How Should We View George Washington in Today’s Context?
With the seismic shift in public perceptions of American systems as a direct result of the protests spawned by George Floyd’s murder, so many inequities have come to light. Unfortunately, so many of them are being revealed for just the first time to people like me. These realizations, coupled with my fascination of the first few years of our country (thanks to Hamilton and the brilliant Lin-Manuel Miranda), have created a moral and ethical challenge that I am still trying to solve.
I have no idea how the phrase “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal” was written with a straight face since the main author himself, Thomas Jefferson, and a majority of other Founding Fathers were slave owners. While it is said that this phrase, and the ensuing fight for independence, caused George Washington to question the practice of slavery and ultimately free his slaves upon his wife’s death (via his will), how should the time in between be judged? How do we view him and his place in history?
For me, this is an immensely difficult question. One thing I know for certain is that whatever is at work (whether it be history, fate, the universe, or something else) picked George Washington to be the figure that he was. Whether it was the improbability that all 4 bullets that ripped through his coat in the Battle of Monongahela and somehow missed him, his suspected sterility from tuberculosis, or his unflappable morals and ideology when it came to being the most important leader in the country, it is my own view that all of these things happened for a reason. I do not believe the country as we know it today would exist without Washington becoming the first president.
Obviously, I hold Washington in high regard in every aspect of his life…except one. Frankly, I don’t know how to quantify the act of owning slaves over 200 years ago. There is often the case made that “that’s just how it was back then”. Perhaps it would have been even more abnormal if he had not owned slaves, but I still cannot fathom anyone thinking they are biologically superior to someone else and owning them because of that, no matter what time period it is. Does that fact outweigh everything else he did?
As I previously alluded to, Washington himself became conflicted in the years after signing the Declaration of Independence. This questioning eventually led Washington to act on a national scale, just not in the way you would expect or one that would complete the fairytale. No, there were no dramatic speeches followed by standing ovations or grand backroom deals to orchestrate the end of slavery. Instead, since he feared the topic of slavery was too hotly contested and would result in the country breaking apart so soon after they finally had it worked out, Washington decided not to unleash the conflict brewing just underneath the surface. This may seem cowardly, but it may actually be one of many examples of Washington’s keen ability to judge the moment (though this reticence would ultimately backfire). At the time, the cotton gin had not been invented, so the system of slavery was quickly becoming financially unsustainable. Knowing this firsthand, while at the same time being unable to know of the arrival of the cotton gin, Washington believed it was actually smarter to let the practice die out naturally rather than risking everything they had just fought so hard to achieve.
I’d like to take a second here to pause, step back, and look solely at Washington’s time as president. I think we forget how hard it is to be the first anything, let alone the first leader of a country that had just improbably beaten a global superpower. Washington had prepared for this moment from childhood, so he was uniquely aware that everything he did as president would serve as a model for all future presidents that would follow him. The most significant precedent that he set, I believe, is also one of the most significant worldwide. Throughout virtually all of history up to that point, the leader of the country ruled until his or her death. However, Washington knew this could not continue, so he decided to serve only two terms as president, perhaps making the United States the first country to have its leader step down voluntarily. Serving only two terms as president remained an unwritten rule until Franklin Roosevelt would go on to win four terms (though his cousin, Theodore Roosevelt, had unsuccessfully tried for a third term in 1912). This extraordinary relinquishment becomes even more impressive when you realize Washington had given up power not once, but twice. Years earlier, at the conclusion of the Revolutionary War, it was almost universally expected that Washington would become the leader of the new country since it was customary throughout history for the leader of the resistance army to take over. George had other ideas, however, and said “I did not beat King George III to become King George I” (alright, it is unknown and probably unlikely that he actually said this, but it’s so badass that I want to believe he did).
The other crucial precedent that Washington set, though not necessarily by choice, was that no unofficial monarchy was created. Again, historically, when the leader of the country died, one of his or her family members ascended and became the new ruler. Luckily, fate had different ideas for America. As I mentioned earlier, Washington notoriously had no children of his own, so the Washington bloodline died with him, as did any chances of a potential Washington Family monarchy. This perfect storm of Washington’s reluctance to be leader, lack of heirs, and good timing (since Washington died a little over two years after he stepped down, meaning he would have died in office, unintentionally giving people the idea that the presidency was a lifetime appointment) was critically important in shaping the presidency and, as a result, history in general.
All that said, slavery can never be eliminated from the discussion. George Washington certainly resisted the institution more than other Founding Fathers, but he did not end up abolishing practice for fear of splitting up the brand-new nation (perhaps a more rational fear than we can know). The fact that I myself am white almost certainly explains why I can continue to hold him in such high regard despite this immense flaw, and I understand that. However, I firmly believe that two things are true at once: George Washington was the exact person we needed at the exact right time, and he was also a slave owner. So, as to the overarching question of how we should view George Washington today, I will always choose to mention Washington’s greatness alongside the fact that those held in slavery made it possible for him to become this larger-than-life figure. To me, keeping the knowledge of both alive means keeping the entire story of America alive.
For more insight and opinions, visit my website or listen to my daily show for free on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or anywhere else you get podcasts!
