Lincoln and the American System of Economics

nicholls

Member
Joined
Jul 28, 2020
Messages
91
Reaction score
56
Lincoln was influenced by the American School of Economics for his support for public infrastructure and a Central Bank that issued interest free money.

However, a libertarian took issue with it and had strong criticisms about Alexander Hamilton.

"You are describing a system that was contrived after the fact to give legitimacy to Hamilton and the Federalists, who did a great deal to centralize power, prop up a privileged elite, exploit the agrarian South and West to benefit banking and industrial interests, and ultimately precipitate secession and civil war.
The Federalists did a lot of damage through the Constitution and early legislation, but were so thoroughly repudiated that the Federalist Party folded into oblivion.
The Daily Kos article's contention that they supported "fair trade" is pure left-wing fantasy. There was nothing fair about their policies, which benefited the wealthy and politically prominent at the expense of the ordinary public."

Is it true that the North exploited the agrarian South and West to benefit banking and industrial interests and ultimately precipitate secession and Civil War?

I would love informed responses who know more about this subject.
 

jgoodguy

Webmaster
Staff member
Administrator
Joined
May 12, 2019
Messages
7,116
Reaction score
4,148
Lincoln was influenced by the American School of Economics for his support for public infrastructure and a Central Bank that issued interest free money.

However, a libertarian took issue with it and had strong criticisms about Alexander Hamilton.

"You are describing a system that was contrived after the fact to give legitimacy to Hamilton and the Federalists, who did a great deal to centralize power, prop up a privileged elite, exploit the agrarian South and West to benefit banking and industrial interests, and ultimately precipitate secession and civil war.
The Federalists did a lot of damage through the Constitution and early legislation, but were so thoroughly repudiated that the Federalist Party folded into oblivion.
The Daily Kos article's contention that they supported "fair trade" is pure left-wing fantasy. There was nothing fair about their policies, which benefited the wealthy and politically prominent at the expense of the ordinary public."

Is it true that the North exploited the agrarian South and West to benefit banking and industrial interests and ultimately precipitate secession and Civil War?

I would love informed responses who know more about this subject.
Sounds too out of time band to be worthy of serious consideration.
 

nicholls

Member
Joined
Jul 28, 2020
Messages
91
Reaction score
56
What do you mean by too out of time band to be worthy of serious discussion? It relates to the civil war.
 

jgoodguy

Webmaster
Staff member
Administrator
Joined
May 12, 2019
Messages
7,116
Reaction score
4,148
What do you mean by too out of time band to be worthy of serious discussion? It relates to the civil war.
Before I put work into discussion, please have Lincoln quotes and Historian quotes to work with. All I see is random stuff thrown on a wall to see if someone reacts.
 

Joshism

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 8, 2019
Messages
488
Reaction score
587
The South has somehow always been the toughest guy on the block yet also the perpetual victim of insidious Northerners.
 

jgoodguy

Webmaster
Staff member
Administrator
Joined
May 12, 2019
Messages
7,116
Reaction score
4,148
The South has somehow always been the toughest guy on the block yet also the perpetual victim of insidious Northerners.
The Richest section of the country exploited into poverty by nameless Northerners.
 

5fish

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 28, 2019
Messages
10,626
Reaction score
4,544
The South has somehow always been the toughest guy on the block yet also the perpetual victim of insidious Northerners.
Woo... No, the South exploited the labor of black enslaved people... that is Insidious
 

5fish

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 28, 2019
Messages
10,626
Reaction score
4,544
What do you mean by too out of time band to be worthy of serious discussion? It relates to the civil war.
I would but you come and go so it's hard to debate you... But his economic history is way off... He needs to be schooled...
 

5fish

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 28, 2019
Messages
10,626
Reaction score
4,544
Here is wiki... overview...


snip...


The American School, also known as the National System, represents three different yet related constructs in politics, policy and philosophy. It was the American policy from the 1790s to the 1970s, waxing and waning in actual degrees and details of implementation. Historian Michael Lind describes it as a coherent applied economic philosophy with logical and conceptual relationships with other economic ideas.[1]

It is the macroeconomic philosophy that dominated United States national policies from the time of the American Civil War until the mid-20th century.[2][3][4][5][6][7] Closely related to mercantilism, it can be seen as contrary to classical economics. It consisted of these three core policies:

  1. Protecting industry through selective high tariffs (especially 1861–1932) and through subsidies (especially 1932–1970).
  2. Government investments in infrastructure creating targeted internal improvements (especially in transportation).
  3. A national bank with policies that promote the growth of productive enterprises rather than speculation.[8][9][10][11]
The American School's key elements were promoted by John Quincy Adams and his National Republican Party, Henry Clay and the Whig Party and Abraham Lincoln through the early Republican Party which embraced, implemented and maintained this economic system.[12]

During its American System period, the United States grew into the largest economy in the world with the highest standard of living, surpassing the British Empire by the 1880s.

snip...

The "American System" was the name given by Henry Clay in a speech before Congress advocating an economic program[21] based on the economic philosophy derived from Alexander Hamilton's economic theories (see Report on Manufactures, Report on Public Credit I and II). Clay's policies called for a high tariff to support internal improvements such as road-building, and a national bank to encourage productive enterprise and to form a national currency as Hamilton had advocated as Secretary of the Treasury.

snip...


Opposition to the economic nationalism embodied by Henry Clay's American System came primarily from the Democratic Party of Andrew Jackson, Martin van Buren, and James K. Polk. These three presidents styled themselves as the peoples' politicians, seeking to protect both the agrarian frontier culture and the strength of the Union. Jackson in particular, the founder of the movement, held an unflinching commitment to what he viewed as the sanctity of the majority opinion. In his first annual message to Congress, Jackson proclaimed that "the first principle of our system [is] that the majority govern".[23] This ideology governed Jackson's actions throughout his presidency, and heavily influenced his protégé Martin van Buren as well as the final Jacksonian president, James K. Polk.

This commitment to the majority and to the voiceless came in direct conflict with many elements of the American System. The Jacksonian presidents saw key tenets of the American System, including the support for the Second Bank of the United States and advocacy of protectionist tariffs, as serving moneyed or special interests rather than the majority of Americans. The Jacksonians opposed other elements of Clay's ideology, including support for internal infrastructural improvements, on the grounds that they represented governmental overstretch as well. Several key events, legislative conflicts, and presidential vetoes shaped the substantive opposition to the American System.
 
Top