-
Positively Shermanesque
June 15, 2011 | 105 comments
-
Everybody Loves Reagan
January 31, 2011 | 60 comments
-
Meet Todd Young
August 27, 2010 | 14 comments
-
Paul Johnson’s Churchill
January 11, 2010 | 24 comments
-
Art Doesn’t Work
November 3, 2009 | 17 comments
Buy the Book
American Moses
James Madison in full, thanks to the excellent Richard Brookhiser.
James Madison
By
Richard Brookhiser
(Basic Books, 287 pages,
$26.99)
Over the last half century Americans have sought a more enlightened, often politically correct, evaluation of their founders. Not for us, for example, are Parson Weems’ tales about George Washington or Washington Irving’s affectionate treatment of the father of our country.
But modern appraisals of America’s earliest statesmen, which too often dwell on their failings, of which they had many, rather than their virtues, of which they had many more, shed light on our own times and mores rather than those of the founding generation.
It is a challenging and important task to recognize and understand the founder’s faults without losing sight of their greatness while illuminating their enduring significance along the way. No historian does this better than Richard Brookhiser.
For nearly two decades, he has produced brief but profound, clear but challenging, explorations of America’s early history. His latest effort, James Madison, is a small, unvarnished monument to its diminutive namesake.
Drawing from and explicating Madison’s own public and personal writings, Brookhiser, employing equal doses of his customary acumen and wit, walks readers through the man’s eight decades in little more than 200 pages. It is an honest and at times unflattering rendering, but one that reaffirms Madison’s genius, and proves authoritatively that his fingerprints remain all over our institutions.
Though he is most celebrated for creating America’s Constitution, here, however, he is less its father than its “midwife.” Madison was the great multitasker and collaborator of the Founding. He could, in Brookhiser’s words, “execute double plays by himself” — laying the groundwork for the Constitutional Convention in Annapolis, then returning home to Virginia to secure the participation of his own commonwealth; producing the blueprint of the Constitution, bringing it to fruition through compromise and then to parchment with the help of Gouverneur Morris, all while recording the proceedings for posterity. He then huddled with Alexander Hamilton to seal the deal through the Federalist Papers. And finally he assumed the role of, in Brookhiser’s words, an “American Moses,” by crafting the first ten amendments to the document.
This is the legacy we are most likely to recognize and honor. But as Brookhiser points out, we might be a bit more hesitant to celebrate Madison’s other progeny: When he and Thomas Jefferson (his mentor and dear friend) clashed with Alexander Hamilton, they constructed the country’s first organized political faction — the Republican Party (today’s Democrats.) To accomplish this, Madison cultivated strategic regional alliances, recruited sympathetic minds and pens, and then through a series of, by Brookhiser’s estimation, crudely written and realized essays in the National Gazette (a freshly launched Republican instrument) laid out an ideology extolling the value of an agrarian economy and the wickedness of cities and manufacturing.
Madison was also one of the first American leaders to understand the importance of public opinion. Consultation with constituents was instrumental; “Public opinion was a loop, sustaining leaders even as they shaped it,” Brookhiser writes. And though it is less pleasant to contemplate, he, along with Jefferson, coolly participated in what modern parlance describes as “the politics of personal destruction.” Though they would not dirty their own hands, they had no objections to letting the likes of scandalmonger James T. Callender raze their rivals. An examination of this period will dispel any notions of a long-past era of civility in American politics. It has been cutthroat since the start; Madison’s imprint can be found here too.
He not only facilitated America’s birth, but also brought it from infancy to adolescence. First in Congress, then after helping Jefferson find his way to the White House, as Secretary of State, and then as president himself, Madison played his part, either behind the scenes or on the dais, in guiding the country into the 19th century and opening its western territories.
