I don’t think he deserves respect from libertarians because he is admired for things he did and said as of which I think are not good or didn’t mean anything. For example, he is admired for being an independent but he was an independent in name only… did he not want to self identify with a party because of his issues with his image? Some say he didn’t want to be president and it may be true that he did not want to be, but then why was he such a good example for Reagan? I also wonder if he did not almost cause the revolution to end as general because he was mostly concerned about his image. Finally, how much did he support the war against france or did he just participate because hamilton convinced him to? Hamilton’s influence made him rather partisan, perhaps more partisan than Jefferson.
Dont get me wrong though… I don’t dislike him unlike how i dislike obama because washington may have meant well for some, but didn’t seem like he knew much of what he was doing… he was also seemed like someone who would’ve been tough enough to say no and to mean it. He was also a prisoner of war which may have unleashed his rage and I can’t decide if he should be held entirely responsible for that because I know too little in regards to that.
All of that said, I’m sure that very few educated libertarians support him, but I dont know whether most respect him so I decided to ask.
He said some good stuff and did some good things, but I disrespect him for being a hypocrite in many ways (such as his brutal removal of Indians and enforcement of the “Civilized Tribes” or whatever). This relates to an old thread of mine where we were trying to find the best founder who actually preached what he stated.
When the revolutionary war was over, Washington’s troops were all mad at Congress for you know, not paying them and all, and wanted to make George king of America.
Not to mention fighting that war…He would have been hanged if the had not suceeded. And if he didn’t succeed where would theories of secession and liberty have been recorded elsewhere in history? Where have Vettel, Locke, and Montesquieu ever had such consideration in the forming of a state?
As far as I am concerned most of the Founders deserve to be revered. They are not ideal human gods as in Greece or Rome; they are human beings that did great things despite their flaws. At least our secular worship isn’t to fictional characters and Fregeian thoughts.
“If his wit be not apt to distinguish or find differences, let him study the Schoolmen; for they are cymini sectores.”
Not only that, but he stood up, volunteered to lead an army, and then financed the army himself, losing virtually his entire fortune during the war, though he made it back after.
In terms of libertarian theory of warfare, here is a man who raised an ad hoc army, privately financed(!), and succeeded against the greatest military power of that age.
It would be like Bill Gates financing and leading an army against the US government and winning.
and winning.