Hamilton would have fought against Brexit
Lin Manuel Miranda’s musical Hamilton vividly brings to life the rags to riches story of Alexander Hamilton’s life, against the backdrop of the tumultuous years during and after the American Revolution. Ron Chernow’s biography of Hamilton, which provides the basis for the musical, more richly describes the political cut-and-thrust of the personalities and politicians that shaped the Constitution and the foundations of the United States.
This week, as President Obama visits London and reminds the British public of the benefits of European Union membership, I have been struck by the parallels between Britain’s exit vote and the decision faced by the founding States regarding ratification of the US Constitution.
Against a background of strong populist opposition to the new Constitution in his home state of New York, Alexander Hamilton collaborated with James Madison and John Jay to write and publish the Federalist papers, which enumerate the benefits of closer union and endorse the proposed Constitution as the best means to secure peace and prosperity for the thirteen colonies. Peace would be secured by closely binding the colonies together, avoiding the risk of factional alliances with European powers, and defusing the risk of petty squabbles between them erupting into war. Prosperity would be achieved through harmonious trading relations between the States, sound conditions for public credit, and a common currency.
Hamilton railed against the ‘little politicians’ who opposed ratification of the Constitution for parochial and populist reasons. As an immigrant to the United States, and a decorated veteran of the Union Army, Hamilton’s primary identity was as an American, not a New Yorker. He believed that the opponents of the Constitution were acting to protect vested State interests and their own State level political influence.
Boris Johnson’s response to President Obama’s essay endorsing the Remain campaign brought Hamilton’s caricature of ‘little politicians’ to mind. Trying to portray Boris Johnson’s character to an American colleague recently, I described him as being midway on a scale between Churchill and Trump. This week Boris is all Trump, and he has been rightly criticized for the crudity, jingoism and veiled racism of his article. His claim that the USA would never agree to join a Union similar to the EU is (deliberately) missing the point: the USA is the right model for the European Union, and it was Hamilton, Madison and Jay who helped to cement this Union, over the baying cries of the Boris Johnsons of the 1790s.
With this all said, Hamilton, Madison et al would not have been able to secure the ratification of the United States Constitution if it had resembled the half-way house that is the EU Constitution of today. The EU’s lack of a directly elected Executive branch and its lack of democratic transparency massively weaken its credibility, and leave it open to the sustained criticism of populists and nationalists. The EU needs an effective foreign policy and defense strategy, and it needs to deal decisively with the open wound of border security. True reform of the EU is necessary, and Britain should seize the moral authority to lead this reform. To do this, Britain will need brave and talented leaders who reject the backward-looking isolationism of the ‘little politicians’ and embrace European identity as a positive and additive force. It needs more leaders like Alexander Hamilton.
