Founding fathers Essay

This paper seeks to explore whether Americas founding fathers were work force of slip and race who were not drive by in the flesh(predicate) semipolitical ambition. Some of the fathers examined in the study include horse parsley Hamilton, Aaron take a look, Thomas Jefferson, asa dulcis Franklin, George Washington, fundawork forcet Adams and James Madison (Ellis, 1- 2). Character advise be looked at as the in the flesh(predicate) traits that are attributed to an individual and which guides his intentions. A hu domain of purpose is that person who lives by principles and motives that are virtuous and desired by the people he is dealing with.These principles and motives should excessively be acceptable according to the honest standards set by the society. Personal ambition is when a person sets and focuses on achieving targets which are aimed at individual satisfaction. One is said to be driven by own(prenominal) ambition if these targets are the motivating factors behind his actions. In the book Founding Brothers by Joseph J. Ellis, the founding fathers were politicians who pursued great ambitions by various avenues.The political rivalry, pride, jealousy and personal ambition however brood them into doing things that do not qualify on the whole of them to be called men of character (Ellis, 10, 16, 23). Nonetheless, most of their activities yielded personal political gratification as well as contributing in some way to the creating of America as a province. According to Ellis (75), it is collect to selfishness and personal interest that the then former depositary of the treasury Alexander Hamilton and sitting Vice president Aaron Burr finish up in a duel that turned surface to be fatal as Burr fired a deadly gyp that killed Alexander.The two men who were on both sides of the political divide representative Republi rat vs. Federalists allowed their hatred to take charge of their thoughts. Alexander did not like Burr because the later captu red a Senate seat from Philip Schuyler who happened to be Hamiltons father-in-law (Ellis, 172). A man of character at this point would have accepted pour down and allowed democracy to prevail. In addition, Hamilton comes let on as a nepotist who placed personal ambition before the interest of the nation for finding it had to accept that Burr defeated his relative Philip Schuyler.The despicable opinion expressed by Alexander against Burr which triggered the argument ending in the duel depicts him as a man who lacked character (Ellis, 113,140). A man of character uses his words wisely in away that does not harm the feelings of his audience but communicates the essential information. Instead of pushing Aaron Burr further in the New York gubernatorial election by endorsing a candidate who ended up vanquish Burr and widening their differences, a man of character would have swallowed pride, inhumed their differences and offered his support or remained neutral to reconcile their diff erences ( Ellis, 160).This is because men of character care for differences of opinion and not taking things personal. However, Hamilton manifested good character by deliberately wasting his bullet and keeping his pre-duel promise by not dead reckoning Burr. The spirited push for the establishment of permanent national capital on the Potomac River was a great fiscal policy that credits him with fighting for the wellbeing of the nation and not his personal political ambition. His support for Jefferson against Burr due to the latters ill intention shows his concern for the nation.According to Ellis (194) we can say with profound confidence that Aaron Burr was not a man of character based on his murder of Hamilton and treason accusation. He comes out as an arrogant man capable of doing anything to acquire power and stay power. Hunger for power is a vice that is not associated with men of character. purge after loosing his Vice- establishment in an election, he was still driven b y personal political ambition to the extent of wanting to betray his own nation.This is patent in his conspiracy to steal Louisiana Purchase lands away from the join States and crown himself a King or Emperor (Ellis, 201) Before his election to presidency, Thomas Jefferson and James Adams forged a relationship that contributed immensely to the American nation. It is this good rapport that prompted Hamilton to prefer his candidacy to that of Burr. In spite of all these, his rebellion and disregard of other leaders for not working his way does not reflect his good character but he comes out as a person who prefers things to work out in his way.This can be illustrated by his opposition to George Washingtons policies which were regarded by more as being in the interest of the nation (Ellis, 240). He was overly angered by John Adams win for presidency which made him to refuse Adams attempt to incorporate him into the cabinet. As a man of good character, he should have accepted the gr atitude and acknowledgment extended by his friend to set in the cabinet. This incident also shows that he allowed his personal political ambition to supersede the interest of the nation by refusing to serve in the cabinet.His acts of character assassination on John Adam reveal his hate and unethical conduct (Ellis, 343). However, Adams reaction warrants his consideration as a good man who was merely trying to help the nation. From his policies and politics, Washington can be considered as a respectable politician who went beyond his personal political ambition to serve the nation. For instance, through the promotion of national unity and highlighting the danger of fondness and party politics (Ellis, 256).On the issue of slave trade, all of these leaders stand accused especially Madison as a man who lacked character by promoting this form of oppression to develop their nation that Benjamin Franklin who spoke out against it magic spell championing freedom for all (Ellis, 317) Co nclusion. looking at the early political days of the founding fathers, we can intermit that some of them had their personal political ambition that tarnished their good character while others maintained their ethical standards and respect while serving the nation.For instance, controlled by personal political ambition, Thomas Jefferson eng successiond in activities that eroded his character as a good man. This trend however changed in old age as he tried to repair his faults including reconciling with John Adams (Ellis, 406). From the to a higher place discussions, I can conclude that not all founding fathers were men of character who were not driven by personal political ambition. contribute CitedJoseph J. Ellis (2001). Founding Brothers. New York Wheeler Pub Inc.