As a leader, Madison’s weaknesses surfaced. His blinding love of France, paranoid detestation of England, and misguided faith in trade embargos and other forms of commercial warfare (Hamilton once remarked that he was “a clever man, but very little acquainted with the world”) riled the popular opinion he so valued and led America into a second war with England. Brookhiser gives Madison’s record as an executive mixed reviews. His management style was “timid and snide.” Lackluster appointments crippled the country in the War of 1812, and left the young capital smoldering. But he corrected course, made the necessary changes, and ultimately guided the country to victory in what the author describes as “a war of national self-assertion.”
Of course there were inconsistencies. Madison and the Republicans accused John Adams of lusting after an American monarchy. But by electing Jefferson, succeeding him, and then paving a path to the presidency for fellow Virginian James Monroe, Madison created an Old Dominion dynasty of his own. He was also prone to jettison his own ideas and arguments when they obstructed his ambitions and purposes. The greatest blemish, though, was slavery. Madison, like many of the founders, owned slaves but also understood the institution was a direct affront to the principles he helped build a country upon. But he did nothing, neither in rhetoric or deed. His extraordinary mind could only conjure foolish schemes to send blacks to Africa, or diffuse slavery by expanding it westward.
These offenses, viewed with understanding of the time and the nature of man, do not diminish Madison. He was flawed, but great. The two qualities can reside in the same host. Brookhiser’s portrait presents both.
Fittingly, the book ends at Montpelier, Madison’s scenically-positioned home in sight of Virginia’s Blue Ridge Mountains. The founder rests under an unremarkable obelisk, not far from the estate. The grave gives little indication of its occupant’s accomplishments. It need not. His legacy — our Constitution, our freedoms, our political system — are far too vast to capture in stone. But in James Madison, Richard Brookhiser’s words bring them brilliantly to life.
About the Author
Ryan L. Cole writes from Indiana.
Letter to the Editor View all comments (32) | Leave a comment
More Articles by Ryan L. Cole
More Articles From Buy the Book
http://spectator.org/archives/2011/10/12/american-moses
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
Current Issue
- The Demise of Money and Credit
- What’s in a Name?
- Ailes: A Voice for the Silent Majority
The Spectacle Blog
The #FreeKate Narrative Melts Down: Lies Exposed in Florida Teen Sex Case
Robert Stacy McCain | 5.25.13
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
H/T to National Review Online
ADVERTISEMENT
POST American| 10.12.11 @ 6:25AM
------------------------USURY--------------------------
----------------------------is-------------------------------
-------------------ABOMINATION----------------------
-Law of MOSES
Mike Hawk| 10.12.11 @ 6:42AM
Full moon today. Been out howling already, I see.
PaulyD| 10.12.11 @ 10:15AM
Perhaps we should mail him a tinfoil hat?
Alan Brooks| 10.12.11 @ 4:07PM
Madison was the MAN, as they said on 42nd street.
But why do you write "the excellent Richard Brookhiser"?
Isn't Madison supposed to be the excellent one? let's give credit where credit is due-- not to the Boswell!
Alan Brooks| 10.12.11 @ 4:08PM
... as in:
Reagan was the great one, not his biographers.
Alan Brooks| 10.12.11 @ 4:19PM
BTW (one more comment):
the reason I like Madison so much is from reading the entire Federalist Papers for college; it was the best political tome, paper-- or anything-- I ever read.
But considering that politics is really mostly about manipulating people, such is not saying much. We are making a virtue out of necessity (whatever necessity is) and praising Richard Brookhiser, who is in fact NR's most seasoned writer, as "excellent". Almost as if Brookhiser himself designed the constitution.
Politics as you needn't be reminded, is a dirty, disgusting, nasty business-- and that is what is good about politics: politics has little or nothing to do with JesusChrist, or the Father or Holy Ghost. Politics is as dirty filthy rags; which is why we like it so much.
We are dogs returing to their own political vomit.
al bundhii| 10.14.11 @ 1:34AM
Ok Alan; if you really read all the Federalist Papers for one polisci class, tell me how to read them. I have tried to read the FPS and each one has something interesting in it, but Madison and Hamilton wrote dense law latinism prose, and when you think you can follow their train of argument, they both move into multisyllable paragraphs. Tell all of us how you mastered Federalist Papers prose.
