We the People: Our Founding Fathers—How Would They View MAGA and President Elect Trump? 

by 

Robert J. Fischer 

Introduction 

Through analysis of writings and other historical documents, it is possible to predict what historical figures might think of current events, but it is important to remember that their views were shaped by the events of their times.  However, while much has changed over the past 250 years, a person’s character will likely remain unchanged.  The following is a brief study of what a select number of our early historical figures may think about our soon to be Trump presidency.  These suppositions are based on a review of the opinions of these historical figures.  As I examined their views, I was at times surprised by their positions. 

George Washington 

Our first President had strong views regarding the Presidency and politics.  He made a clear choice not to be elected as a king.  He did not support political party affiliation.  As the first President, he was not part of any political party!  He believed that political parties created division.  This division was detrimental to the goals of the nation, often serving party goals over national well-being.  Washington believed in individual liberties and national freedom.  These values would be best protected by a strong central government.  It is likely that Washington would have been supportive of President elect Trump’s plans for economic growth and a reduction of government overreach.  On the other hand, it is likely that Washington would have found Trump’s attempt at greater centralization of power in the executive branch as an overreach of presidential power.  Washington was a strong supporter of checks and balances, as well as protection of civil liberties as expressed in the Constitution and Bill of Rights.  Washington would likely have been opposed to the elimination or reduction of power in the Department of Education.  Washington, along with many others, believed that if democracy was to survive, the nation needed an informed electorate. Therefore, informed voters would demand accountability with a focus on real concerns.  Politicians would need to be more responsive to the electorate’s concerns rather than focusing on self-preservation and the party line.  A good education is about empowering voters to think critically.  Education can empower citizens to make informed decisions and then hold elected officials accountable. 

Benedict Arnold 

While considered a traitor to the American Revolution, General Arnold was one of Washington’s top military leaders.  Arnold’s betrayal was motivated by his personal feelings of a lack of recognition and personal ambition.  It is likely that he would find some aspects of Trump’s nationalist and populist rhetoric appealing.  Trump’s portrayal as a strong leader and outsider would likely be appealing to Arnold based on his own experiences.  Still, it would be difficult to know how Arnold would view Trump’s efforts to centralize power in the presidency. 

Benjamin Franklin 

Franklin was an intellectual who valued reason, liberty and civil virtue.  He was known for his pragmatic approach to governance.  He had a strong belief in a balance of power to protect individual freedom.  As with Washington’s view, Franklin would have supported Trump’s economic vision and desire to reduce government overreach.  Both goals fit with his belief in individual enterprise and a government focused on protecting citizen’s rights.  Like Washington, it is likely that Franklin would have been concerned about Trump’s possible overreach with an emphasis on centralized power.  Franklin, as exhibited in his support of the Constitution, was a strong advocate of checks and balances and the protection of civil liberties.  In addition, Franklin’s experience in diplomacy and international relations would probably cause him to be concerned about Trump’s America First and isolationist policies. Franklin would also have been concerned about the intense party loyalty not the interests of the nation.   

Thomas Jefferson 

Jefferson’s views are enshrined in what we now call Jeffersonian Democracy.  Jefferson believed in individual rights, a limited federal government, and the agrarian community.  State’s rights were paramount over the rights of the federal government.  Jefferson would likely appreciate Trump’s state rights views and his focus on economic development.  However, like many of his contemporaries, he would be troubled by Trump’s focus on centralized power with executive overreach.  As seen in his words in the Constitution, Jefferson was a firm believer in checks and balances. 

Aaron Burr 

Aaron Burr is a unique figure in early American politics.  He served as the third Vice President under Thomas Jefferson.  Burr was ambitious and often challenged the status quo of his time.  It is very likely that Burr would appreciate Trump as an outsider who has challenged the status quo.  His own alleged attempt to form an army and seize control of portions of America within the new Louisiana Territory would likely provide a positive view of Trump’s January 6 demonstration. 

