Trump and Harris’s Battle Reflects America’s Historical Political Conflict

The intense allegations exchanged between Democrats and Republicans today would have been recognizable to the Founding Fathers.

In fact, the election of 1800 alone had almost all the elements that have made Donald Trump’s three presidential campaigns so eventful.

Accusations of foreign interference?

Definitely – John Adams and Thomas Jefferson, the 1800 candidates, believed each other to be under the influence of foreign powers.

The French Revolution caused as much division among Americans as any foreign policy crisis today.

Jefferson’s Democratic-Republican Party, which evolved into today’s Democratic Party, viewed Adams and his Federalist Party as monarchists and Revolutionary War traitors for their pro-British and anti-French stance.

The Federalists saw Jefferson’s pro-French party as radical as France’s own revolutionaries, perceiving Jeffersonians as potential atheists who would abolish private property.

Republicans accused Federalists of being anti-democratic, while Federalists claimed Republicans were against the Constitution.

Each side firmly believed the other was “illiberal” and in cahoots with foreign powers contrary to American principles.

Immigration was a contentious issue back then too, intertwined with fears of anti-American influences from abroad.

During Adams’ presidency, Congress extended the residency requirement for naturalization and granted the president broad authority to deport immigrants, then called “aliens.”

How about allegations of government being used against domestic opponents?

With the Sedition Act of 1798, Congress criminalized critical writings against the government.

Today, administrations like President Biden’s rely on social media companies for censorship, similar to what critics of COVID policies, such as Jay Bhattacharya, have encountered.

Jefferson and his supporters not only opposed the Alien and Sedition Acts but were ready to defy them, even inciting states to go against the federal government.

The Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions of 1798, written anonymously by Jefferson and James Madison respectively, argued for state resistance to federal laws.

The “sanctuary city” progressive mayors respond to federal immigration restrictions with a similar approach.

A new twist is when states like Florida and Texas must enforce immigration laws that Biden won’t uphold, requiring them to counteract nullified laws.

Jefferson had a more consistent state-oriented government philosophy than most politicians of his time, although he could be inconsistent when needed, particularly regarding the Constitution’s separation of powers.

Negotiating the Louisiana Purchase and presenting it as a done deal in 1803 may have been beyond his presidential authority, yet Jefferson allowed the Senate to ratify the treaty afterward.

Despite opposing the Sedition Act, Jefferson believed in punishing “seditious libel” at the state level.

In another similarity to modern politics, the 1800 Adams-Jefferson rivalry didn’t end with the election.

Disgruntled members from one’s own party could be a significant embarrassment then, just as it is today.

Former Jefferson supporter James Callender was the first to publicize rumors of a scandal involving Jefferson fathering children with his slave Sally Hemings, tarnishing the third president’s reputation.

Callender also introduced gender controversy to the 1800 campaign by attacking Adams in a scandalous pamphlet that led to his prosecution under the Sedition Act.

Jefferson tried to soothe partisan tensions in his inaugural address by declaring unity between Republicans and Federalists.

He advocated for tolerating those with opposing views, emphasizing the importance of free speech in combating error of opinion.

Modern politics may be intense, but American history offers inspirations from leaders like Jefferson and Adams.

Daniel McCarthy is the editor of Modern Age: A Conservative Review.