Our Founding Father's Lasting Advice

---

In early 1796, President George Washington decided not to seek reelection for a third term and began drafting this farewell address to the American people. The address went through numerous drafts, in large part due to suggestions made by Alexander Hamilton.

In the 32-page handwritten address, Washington urged Americans to avoid excessive political party spirit and geographical distinctions. In foreign affairs, he warned against certain entanglements with other nations.

The address was printed in Philadelphia’s American Daily Advertiser on September 19, 1796. Washington’s final manuscript is at The New York Public Library 

(source: https://www.ourdocuments.gov/ )

As our nations' first president, George Washington  established precedents for the executive office.  America’s first presidential campaign was, in fact, a broad effort to persuade Washington to accept the office. Citizens across the colonies as well as former comrades in arms insisted that only he could forge a nation. Washington won the presidency by unanimous electoral vote in both 1788 and in 1792. Their were no formal political parties, only the desire of united American Citizens to succeed as a newly formed nation.  

In accepting the presidency of what was still an experiment in republican democracy, Washington proved a model of confidence and restraint. For example, his decision to serve no more than two terms set a lasting precedent. A century and a half later, after Franklin Roosevelt was elected to four terms, that precedent was cemented in the Twenty-Second Amendment.

Washington’s prestige and patriotism helped galvanize the new republic at a time when it was most vulnerable to domestic and foreign turmoil. In 1791, he successfully suppressed the Whiskey Rebellion, invoking the power of the federal government over the states. To avoid becoming embroiled in the war between Great Britain and France, he issued a Proclamation of Neutrality in 1793. In 1795, the Jay Treaty strengthened American economic ties with Britain and vacated English forts in the American west. 

During his Presidency, Washington watched with dismay as the very officers and citizens who had fought off the rule of a monarch made grabs for their own individual power. The entry of political parties into the the shaping of America in part led Washington to not seek re-election. Interestingly, no candidate since Washington has won 100% of the electoral college.

Washington's Farewell Address warned our nation and future elected officials that the “independence and liberty” they currently enjoyed was the result of the “common dangers, sufferings, and successes” they had experienced together in the American Revolution and early years of the republic. To safeguard their hard-won system of republican government in a federal union, the country had to remain united.  

 (Sources: https://americaspresidents.si.edu/research/object-groups/highlights-george-washington-1732-1799 ; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_presidential_elections_by_Electoral_College_margin; https://www.mountvernon.org/library/digitalhistory/digital-encyclopedia/article/george-washington-s-farewell-address/

In his Farewell Address, Washington warned the greatest danger to the Union, stemmed from the combination of factionalism and external invasion. Washington explained that partisanship “open[ed] the door to foreign influence and corruption” because it weakened voters’ abilities to make reasoned and disinterested choices. Rather than choosing the best men for office, the people would base decisions on “ill-founded jealousies and false alarms,” and so elect those in league with foreign conspirators. 

The theory that guided Washington and his successor, John Adams, was simple, and widespread at the time. If a consistent partisan majority ever united to take control of the government, it would use its power to oppress the other party. The fragile consent of the governed would break down, and violence and authoritarianism would follow. This was how previous republics had fallen into civil wars, and the Framers were intent on learning from history, not repeating its mistakes. As the American political system evolved, communications across the states were slow and the development of political parties took time to evolve with minimal unity on a national level.

From the mid-1960s through the mid-’90s, American politics had something more like a four-party system, with liberal Democrats and conservative Republicans alongside liberal Republicans and conservative Democrats. Conservative Mississippi Democrats and liberal New York Democrats might have disagreed more than they agreed in Congress, but they could still get elected on local brands. You could have once said the same thing about liberal Vermont Republicans and conservative Kansas Republicans. Depending on the issue, different coalitions were possible, which allowed for the kind of fluid bargaining the constitutional system requires. 

But that was before American politics became fully nationalized, a phenomenon that happened over several decades, powered in large part by a slow-moving post-civil-rights realignment of the two parties. National politics transformed from a compromise-oriented squabble over government spending into a zero-sum moral conflict over national culture and identity. As the conflict sharpened, the parties changed what they stood for. And as the parties changed, the conflict sharpened further. Liberal Republicans and conservative Democrats went extinct. The four-party system collapsed into just two parties. 