Alexander Hamilton  

Hamilton is considered one of the Founding Fathers and was the first Secretary of the Treasury.  Unlike Jefferson, Hamilton favored a strong central government with a powerful executive branch.  Some of his views may have come from serving as George Washington’s chief aid.  He believed that a strong government was necessary to control the nation’s finances and support its economic growth.  In his view he would likely support Trump’s focus on economic growth and reduction of government restrictions on business.  Still, he would also find Trump’s belief in centralized power as an executive overreach.  Hamilton believed in a balanced government.  He may also have been concerned with Trump’s policies that could increase national debt and undermine the government. 

John Jay 

Jay was a Founding Father who was responsible for much of the Bill of Rights.  He was also the first Chief Justice of the Supreme Court.  Jay believed in a strong central government, diplomacy, and the rule of law.  His views on Trump would likely be mixed.  Jay would probably support Trump’s nationalism and economic protectionism.  However, Jay would likely have concerns for Trump’s rhetoric and the potential he has shown for undermining democratic institutions– particularly the Supreme Court. 

James Monroe 

Monroe was the fifth President.  His presidency was known for its strong stance on American sovereignty and his efforts to limit European influence in the Western Hemisphere.  His strong stance created what has become known as the Monroe Doctrine.  While given Monroe’s strong feeling on national sovereignty and protectionism, he would likely support Trump’s positions in these areas.  However, like his predecessors, Monroe would find Trump’s divisive language, and his statements undermining democratic institutions, a major concern.  Monroe valued unity and stability of government over party. 

James Madison 

Madison is often called the Father of the Constitution.  It is evident from his writings that he was a strong advocate of a balanced government, using checks and balances of power.  He believed in individual rights and a healthy federal system.  Again, Madison would likely have a concern over Trump’s rhetoric.   The divisive nature of his dialog and his willingness to attack democratic institutions, would be counter to his belief in unity and stability in government. 

Thomas Paine 

Thomas Paine was perhaps one of the most significant figures in America’s history.  As John Adams said:  “[W]ithout the pen of Paine, the sword of Washington would have been wielded in vain.”  Adams was probably correct.  Paine published Common Sense in 1776.  Over 500,000 copies were produced in a time when the population of the British colonies was less than 2.5 million.  The percentage of readers is greater than the percentage who watch our Super Bowl!  It is likely that Paine would not approve of much in Trump’s proposal for governance over the next four years.  He would find Trump’s desire for a leaner and less intrusive government a positive position.  However, he would likely be vehemently opposed to Trump’s focus on centralized power.  Every American should read Paine’s Common Sense.  It is as applicable to today’s world as it was in his.  This champion of liberty would view Donald Trump and MAGA as a force to be resisted. 

Synthesis 

As I stated in the Introduction, it is difficult to know what any historical figure might think of modern society. However, personal values probably would not change.  Of the ten early American leaders, it is interesting that all ten might support Trump’s general assumptions regarding protection of American sovereignty and his economic positions. However, at least eight would all be concerned about his apparent disregard for the democratic foundations of this country.  Of course, this is a logical conclusion since these men were instrumental in creating the United State of America.  Burr and Arnold would more likely be supportive of Trump.  However, their own ambitions were their downfall.  Both were concerned about their own well-being and legacy.  It is no wonder that given Trump’s personality, they would likely find much of his agenda palatable. 

Conclusions 

It would serve us all well if we took time to reexamine the materials left behind by our early leaders.  They did not agree on many things but were able to find common values.  These men wrote some of the most enduring pieces of literature in our historic time.  Thomas Paine’s works were widely disseminated and read by other prominent Americans.  The Articles of Confederation, the Constitution, and the Bill of Rights carry their message in precise language.  Over the years our own institutions of government have often failed to live up to the vision that was behind the written words.  America needs to focus more on providing an education that includes lessons on our early history, not just rote memorization, but an engaged dialog that allows for evaluation and individual interpretations. 

America’s Future—A Land Owned by Billionaires and Corporations?

