Thanks for the response Susan.  While time doesn't allow me to read Rothbard's 
complete interpretation of George Washington, I will
take your summary under consideration as I come across related articles from 
time to time.  Thanks.

  _____  

From: [email protected] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Susan 
Hogarth
Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2008 6:53 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [Libertarian] Rothbard's history of the revolution in audio - free



On Jan 28, 2008 11:57 PM, Bob Giramma <[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
<mailto:evil_spock%40hotmail.com> com> wrote:
>
> BOB: OK, I already knew Washington wasn't a great general in the
> traditional sense. Sorry if I misled on that one. And it's also fair to
> say I have inadequate background to comment on Rothbard's criticism if I
> haven't read it in his own words. But given that I already knew some of
> Washington's shortcomings, I don't see a legend to be broken. Instead, I
> appreciate his accomplishment at taking a rag-tag army and running around
> the countryside long enough for luck to go his way. There was no possible
> way the colonial army was going to beat the British military in traditional
> European-style battle.

Actually, that was the exact substance of Rothbard's critique - that
Washington hindered rather than helped the guerrilla nature of the
revolutionaries; that he tried to force this 'ragtag bunch' into a
clone of a traditional European army - with nearly disastrous results.
Basically, the war was won in *spite of*, rather than *because of*,
Washington.

Possibly an overly harsh critique, but it serves as a good
counterweight to the glossing Washington has gotten form most besotted
historians.

> Also, although he had an imperfect presidency, there
> were many precedents set by Washington that we should celebrate even today.
> It's not easy being first. I think the greatest thing George Washington
> ever did was go home -- twice. Throughout most of history, military victors
> became absolute rulers. After the war, Washington resigned his commission
> and went home. Then, after two terms as president, he again went home, and
> we enjoy a peaceful transition of power to this day. I guess I appreciate
> the simple things in life.

Yes, a great deal of hay is made of this 'reluctant leader' story -
but I wonder about it. Washington was obviously a man of great
ambition, so I wonder if it would have been as easy for him to have
assumed a dictatorship as folks imagine. He wasn't THAT popular
(especially after having been president), and revolutionary ideas must
still have been very much in the air.

-- 
Susan Hogarth
http://www.collieth <http://www.colliething.com> ing.com


 


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Reply via email to