Today, triple developments—the nationalization of politics, the geographical-cultural partisan split, and consistently close elections—have reinforced one another, pushing both parties into top-down leadership, enforcing party discipline, and destroying cross-partisan deal making. Voters now vote the party, not the candidate. Candidates depend on the party brand. Everything is team loyalty. The stakes are too high for it to be otherwise. 

The consequence is that today, America has a genuine two-party system with no overlap, the development the Framers feared most. And it shows no signs of resolving. The two parties are fully sorted by geography and cultural values, and absent a major realignment, neither side has a chance of becoming the dominant party in the near future. But the elusive permanent majority promises so much power, neither side is willing to give up on it. 

America has gone through several waves of political reform throughout its history. Today’s high levels of discontent and frustration suggest it may be on the verge of another. But the course of reform is always uncertain, and the key is understanding the problem that needs to be solved. In this case, the future of American democracy depends on heeding the warning of the past. The country must break the binary hyper-partisanship so at odds with its governing institutions, and so dangerous for self-governance. 

With recent events and the current political environment, Washington's Farewell Address provides a lasting warning Americans still need to heed as we select our elected officials. It should also serve as an impetus for changing how we view and vote within America's electoral system.

Sources (https://www.mountvernon.org/library/digitalhistory/digital-encyclopedia/article/george-washington-s-farewell-address/; https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/01/two-party-system-broke-constitution/604213/

In his Farewell Address, George Washington warned..."They [Political Parties] serve to organize faction, to give it an artificial and extraordinary force; to put, in the place of the delegated will of the nation the will of a party, often a small but artful and enterprising minority of the community; and, according to the alternate triumphs of different parties, to make the public administration the mirror of the ill-concerted and incongruous projects of faction, rather than the organ of consistent and wholesome plans digested by common counsels and modified by mutual interests. 

He also warned..."they [Political Parties] are likely, in the course of time and things, to become potent engines, by which cunning, ambitious, and unprincipled men will be enabled to subvert the power of the people and to usurp for themselves the reins of government, destroying afterwards the very engines which have lifted them to unjust dominion."

George Washington further laid out how "The spirit of encroachment tends to consolidate the powers of all the departments in one, and thus to create, whatever the form of government, a real despotism. A just estimate of that love of power, and proneness to abuse it, which predominates in the human heart, is sufficient to satisfy us of the truth of this position. The necessity of reciprocal checks in the exercise of political power, by dividing and distributing it into different depositaries, and constituting each the guardian of the public weal against invasions by the others, has been evinced by experiments ancient and modern; some of them in our country and under our own eyes. To preserve them must be as necessary as to institute them."

In essence, our first President was concerned that political parties would eventually erode the institutions our founding fathers so brilliantly designed to prevent the consolidation of power which they understood destroyed previous experiments in democratic models of government through their study of ancient civilizations such as Rome and Greece as well as the period of European Enlightenment.

This appears to be what is occurring with today's Republican Party, but could in reality happen with any political party.

After explaining that he would not serve a third term, and had actually wanted to retire after his first term, he thanked the nation for its support that had encouraged him in the face of challenges and criticism. With the transition of leadership, Washington promised that he would pray for the country for the rest of his life that the union would be preserved under the Constitution, administered by wise leaders who would preserve liberty. He primarily wanted to give his advice concerning lurking dangers and the top priorities for national wellbeing. 

Knowing that the new nation loved liberty, he insisted that national unity was necessary to preserve American independence and peace. Unity was facilitated by America’s common religious, cultural and political values. The main reasons he identified for maintaining American unity included patriotism, the great benefits of each section supporting the others to share in the success of commerce, and the reduced need for an expensive army since civil war would then not be likely. Thus the things that separate like regional interests and misrepresenting the aims of others should be avoided. United government is necessary for an effective permanent union rather than a mere alliance as this is why the Articles of Confederation were set aside. The Constitution should be kept until consciously changed by the vote of the people. 