Or

A Land of Opportunity and a Good Life for Everyone?

by

Robert J. Fischer

Introduction

            With the election of Donald Trump as our 47th President and his plans for America’s future, it is time to evaluate what “America, the Land of Opportunity” meant, what is means today, and what it could be in the future.  For many of our ancestors, America was a land of opportunity.  But what did that mean?  Many immigrants came to this country to find a better life.  Economic stability was a goal.  Land, housing, food, and an occupation that would allow for a comfortable standard of living were achievable goals.  That dream has continued to be the focus of many Americans and new immigrants.  As a 3rd generation descendant of a Swiss immigrant, I know that my grandparents achieved this dream.  My parents were also able to offer the same opportunity to me.  I have hopefully provided the same for my children.  America, since its founding, has become a nation that has grown economically strong.  Along with this prosperity, the focus of many of our dreams has changed from wanting our basic needs satisfied to accumulating material wealth.  Our government and business leaders view our strength in the Domestic National Product (DNP) reports, where America is number 1 at $29 trillion.  But the question might be, is the DNP and our quest for material wealth really what makes a nation great?  Can President Trump’s plans make us great again?  Aren’t we already the greatest nation if we use the DNP as our measure?  Did the average American not know about our country status?  In their vote for Donald Trump, many Americans did not feel that the nation was the greatest (MAGA) on Earth!

Other Measures of National Success

            Despite the MAGA vote, many Americans often view our nation as one of the greatest. A critical evaluation will show that there are other countries that do a better job with health care, education, and in general, a standard of living.  Some other measures where the United States does not fare as well include:

Human Development Index: This index includes life expectancy, education level, and per capital income.  In this index, America ranks relatively high with a score of .927 out of 1.  The world average is .6.  The strength of this index is that it goes beyond domestic national product.  The admitted weakness is that it does not consider income inequality, economic opportunities, and health beyond longevity.

Gini Coefficient This statistic measures income inequality. America does poorly on this measure, receiving a score of 39.8 out of a possible 100.  Zero means perfect equality in income and 100 means totally unequal.  The best score goes to Sweden at 25.  It is followed by Japan, then Germany and Canada.

Happy Planet Index This index measures sustainable well-being, considering life expectancy, well-being, inequality, and ecological footprint. America ranks very low on this index at 121 out of 180 countries.  The variables that bring our rating down include too many poor people, and a low sense of well-being.  Our life expectancy beyond 60 is low, and the percentage of people making less than the median wage is high.

Social Progress Index This index measures social and environmental factors such as basic human needs, foundations of well-being, and economic opportunities. Again, America does not fare well.  We are ranked number 25 out of 170 countries.  Our scores in the human needs area, well-being, and economic opportunity are low.  Countries at the top of the list include Norway, Denmark, Finland, Sweden, Iceland, and Switzerland.

Environmental Performance Index This index ranks countries based on their environmental health and ecosystem vitality, using air quality, water resources, and biodiversity measures. On this index, America ranks 43rd out of 180 countries.  The variables include our air quality, problems with water quality and resources, and biodiversity.  The best performances are the countries of Denmark, United Kingdom, Finland, Malta, Luxembourg, and Austria.

What Makes Americans Happy?

      This is a difficult question.  While it can be different for everyone, there are some common variables that most Americans value.

      Strong Relationships Most Americans put family, friends, and their community high on the list of important things. 

      Good Health This biological reality is essential to a happy life.  The ability to have access to good healthcare, a good diet, and exercise are critical.

       Balance Between Life and Work While work had for decades been seen as the most important part of providing a secure future, today many young people seek a balance between their personal life and their work.

      Financial Stability A steady job provides the greatest feeling of financial stability.  The work pay must be enough to meet basic needs without constant stress over how to make the next payments.

      Purpose It is important to most people that they have an identified purpose in life.  That purpose allows them to work toward personal goals and gives a sense of accomplishment.

      Personal Freedom Americans believe it is important to that we can say what we want without fear of punishment.  We need to know that we have free will and while we are free to make choices, there is the realization that there are also consequences.

      A Positive Environment We all want to live in a safe community.  We strive to have clean and friendly neighborhoods.

      A Desire for Leisure As noted above there is a need to balance work with life.  Most Americans want to enjoy leisure time, whether it is watching a sporting event, participating in a sporting activity, or engaging in other type of activities such as painting, music, or collecting.

      Shared Community and Cultural Values Most Americans want to be part of a community of like-minded individuals.  These people share cultural and social values and create a feeling of happiness.

What Can Make America Great Again?

