A quick blog post. I'm trying to learn that not every post needs to be a perfect gem of academic writing, otherwise I never write anything and nothing gets posted and this blog sits fallow as it has for the last couple years.
Anyway, I’ve read through the “Conway Cabal” and through the winter of 1778 – 1779 and the arrival of the first French fleet to North America. A couple of things have struck me.
First, I have a couple of very nitpicky comments about the organization of Washington: A Life. While Chernow’s prose are quite readable, the chronological organization makes every chapter almost indistinguishable and difficult to differentiate at times. Chernow has a very strict pattern page-to-page and chapter-to-chapter – even paragraph-to-paragraph it seems – and it makes a 900+ page book something of a slog. I understand why the book won a Pulitzer – it’s well-written and incredibly well-researched with clearly supported arguments. I just thought it might be less a slog to push through. To paraphrase the late, great Yogi Berra, each chapter is like déjà vu all over again.
Apart from that though, a couple of things have leaped out at me. First, the impact that the highly flawed “Articles of Confederation” had on the execution of the Revolutionary War. The descriptions of the first several years of the Revolutionary War continuously refer to the lack of clothes, food, weapons, gun powder, and other supplies for the Continental Army. This stemmed, in large part, from the Continental government’s inability to levy taxes. They had to request money to pay the troops and buy military supplies from the individual states. Just consider the recent years of argument over expanding Medicaid (part of the ACA/Obamacare, where the federal government pays for ~95% of the expansion) and imagine how well that system functioned.
Spoiler alert: it did not.
Chernow doesn’t go into it much, but I wonder about how much that experience influences Washington’s support for the Constitution several years later. Chernow continually refers to how Washington’s early military service in the French and Indian War and his experiences as a plantation owner influenced his revolutionary fervor. I wonder how much directly experiencing how such an inefficient and ineffectual central government executed a war influenced his support for a strong central government later.
Additionally, the sophistication of the economic system in the late 1700’s struck me. Obviously, Washington was a member of the economic and political elite of the colonies, but the book (and Washington’s personal writings, which are quoted extensively) is rife with descriptions of interest bearing notes, sophisticated lending arrangements, and real estate speculation.[1] I think that too often we forget how highly developed the economic system was, even 250-ish years ago. Credit, lending, manufacturing, business partnerships and corporate structures. The fundamental transformation of the modern economic system has been to expand the benefits of a sophisticated economic system – access to market investing, access to capital loans, reliable compensation, etc. – beyond a narrow slice of the elite.
Just, for example, consider purchasing a car in the modern era. The book goes into detail about Washington’s relationship with his London factors – who extended him and other Virginia planters credit for British manufactured and luxury goods.[2] Washington was extended credit to purchase major assets, but obviously most folks would not have had that option. Or if “credit” was available, it was more likely to be highly predatory instrument.[3] However, in the modern era, numerous lending organizations exist that will provide you an amount of money equal to a decent percentage of your annual salary to purchase a depreciating asset and probably at better interest rates than Washington got. I just find it interesting to be reminded of the sophistication of the economic system at the time, at least for the economic, political, and social elite.
Of course, that economic sophistication was built largely upon the back of slave labor. While Chernow does explore the contradictions in a democratic revolution led by a major slave owner – a contradiction that Washington’s own writings acknowledge – the more curious discussions so far are Washington’s comments on slavery as an inefficient economic system. Obviously, the moral and ethical quandary of slavery was and is paramount, but it’s understandable (if depressing) that a major beneficiary of a slave society (i.e., Washington) would find reasons to avoid confronting the moral and ethical issues of slavery directly. It’s more remarkable to me that Washington struggled with the economic inefficiency of the system and considered divesting himself of his slaves. Washington considered getting out of the slave-owning business by selling his slaves and converting his wealth to bonds and other financial instruments (that sophisticated economic system again). While the idea of selling off several hundred human beings (families, children, etc.) simply because it’s economically beneficial is horrifying, it’s interesting to see that beneficiaries of a horrific social system could still see its fundamental economic flaws. These economic flaws, of course, were most immediate to slave owners, while they avoided the moral and ethical issues of chattel slavery. Human nature is an interesting thing.
That’s it for the moment. I still have about half the book to get through so perhaps there will be a more detailed discussion of Washington’s view of governmental institutions and more discussion of his evolving views of slavery.
[1] Oh so much real estate speculation. It appears as if Washington eventually owned enough land to make Ted Turner jealous.
