In 1786, nearing the end of his 8 year presidency George Washington wrote a farewell address announcing “The period for a new election of a citizen to administer the executive government of the United States being not far distant “…“the resolution I have formed, to decline being considered among the number of those out of whom a choice is to be made”. As well in this address he laid out from his “much reflection, of no inconsiderable observation” where he felt the country is, which way its affairs will go, and the advice on how it is he would consider best to deal with them. His remarkable insight warned of troubles that to this day plague the United States and shed light upon solutions, some implemented, some not, in today’s government. Most remarkable to me was his focus on faction being a dangerous force that had to be controlled with in a government for it to hold consistent, an argument that is very relevant to today’s political arena. The question comes to mind, would Washington approve of the current two party system of democrats and republicans in presidential politics?
Washington presents an interesting idea, “liberty”, “is, indeed, little else than a name, where the government is too feeble to withstand the enterprises of faction”. With this view one could quickly commit to the idea that political parties are a negative aspect, but Washington states “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” suggesting instead, they are “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.” Using this logic we have the basis for an inquiry of today’s situation, is the “uniform vigilance” present today?, and if so, is it strong enough to combat today’s political organizations?
The answer to this takes further investigation, and another statement Washington makes comes into play. He states “Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports.” continuing on to later state “Promote then, as an object of primary importance, institutions for the general diffusion of knowledge. In proportion as the structure of a government gives force to public opinion, it is essential that public opinion should be enlightened.” If we suffice to say that public opinion is the “uniform vigilance” Washington spoke of, we answer the first question, yes it is still present today. We move onto the next question, is public opinion “enlightened” enough to perform its duties?
Though this question is endlessly debatable I’ll present a few things to consider. Public opinion is not the base factor in electoral process; it is channeled and refined through multiple choke points before it is accounted for. By this, I speak of first, primary elections for presidential candidates, each party holds an election to decide who their candidate shall be. In doing this, they take a filtered, by the fact you may only vote in your previously chosen’s parties primary, selection of public opinion and choose who will be put forth for further consideration. Though these are not the only candidates for president, the political parties put forth the convincing argument of these are the only two with the financial and political power backing them to stand a chance, forcing a narrow view of possibility. The next refinement of public opinion is the fact that the popular vote, the count of the entire countries votes for president, is not what decides the end result of the elections. Instead, electoral votes on a per state basis based on population size of each state are.
Does this all answer the question, is public opinion enlightened enough to perform its duties of preventing factional spirit from consuming liberty? Not entirely, but it does seem to indicate that public opinion is ignored in its raw form, and is only accepted after being transformed into an acceptable form through the party system. Would Washington feel that his farewell advice had gone heeded? It is impossible to say, but I think that he would feel the spirit of his advice is being listened to, and though parties hold more power than perhaps he would of liked, the public’s opinion is still the foundation from which it all starts.
Sources-
The Avalon Project Yale Law School 12 February, 2009 Washington's Farewell Address
Library of Congress. U.S. Govt. 12 February, 2009 Washington's Farewell Address