      The Trump campaign focused on the desires of the American people.  The champaign’s primary focus has been on the increased cost of living, fear of crime, and displacement and unfair treatment caused by uncontrolled immigration.  These variables address many of the deficiencies in the American happy dream.  The need to address these deficiencies is evident when considering measures beyond the GNP. 

      It may not be obvious, but it appears that much of the decline in happiness and our low scores on the indices beyond the GNP are the result of policy decisions made following WWII.  President Eisenhower, in his final address as President, said to be weary of the military industrial complex.  He saw economic growth and power in this military industrial arena.  What he likely did not foresee was that big business and wealthy capitalists would eventually replace small businesses and middle-class Americans as the controlling interest in this country.  President Nixon took two professions and turned their focus to a business model.  What we now have is a for-profit health care system as well as a legal profession where many larger firms care more about their bottom line than justice!

      It is obvious that many Americans think longingly about the good old days of individual freedom, economic prosperity, and family. However, the current environment, controlled by the quest for the dollar, has left many Americans struggling to achieve the American dream.  The gap between a working-class income and the profits achieved by large corporations and the ultra-rich has become ridiculous.  I guess if you believe that President Trump, who has surrounded himself with millionaires and billionaires, will make America great, then I have concerns for your dreams.

      America needs policies that control the growth of mega corporations and ask the very rich to contribute to the well-being of the country that has made them wealthy.  Pay needs to be improved to allow for a consistent standard of living.  Health insurance should be overhauled to reflect the best models in other countries.  Education, a foundation of our democracy, must be provided to all without being filled with political and religious mandates.  School districts should have equality in funding regardless of their locations.

      If we can achieve these few, (but politically complicated) goals, Americans will improve in the non-GNP indices as Americans again realize the value of family, a steady and adequate income, and a sense of belonging to a community that is not threatening, but welcoming.

Thoughts from the Middle

It’s Not the Age, It’s the Character that Counts

Robert James Fischer

We all age differently.  Some have arthritis, others can still play pickleball at 85.  Age isn’t really a factor in politics.  If cognitive abilities remain, other physical diminishments really are of little consequence.  And even with slowed cognitive abilities, good decisions can be made.  But, considering all the information that an older person has gathered, it sometimes takes extra time to retrieve specific information. 

On the other hand, character is something that is well defined before the end of our teen years.  People who do not develop accepted societal values will likely not develop them as they age.  In practice, those people learn how to mask their weaknesses.  They often become con artists or are involved in other non-socially unacceptable behavior.  Moral people tend to continue to care for others. They use their strong societal values to improve society rather than looking to their own needs.

Why does this matter in the political arena?  Over the years, history has shown that those who have served our country with policies that have improved life for our people have been persons with strong positive values— Washington, Jefferson, Hamilton, Lincoln, T. Roosevelt, F. Roosevelt, J. Kennedy, Obama and Biden, to name only a few.  On the other hand, some who have served did not possess the character to sacrifice their own well-being for our nation.  They were more interested in serving their own interests—for example, Burr, A. Johnson, Harding, Agnew, Nixon, and now Trump. Thankfully, a much shorter list!

History does teach us lessons if we would only pay attention.  Not that long ago the presidency of Richard Nixon taught a nation a hard lesson on personal greed.  Many Americans are too young to remember the Watergate scandal and the treachery behind Nixon’s desire for power.  There are many similarities between Tricky Dick and Donald Trump.  America needs to understand that persons like Nixon and Trump may make grand statements about their love of America, but they are only using citizens to maintain power and stroke their own egos. As a recent pundit remarked.  There are millions of Americans who are in need.  They are looking for someone to lead them out of poverty.  Person’s such as Nixon and Trump prey on this desire and promise a better way. They want your vote to maintain their own power and stroke their ego.

In the coming months Americans will need to decide whether or not character counts.  History tells us that it does.  In November don’t let the false belief that age is a problem cloud your judgement.  Biden may be a few years older than Trump.  But they are both old men!   The real choice is about character.  Who has shown a love of country and an ability to compromise?  Remember that Biden was friends with John McCain!  Who cares more about their own ego and maintaining power? Consider the fact check that Trump’s own cabinet and vice president don’t want him back in office.

The choice is clear!!