First Entrepreneur: How George
Washington Built His—and the Nation’s—Prosperity. By Edward G. Lengel. Da
Capo. $25.99.
It was President Calvin
Coolidge who was quoted as saying, “The business of America is business” (actually
a misquotation: he said “the chief business of the American people is business,” which is not
quite the same thing). And it was that erudite musical mischief-maker and
satirist, Tom Lehrer, who said, in a song called Smut, “When correctly
viewed, everything is lewd.” Putting these two thoughts together – an
admittedly unlikely combination – produces the notion that when correctly
viewed, everything in America is about business. That even includes Edward G.
Lengel’s notion of George Washington as an entrepreneur.
This is a curious viewpoint, not because
Washington was not creative in his business ventures (he was) and not because
it is unattractive to think of Washington as more than a stodgy figurehead (it
is), but because the whole notion of entrepreneurship has so little to do with
18th-century farm-and-land-focused life. An entrepreneur is a
business organizer who takes on substantial financial risk. This scarcely
describes Washington, who, if not quite a gentleman farmer, did manage an estate
that was already in his family – taking on the same sorts of risks encountered
by farmers today, but not the types associated with modern entrepreneurial
ventures.
But even if this book’s
title is a stretch, Lengel, director of the Washington Papers documentary
editing project at the University of Virginia, is onto something here.
Washington is usually seen as a military and political leader, but military and
financial matters were as intimately interrelated in the 18th
century as they are today, and Washington had almost as much to do with one as
with the other. Through a series of successes and reversals both in his
military role and at the Mount Vernon estate, Washington was enmeshed in “the
commercial rivalry between Virginia and Pennsylvania” in the 1750s even as he
was honing his military skills and deciding for the first time that “British
colonial authority [was] indifferent to if not actually opposing Virginia’s and
his own financial prosperity.”
Thus, Lengel argues, the
seeds of Washington’s revolutionary leadership were intimately connected with
his business concerns, and as time went on, he became more and more adept –
despite his lack of formal education – in the discipline, hard bargaining and
hard work that served him well both on the battlefield and at home. Lengel does
a good job of showing how committed Washington was to fair financial treatment
and appropriate compensation for duties performed, and also takes Washington as
economic planner out of the shadow of Alexander Hamilton, who – Lengel argues –
largely implemented and expanded policies that originated with Washington. “When
it came to business,” Lengel writes, “Washington was no idle dreamer but a
hard-headed realist.” This applied not only to his personal affairs but also to
those of the new nation – setting a course, Lengel says, upon which the United
States continues. What Lengel does not say is that this argument draws an
important distinction between Washington and Thomas Jefferson, the polymath
who, for all his far-seeing ways and cultivated instincts, was most comfortable
viewing the United States as a self-supporting agrarian nation. Jefferson was
thus a proponent of what would today be called “small, decentralized
government,” while Washington, it can be argued, favored the “big, centralized
government” model that has, for better or worse, persisted.
Inevitably for a history
book of the 21st century, Lengel’s deals with Washington’s attitude
toward slavery, looking at Washington’s late-in-life plan to sell enough land
“to liberate a certain species of property which I possess, very repugnantly to
my own feelings.” In accordance with Washington’s business principles, the
emancipation, Lengel states, was to be done “in a way that did the least harm
either to the enslaved or to his estate.” The planned land sale did not go
through, however, and it was eventually left to Washington’s widow, Martha, to
free their slaves, in accordance with Washington’s will.
Washington’s business savvy
and hard-won knowledge of economic success and failure may not have constituted
entrepreneurship in any modern sense, but Lengel does a good job of showing how
the first president’s hatred of debt and concerns about poor public credit,
inefficient government and an insecure currency helped shape the nation’s early
policies in ways that Hamilton would fight to implement. And at the very end of
First Entrepreneur, Lengel brings up
something intriguing: “Emotion bound America to France, but interest bound it
to Great Britain.” That sentence alone shows a great deal about Washington’s
economic pragmatism and desire for fiscal stability, even if that meant closer
ties with the nation’s onetime enemy and looser ones with the country that
helped Washington win the Revolutionary War. This sort of
traceable-to-Washington pragmatism, it can be argued, has long been the
linchpin of American economic policy. But it follows, then, that if Washington
could see the bloated and deeply debt-ridden federal government of the United
States today, which spends so much time redistributing wealth and so little
helping individuals find new ways to maximize it, he would be appalled.
No comments:
Post a Comment