiskey Rebellion to be a crucial turning point for American history, for the following reasons. After the Revolutionary War, the loose alliance bound by the Articles of Confederation failed because it lacked a strong central government, which could back up and enforce its laws. A government composed of multiple sovereign states crippled itself.
Even though the form of a central government to remedy this had been passed by our Constitution, no one knew for certain it would work. From the Westerners' point of view, this was little different than the acts for which they declared their independence from England. Even if represented, the whiskey tax was an unfair burden, and the benefits they received were not anywhere close to the cost to them.
Washington's forceful action to enforce the tax, and put down the rebellion was unprecedented. First of all, no one expected the "Father of Our Country" to act so strongly. Secondly, because he was so respected and loved, his decisive action made such action by the president acceptable, so that his successors had the ability to take such drastic action.
Though the Whiskey Rebellion may not have been the crucial turning point in American history that Slaughter says it is, I do feel that the ideologies and attitudes established were very important aspects of what would become the United States' "Wild West."
Additionally, the massive force assembled by George Washington and Alexander Hamilton to put down the revolt showed how much they had been changed by Shays' Rebellion in 1786-1787. Washington's use of the Militia Law of 1792 showed his willingness to test the federal government's authority.
Finally, the manner in which Washington dealth with the rebels may have shown other citizens that an uprising would not be the way to go when searching for political change; the government was prepared and more than ready to deal with similar revolts.
On a lighter note, I can't shake the similarites between the Whiskey Rebellion and the appeal of the whiskey tax and the more recent events of Prohibition.
I do feel that Slaughter was convincing in his assessment of the whiskey rebellion as a turning point in the history of America. The whiskey rebellion was an important event in American History because it took a weak government and allowed it to consolidate its power and to show that it was willing to fight to remain in power. If Washington had not taken such a strong stance against the rebels the federal government may have developed in a much different fashion than it did. Since Washington was so popular his raising of an army to put down this rebellion was not seen in a sinister light. If Washington had not acted as he did the power of the government to tax and collect taxes would have been undercut and the federal government would have collapsed in a few years. This collapse would have been a direct result of the governments inability to raise money. The whiskey rebellion was an important turning point in American History because it unified the federal governments power and the ability to tax.
Post a Comment