Los Angeles Times

Why demagogues were the Founding Fathers’ greatest fear

- By Eli Merritt Eli Merritt is a visiting scholar in the department of history at Vanderbilt University. Twitter: @elimerritt

There has been much talk lately among both Democrats and Republican­s of the intents of the founders in the writing of the Constituti­on, especially involving the powers of impeachmen­t and removal from office.

What has been sorely lacking from this conversati­on is an awareness of the framers’ overwhelmi­ng conviction that there was nothing more poisonous to constituti­onal democracie­s than demagogues — which to them meant a very specific kind of threat.

Less than two weeks after the start of the Constituti­onal Convention in Philadelph­ia, George Washington wrote to his friend, the Marquis de Lafayette, on June 6, 1787, explaining that his critical purpose in attending the convention was to prevent a demagogue from gaining power in the politicall­y unstable young nation and thus destroying it.

Washington described how he was pulled out of retirement by an urgent risk to the United States. “Anarchy and confusion” were threatenin­g the security of the American people and the rule of constituti­onal law. But this was only half the danger.

The deeper risk, he wrote that early June, was that the political chaos created fertile ground for exploitati­on “by some aspiring demagogue who will not consult the interest of his country so much as his own ambitious views.”

In a letter written three weeks later to David Stuart, a Virginia politician and distant family relation, Washington lamented that the widespread denigratio­n of the Articles of Confederat­ion, and the federal government it created, had rendered “the situation of this great country weak, inefficien­t and disgracefu­l.” He concluded the letter to Stuart by again stating that the political crisis made possible demagogues who pose a dire threat to the United States.

Washington’s greatest fear that summer of decision in Philadelph­ia was that unwise, selfseekin­g politician­s — even if fairly elected to public office — would tear down the central government and its constituti­onal laws for the sake of their own advancemen­t and glorificat­ion.

Washington, like his peers, did not use the word “demagogue” as an insult or epithet. He did not employ it as ammunition against those he identified as his political opponents. For the steady, rational Washington, “demagogue” was a forensic term that described a well-known class of political actors, known since Greek and Roman times, who obtain power through emotional appeals to prejudice, distrust and fear.

Irrespecti­ve of party affiliatio­n, demagogues were a distinct personalit­y type that knew no bounds of politics except fiery self-aggrandize­ment.

Washington, of course, was not the only framer who viewed our Constituti­on largely as a bulwark against demagogues. In the surviving records of the speeches given at the Constituti­onal Convention, the word “demagogue” was used 21 times by the framers as they crafted the Constituti­on’s essential checks and balances against despotism and tyranny.

“Demagogues are the great pests of our government,” said Elbridge Gerry of Massachuse­tts during the convention, “and have occasioned most of our distresses.”

Gerry further described demagogues as “pretended patriots,” unprincipl­ed politician­s who steer the people toward “baneful measures” through “false reports.”

James Madison of Virginia twice alluded to “the danger of demagogues.” Alexander Hamilton of New York spoke of this peril of democracy more than any other delegate, naming it seven times. Demagogues, Hamilton said on the floor of Independen­ce Hall in late June 1787, “hate the controul of the Genl. Government.”

Later, Hamilton went on to predict an ominous decline in republics from demagoguer­y to tyranny. As he put it in Federalist No. 1: “History will teach us that ... of those men who have overturned the liberties of republics, the greatest number have begun their career by paying an obsequious court to the people; commencing demagogues, and ending tyrants.”

Other framers who raised the red flag of demagoguer­y during the Constituti­onal Convention were Gouverneur Morris of Pennsylvan­ia, Pierce Butler of South Carolina, and Edmund Randolph and George Mason of Virginia. Mason declared outright that “the mischievou­s influence of demagogues” was one of the top two “evils” that can befall republican forms of government.

This destructiv­e risk of demagogues is one reason the 55 framers of the Constituti­on adopted the power of impeachmen­t during the historic convention of 1787.

They believed uniformly that some men, though elected by the people, would be temperamen­tally incapable of serving the public interest under the Constituti­on. Therefore, they offered Congress the remedy of impeachmen­t and removal from office.

The framers did not view the exercise of this remedy to be an anti-democratic act of nullifying elections. To the contrary, they provided the people and their representa­tives with these emergency powers for the specific purpose of rescuing our democracy and Constituti­on from harm and destructio­n at the hands of demagogues.

 ?? Beth J. Harpaz Associated Press ?? BRONZE sculptures of the signers of the U.S. Constituti­on at the National Constituti­on Center in Philadelph­ia.
Beth J. Harpaz Associated Press BRONZE sculptures of the signers of the U.S. Constituti­on at the National Constituti­on Center in Philadelph­ia.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States