Obstruction of authority is destructive to constitutional government and will lead to its demise. Thereby minorities gain artificial political power over the delegated power of government. These methods aid unscrupulous politicians to subvert popular rule by usurping power. If the Constitution cannot be overthrown, some will attempt to bring innovations to weaken the Constitution. A wise nation will guard against partisan politics. Rival factions often seek revenge producing tragedies that lead to permanent despotism and the loss of liberty as people yield absolute power to an individual so that they can be relieved of their disorder and misery. Partisan politics distracts and weakens government by agitation, fomenting riots and even insurrection that enables foreign influence and corruption. Partisanship is like fire—it is valuable for warmth, but if it gets out of control it will burn down everything. 

Each branch of government should confine itself to its respective constitutional sphere. When one branch seeks to consolidate power, it leads to despotism. The human love of power leads to the abuse of power and history shows this tendency of one part of government to encroach on the responsibilities of another part. Be on guard for this and be sure only to change the Constitution by constitutional means as usurpation of power will ultimately lead to evil results. 

Political success must have the support of religion and morality. No patriot can stand against these as they lead to happiness and aid citizens to do their duties. Both the politician and the devout should cherish them as they are vastly important to personal and national wellbeing. Without them, our courts will fail in justice. Some scholars may claim that religion is not needed for moral conduct but reason and experience prevent us from expecting national morality to prosper if the morally correct behavior taught by religion is excluded from society. Moral behavior is necessary for a free government. We cannot be neutral to attacks on national morality as it is an attack on the foundation of our government. Thus we also need educational institutions to disseminate knowledge and shape public opinion. 

The government should value its right to borrow by using the right sparingly and promptly paying its debts. Wars are expensive and should be avoided. In peace, debt should be paid off as quickly as possible. We should not make future generations pay the debt that we have incurred. But remember, to pay off debt, there must be taxes. The government should be candid about its taxation and we must be willing to accept what is necessary to pay the public debt. 

The nation must keep its word and be just toward all nations which is the way to seek peace and is required by religion, morality and good policy. This is worthy of a free, enlightened and soon to be great nation. This may be costly but will pay off in the long run as providence blesses high moral standards. We must not have permanent opposition to some nations and passionate attachment to others. Instead, pursue a just friendship toward all, lest we become enslaved to hatred, leading to war and the loss of liberty. 

Having favorite nations creates an illusion of common interest when there may be none and raises the potential for taking on those nations’ hostilities. It not only facilitates giving away what should be kept but also creates jealousy among less favored nations. Devious citizens use the favored nation status to betray their own nation in the name of national interest. Foreign influence stirs domestic factions. So a free people must be vigilant against the subtle and dangerous stratagems of foreign influence, even as we remain unbiased to avoid manipulation by differing nations. The rule for foreign policy should be commerce rather than politics. While we must keep existing commitments, let us stop here. Europe’s controversies are foreign to our concerns so it is unwise to join their struggles. Our unique geographical advantages lead to independent neutrality so we will soon be immune from invasion to pursue peace or war as we alone decide best. Steer clear as much as possible from permanent alliances with foreign powers, although temporary alliances for defense in extraordinary emergencies are acceptable. Our international commerce should be fair, establishing business rules for stable trade and the rights of merchants. Such rules must be re-evaluated from time to time since there are no unselfish nations and each seeks its own best interests. 

My countrymen, this friendly advice will likely not make the impact I wish given human nature and the usual course of nations. But I hope it will help to moderate partisan rivalry, warn against foreign intrigue and guard against pretended patriotism. If such is the case, I will be amply paid for my efforts. I have sought to follow these principles but only the records of history can establish whether I have succeeded. I have unswervingly remained neutral in the current war in Europe as I proclaimed in April, 1793 in spite of efforts to change my mind. Every nation involved has essentially admitted that we have the right to take this course. The main reason for neutrality has been to gain time for our national institutions to mature, so we could chart our own course.

I have never intentionally erred, although I have likely erred often due to my inexperience. I am praying that God will avert any evil which may result from such errors. After 45 years of service to the nation, I hope that it will be gracious in forgetting my errors as undoubtedly; I will soon be lain to rest. I am relying on America’s kindness and am motivated by deep love for my native soil as I return to Mount Vernon. There I will share with you the benefits of good laws under our free government. This is the favorite object of my heart and the happy reward of our mutual cares, labors and dangers.

– Geo. Washington