Joseph J. Ellis takes an historical approach to the notion, that American politics should become more partisan and imitate the Westminster model.

Did they want people to organize into parties?

Today’s partisan principles and lobbyists would surprise them. They believed the concept of the republic was different from the will of the people. The republic represented the long term interest of people, and they saw the politicians’ role as attempting to divine what the larger public interest was.

The founders thought groups like political parties or lobby groups were dangerous violators of the principle of public service, that they were narrow and sectarian in their goals. They thought there was no real place for parties in the republic.

Jefferson even said that if he could not go to heaven but with a party, he would not go there at all. That kind of virtuous republic didn’t last very long in fact.

Generally, for the interview, Ambreen Ali equates the Tea Party with mobs, which, with the exception of Jefferson and Franklin, most of the Founding generation condemned, according to Ellis. However, on the Tea Party, Ellis’s answer is nuanced.

The mobs in early American history are orchestrated. In some ways, the founders believed there were good mobs and bad mobs. The good mobs are like the one that threw tea into the Boston Harbor and the bad ones are like the ones that destroyed the French nation. They believed America has good mobs.

So, are astroturf protests good, and spontaneous wingnut assemblies bad?

Filed under: Academia, History, Politics, USA Tagged: congress, joseph j. ellis, mobs, sam adams, tea party, thomas jefferson, westminster system