Timothy L. Pennell| 10.12.11 @ 7:11AM
Why is it "Important to Recognize and Understand our Founder's Faults"? They were Human Beings. "There was only ONE Perfect Man, and HE was Crucified", the saying goes. I don't care what their "Faults" were. I care about their GENIUS.
Liberals write the things they write, about the Founders, because they have to knock them down. After all, they created a Land of Opportunity. A Land of Freedom, and Liberty, and (wait for it) Personal Responsibility.
Their promise was that, if you worked hard, if you had a dream, or, just an idea, you could prosper in this Country. Their promise was that there would be NO RULING CLASS No Kings. No Princes. No Dukes or Duchesses. The Federal Government would not be a BOOT on your THROAT. You could make it on your own.
Well, if you're Liberal, that's not good. Liberalism's favorite article of clothing is the BOOT. And, ON YOUR THROAT, is their favorite place to put it. So, they have to knock these great men, down. That's what little men do. They knock down bigger men, to make themselves, look bigger.
This one Owned Slaves. This one had a Mistress. That one might have been a Homosexual.
Today, they would be in The LEADERSHIP of the Democrat Party, with those Credentials.
The truth is, these were different times. Things didn't work the way they do now. There was Slavery. There was Sharecropping. There were lots of things that were bad and corrupt and different. That's the way it's been, since the beginning of Civilization. It's DOG BITES MAN.
I, for one, will remember these men for the GOOD, they did. For the GIFTS they laid out, for us. "A Republic, if we can keep it."
I believe in CHRIST. I believe that HE died for our sins. Did HE ever pick his nose?
I don't know.
And I don't care
Tina B| 10.12.11 @ 8:37AM
Timothy, I so resonate with your thinking, and so very often. You are blessed, my friend with a wonderful way with words, and even with uppercase letters. haha
I have recently heard about a wonderful new book, Beautiful Outlaw, about Our Savior, His playfulness (with the Apostles after his Resurrection for example) and His wit. I haven't ordered it yet, but I wanted to share the title with you. In case you want to find and read it, it's:
Beautiful Outlaw: Experiencing the Playful, Disruptive, Extravagant Personality of Jesus
By: John Eldredge
Ken (Old Texican)| 10.12.11 @ 8:54AM
Tina,
this may be Timothy's best...so far. I have saved it to my permanent docs.
And thank you for the book on Jesus. Over my life I have often wondered when Jesus was teasing.
I'm going to amazon when I finish typing here.
JP| 10.12.11 @ 10:24AM
Modern historical scholarship does on important thing; it prevents biographers from indulging in political haiography. But, in our partisan times the work has been split. Post-Modern Progressives like to point out that the Founders were totally flawed men who only served the colonial squirearchy; from the Right, or Libertairian Right, theories abound that the Founding failed due to "moneied interests" of New England. In both cases, the partisans on both sides declare there were only private interests, not public ones.
This kind of deconstructionalism or revisionism eventually leads people today to discount the actual sacrifice most of these men and thier families suffered. They all took huge risks to themselves and thier loved ones when they broke away from Great Britain. If King George prevailed they would have been stripped of thier properties, sent to London and hung.
And at this late date, only the most partisan conservatives believe that Washington never told a lie. Conservatives by thier nature understand the failings of Men. For that reason alone, the Seperations of Powers and Federalism were acts of genius.
TrueBlue| 10.12.11 @ 4:58PM
Kind of like ret-conning comics. They all want to make their own mark for personal gain, so they take something that was great, and twist it to support their views.
Jim| 10.12.11 @ 7:34PM
Tim, you are a loon.
John Daniel| 10.12.11 @ 7:16AM
Madison was a second stringer compared to George Mason. James Monroe basically ran the last two years of his presidential administration when he folded after the British invasion. He did, however, later in life realize the Constitution was an abomination. n.b, Jack Rakove's "Revolutionaries" a far better read.
