The United States has existed for 244 years, at first glance that seems like an eternity, the average lifespan is nowhere near that, and no one is contemporary America can even remember the early 20th century, let alone the formation of America. Recorded human history goes much farther than the lifespan of America and so it can be concluded that this is a relatively new country.
In the reading “Wealth and Power in the Early Republic”, a young nation struggling with ambitions of a brighter future and traditions of the past is portrayed. When examining human history, one common theme can be observed, and that is the ruling by the few over the many. More specifically, societies organized themselves time after time by way of centralized power by small elitist groups over the much larger populations. Monarchies and dictatorships who were often brutal were the norm for many centuries. The oppression of the lower classes wasn’t only done by force, but also through low expectations. The aristocracies ruled by self-proclaimed superiority and strongly propagated a culture of God given rights to elitism.
This is the struggle that America was faced with in its early stages and there were many proponents of the old ways of governance as well as numerous others who spoke about the ideological revolution which was the importance and strength of the individual. The idea that the individual could achieve the highest accomplishments through hard work and determination and that equality of opportunity was in this case, the god given gift and right.
The chapter explains various historical events in order to give an in-depth perspective into this struggle. There are many quotes to illustrate both philosophies, but these are well encapsulating. “People think, act and speak here precisely as it prompts them… every man expects at one time or another to be on a footing with his rich neighbor” (Mandell, P.79). This quote by Johann Schoepf provides an outsider view into the revolutionary thinking in America at the time. It really shows the strong sentiments of equality of opportunity and the confidence of the individual. The fact that this surprised Johann is a testament to how new this type of thinking was at the time.
This quote, although not explicitly advocating for an elitist and aristocratic government, shows the thinking that many had at the time in terms of their belief in the old way of governance. “Almighty god has established an order in human affairs, reflected in differences in wealth that resulted from ability, industry, inheritance and god’s favor, and Americans needed to respect that arrangement in order to achieve political happiness” (Mandell, p.84). Nicholas Collin doesn’t overwhelmingly propose rule by the few elites, rather he expresses some truths which are that some people are born with certain skills and other various advantages that would benefit them and bring them in a better socioeconomic situation than others but given the context and the manner in which this is said, it is spoken in an oppressive and condescending way that mimics those feelings of low expectations elitists historically held, as previously mentioned.
It is important to distinguish theory from reality. This response is mostly an examination of the revolutionary thinking at the time in America, rather than what really took place. It was a new way of thinking that laid the foundation for contemporary society, not only in America but in the Western world as a whole.
You start off with some generalizations about American history, and history in general, that may contribute to you missing the larger point of the Mandell chapter. Yes, the Early United States was unique in world history, for the reason Schoepf describes—Americans (at least white males) enjoyed a relative equality of wealth and property that surpassed anywhere else in the early modern western world, and many expected it to grow more equal after the Revolution. But after that point, there was a debate about how equal American society should be, and how that equality should be brought about, as well as fears of a new “aristocracy” based on wealth and, perhaps, talent.
Most, like Collin, thought it was impossible to prevent the rise of this kind of aristocracy; but a surprisingly prominent minority strain, what Mandell labels a “lost tradition” argued that republican citizens should use the power of government to further economic equality by promoting education, limiting the size of landholdings, restricting certain types of inheritance, etc. So he is really emphasizing a strain of ideas related to the “commonwealth” (the res publica) much more than individualism, although of course that is an important strain of American thought as well.