At the end of the American Revolution in 1783 several economic and political concerns worried the newly independent nation. One such was the wealthy elite amassing too much political and economic power calling for limits on the amount of land that can be purchased. This point can be shown in (pg 110) when it states Many elites defended their traditional authority and complained that subversive democrats wanted to take all the property and level all distinctions, whereas many farmers and artisans feared an aristocracy of wealth. In order to promote their positions political factions like the Federalist who wanted a strong national government worked to gather new followers to boost their party. The other party that developed the Republicans or the Democratic Republicans who were concerned about class conflict and wanted a more egalitarian socioeconomic structure. These democrats were looking out for the poorer classes of people against the wealthy monopolizing power. All this shows the post war turmoil as the country grappled with its socio economic policies even when Hamilton introduced a new tax there was revolt the illusion of a smooth transition for the new nation was mired in district and fears of social class. As by the end of the war America had the least amount of class division in the world. Key figures such as Hamilton and Adams feared the French Revolution for its radical ideas and liked England for its Stability so based much of their system on it. For these key members of the Federalist party the French Revolution and its Enlightenment thinkers were a danger to what they worked to build and wanted closer ties to England. As we can see the issue of class and wealth inequality shaped much of this period as strong individual property rights was of importance to American men but also the goal of attaining more economic equality.
3 thoughts on “Kehinde Peters Wealth And Power in The Early Republic”
Comments are closed.
Economic equality is always a issue. After American Revolution that when they realize the class division and economic class level. Of course the rich will always stay rich but its harder for the poor or lower class people to climb out of that economic struggle without the help of the rich or government assistance. To be honest I feel like even when the government try to help the poorer people its really hard to get them out of that situation because there isn’t much resources to guide them. Even when you tax the rich they will always have incoming money, and it doesn’t really effect them as much. I feel like if the rich get over tax they will start a movement which they will most likely win due to the amount of resources they have. I feel like at the end of the day it comes down to the amount of resources and help one gets to guide them out of lower class.
I appreciate your comment on Kehinde’s post. Just to point out, however, there was no such thing as an income tax in the period Mandell describes, and the idea of “progressive” taxation (taxing the wealthy at a higher rate) did not come into use until the early 20th century. Arguably, however, progressive taxation, including rates of 70% or above for the highest earners during the decades of the 1930s–1970s, was responsible for lifting many out of poverty and allowing many more to attain a middle class lifestyle during these decades (the counter-argument is that the economy has changed significantly since then and that the wealthiest hold most of their wealth in capital gains, which are taxed separately from income).
This gets off to a strong start, but falters because you don’t organize your thoughts or connect them from sentence to sentence. You also fail to put the quote from p. 110 in quotation marks, so it’s unclear where the quotation ends or whether you are quoting (or paraphrasing) elsewhere in the post. Be sure to put all quoted passages clearly, and express your analysis in your own words, otherwise you can leave yourself liable to charges of plagiarism.
Your last sentence contains the central paradox of Mandell’s book, as well as, perhaps, this period… most Americans wanted strong protections for individual property rights, yet also demanded a relatively equal distribution of property in accordance with ideas of the commonwealth, or res publica. How did some of the figures Mandell mentions attempt to resolve this tension in the period?