Stefan Stackhouse| 10.12.11 @ 10:34AM
Madison was one of our most brilliant founding fathers and one of our worst presidents. The war of 1812 was a huge mistake and a fiasco. You may have gone through school being told it was a "draw". Cow cookies! We were beaten, and beaten very badly. We were extremely lucky to get off as lightly as we did. The US might very well have ended up being a very different country (or more likely, several different countries) that it is today, and not at all for the better. The responsibility for this disaster of a war falls directly on Madison. He was possibly the most incompetent commander in chief we have ever had, although James Buchanan, LBJ, and Jimmy Carter gave him a close run for the money
ejp| 10.12.11 @ 11:08PM
You have heard of the Battle Of New Orleans, I take? Regardless of the wisdom of the war itself, that fact alone (even though it had no impact on the Treaty of Ghent, it DID elevate respect for America on the part of the British afterwards since they didn't even get anything close to that kind of shellacking during the entire Napoleonic Wars) renders nonsense your "we were beat badly" argument.
Stefan Stackhouse| 10.13.11 @ 8:27AM
One battle won after a peace treaty has been signed does not win a war. Americans have latched on to that battle as an object of pride because there was so very little (with the exceptions of Old Ironsides and Commodore Perry on Lake Erie) about that war in which we could take any pride.
W| 10.12.11 @ 11:24AM
The founders did establish the best system of government to date. But that does not mean we cannot criticize them for not dealing with the slavery issue to end it. We are not talking about some minor issues, such as picking your nose or having a mistress. We are talking about slavery. They knew it was wrong, but not wrong enough to end it.
Maybe since Madison and Jefferson were from Virginia, a slave state, and owned slaves, they were used to it. But their failure to end slavery caused the Civil War with over 600,000 American dead, then segregation, and we still have issues today with how the black family has been damaged by welfare and crime.
Yes the founders devised a great plan for government, and it would have been a perfect plan had they included all the people. What is the point of minimizing their tragic error, and leaving the issue of slavery to future generations? Although different, it is similar to today's leaders not dealing with the debt and leaving to future generations the problem of paying it.
Al Adab| 10.12.11 @ 11:36AM
W:
I caught your comment on the sidebar blog and my Dante. Thanks for that.
Madison is one of the better studies in how the Founders actually thought and worked. He changed his position a couple times as events unfolded and showed himself thereby a true statesman. Wafflers go with the wind, but statesmen change with reality. Where are they today? We need them desperately.
The Bruce| 10.13.11 @ 1:33AM
W, had it not been for the 3/5th Compromise, the Amendment process in the Constitution, there never would have formed a Union to abolish slavery in the first place. The Founders understood and wrote about this problem.
Would I have preferred to see slavery ended at the formation of our Republic? Of course.
However, I also understand that our union would never have happened had it not been for this temporary compromise. Had it not been for this compromise, the North America continent would probably look very different today.
By the way, do you know that the United States was the very first country to abolish slavery? Countries like Saudi Arabia didn't get around to that until 1996.
While not perfect, the United States has been ahead of the curve of freedom since its inception.
W| 10.13.11 @ 8:06AM
Bruce,
What if history is always interesting but it is what if. Most countries abolished slavery without war before the USA. Examples are Canada, France, Britain, Russia, and most of the Europe and South America. There was a war in Haiti to abolish slavery.
To argue we had to compromise to create a slave nation so we could fight a bloody civil war to end slavery is not persuasive. Your argument would have some merit if slavery would have been abolished peacefully through legislation in the political process established by the founders. The amendment to abolish slavery in 1865 passed only because the North defeated the South and imposed it. But it took a war to do this.
There is no getting around that the Founders should have dealt with the issue in 1789.