[2] Mercantilism!
[3] I said “sophisticated”, not particularly fair or equitable.
Anyway, I’ve read through the “Conway Cabal” and through the winter of 1778 – 1779 and the arrival of the first French fleet to North America. A couple of things have struck me.
First, I have a couple of very nitpicky comments about the organization of Washington: A Life. While Chernow’s prose are quite readable, the chronological organization makes every chapter almost indistinguishable and difficult to differentiate at times. Chernow has a very strict pattern page-to-page and chapter-to-chapter – even paragraph-to-paragraph it seems – and it makes a 900+ page book something of a slog. I understand why the book won a Pulitzer – it’s well-written and incredibly well-researched with clearly supported arguments. I just thought it might be less a slog to push through. To paraphrase the late, great Yogi Berra, each chapter is like déjà vu all over again.
Apart from that though, a couple of things have leaped out at me. First, the impact that the highly flawed “Articles of Confederation” had on the execution of the Revolutionary War. The descriptions of the first several years of the Revolutionary War continuously refer to the lack of clothes, food, weapons, gun powder, and other supplies for the Continental Army. This stemmed, in large part, from the Continental government’s inability to levy taxes. They had to request money to pay the troops and buy military supplies from the individual states. Just consider the recent years of argument over expanding Medicaid (part of the ACA/Obamacare, where the federal government pays for ~95% of the expansion) and imagine how well that system functioned.
Spoiler alert: it did not.
Chernow doesn’t go into it much, but I wonder about how much that experience influences Washington’s support for the Constitution several years later. Chernow continually refers to how Washington’s early military service in the French and Indian War and his experiences as a plantation owner influenced his revolutionary fervor. I wonder how much directly experiencing how such an inefficient and ineffectual central government executed a war influenced his support for a strong central government later.
Additionally, the sophistication of the economic system in the late 1700’s struck me. Obviously, Washington was a member of the economic and political elite of the colonies, but the book (and Washington’s personal writings, which are quoted extensively) is rife with descriptions of interest bearing notes, sophisticated lending arrangements, and real estate speculation.[1] I think that too often we forget how highly developed the economic system was, even 250-ish years ago. Credit, lending, manufacturing, business partnerships and corporate structures. The fundamental transformation of the modern economic system has been to expand the benefits of a sophisticated economic system – access to market investing, access to capital loans, reliable compensation, etc. – beyond a narrow slice of the elite.
Just, for example, consider purchasing a car in the modern era. The book goes into detail about Washington’s relationship with his London factors – who extended him and other Virginia planters credit for British manufactured and luxury goods.[2] Washington was extended credit to purchase major assets, but obviously most folks would not have had that option. Or if “credit” was available, it was more likely to be highly predatory instrument.[3] However, in the modern era, numerous lending organizations exist that will provide you an amount of money equal to a decent percentage of your annual salary to purchase a depreciating asset and probably at better interest rates than Washington got. I just find it interesting to be reminded of the sophistication of the economic system at the time, at least for the economic, political, and social elite.
Of course, that economic sophistication was built largely upon the back of slave labor. While Chernow does explore the contradictions in a democratic revolution led by a major slave owner – a contradiction that Washington’s own writings acknowledge – the more curious discussions so far are Washington’s comments on slavery as an inefficient economic system. Obviously, the moral and ethical quandary of slavery was and is paramount, but it’s understandable (if depressing) that a major beneficiary of a slave society (i.e., Washington) would find reasons to avoid confronting the moral and ethical issues of slavery directly. It’s more remarkable to me that Washington struggled with the economic inefficiency of the system and considered divesting himself of his slaves. Washington considered getting out of the slave-owning business by selling his slaves and converting his wealth to bonds and other financial instruments (that sophisticated economic system again). While the idea of selling off several hundred human beings (families, children, etc.) simply because it’s economically beneficial is horrifying, it’s interesting to see that beneficiaries of a horrific social system could still see its fundamental economic flaws. These economic flaws, of course, were most immediate to slave owners, while they avoided the moral and ethical issues of chattel slavery. Human nature is an interesting thing.
That’s it for the moment. I still have about half the book to get through so perhaps there will be a more detailed discussion of Washington’s view of governmental institutions and more discussion of his evolving views of slavery.
[1] Oh so much real estate speculation. It appears as if Washington eventually owned enough land to make Ted Turner jealous.
[2] Mercantilism!
[3] I said “sophisticated”, not particularly fair or equitable.