I would not compare USA to Saudi Arabia, the Sudan still has slavery.
markie| 10.12.11 @ 2:18PM
The saying from James Madison goes: "The day will come when our Republic will be an impossibility because wealth will be concentrated in the hands of a few. When that day comes, we must rely upon the wisdom of the best elements in the country to readjust the laws of the nation." Look at the rich is enjoying tax breaks via the Bush taxcuts...well...
Mike Hawk| 10.12.11 @ 3:47PM
I have two questions for you fella:
1. Who are the rich?
2. How did they get that way??
markie| 10.13.11 @ 11:59AM
Answers to both questions: If wealth is concentrated in the hands of a few, we suffer because we do not get decent wages. The rich rake in more money while we get declining wages. More rich=more paupers.
Stefan Stackhouse| 10.13.11 @ 1:14PM
Forget about "the rich" - the ones I want to beat up on are the "too well-connected to fail" cabal, the crony capitalists. That is a relatively small and well-defined subset, and most definitely do deserve to be targeted with unbridled rage.
Al Adab| 10.12.11 @ 3:48PM
Yeah markie, those darned tax cuts. We suffered with them since 1981 and all it did was create 25 years of economic expansion beginning in 1983. Every time those nasty republicans follow their Conservative red-necks and cut taxes more and more people prosper. Dang nab them anyway. Don't they know that government exists to provide all our basic needs and keep other people from ever getting ahead?
You really believe this stuff?
markie| 10.13.11 @ 12:05PM
Reagan ran up deficits because of those taxcuts. I do not care which party was in control in Congress, but Reagan almost got what he got....Bush and Bush left more deficits...prosperity was at the government expense...if we had stuck at 1961 levels, we probably won't in debt now. Keynesian approcach!
Naturalborn Texicanette| 10.12.11 @ 7:11PM
Just bought the book about Jesus! Haven't had time to crack it yet...hopefully this weekend I'll get into it.
John Eldredge is a fantastic author. His writings are truly inspired by our Lord. I recommend "Epic" (if you like epic, uplifting movies), "Captivating" (for women), and "Waking the Dead" (spiritual warfare).
Tim...great post!!!
POST American| 10.13.11 @ 12:03AM
'---and David counted the tribes."
USURY --------IS ABOMINATION.
ALLLLLL there is to talk about, look at,
and call out in 2011.
USURY is, by nature, treasonous,
deviant and upheld by deviance,
demands sacrifice --human sacrifice
(THINK genocide, abortion, euthanasia)
and always ends up diddling around with
the homunculi (--THINK trans-humanism,
chimeras, clones).
---------------The very WORD of GOD----------------
---TAKE HEED
----------TAKE HEED
nathan| 10.13.11 @ 12:05PM
In acknowledging the faults of the Founders, and there is no question they had them, slavery being the most mentioned, we do not want to lose sight of their very real merits. Jefferson's unalienable rights doctrine, plagerized though it was from George Mason's Virginia's Declaration, nevertheless was the first major statement of it kind anywhere in the world by a group constituted like the one in Philadelphia and still remains the best single expression regarding individual rights. The fact that Jefferson and other members meeting in Philadephia owned slaves when they signed it and all the other issues surrounding the Declaration does not detract from it's merits or value. Similarly when you look at the Constitution, especially the Bill of Rights written by Madison, the brilliance cannot be denied.
I will argue and no doubt draw disagreement from others here, but I will argue that the Founders, whatever their faults, were as a group, when you look at their collected body of work, the Declaration of Independence, the Federalist Papers, the Constitution, and their commentaries surrounding those documents were the most brilliant political thinkers ever assembled in one time and place certainly in this country, and maybe in the history of this world. While the ideals they laid down have not always been adhered to (most recently by both the Bush and Obama administrations) those ideals still remain the basis on which the country was founded and which we need to strive to follow as both Americans and conservatives. In fact I would argue that the true definition of conservatism in this country is how close a person comes to adherence to those ideals, both those expressed in the Declaration and the Constitution.
Faults and all we will never see such a group again.