War of 1812 and Dejavu

It is interesting that New England was the center of opposition to the War of 1812 between The young United States of America and Britain.. Interesting also was that the British did not extend their blockade of American ports to New England until 1814. During the war, New England traded freely with British Canada up until then. Although New England was being enriched during the war, their political party leaders claimed the area was being ruined. They were furious at “the little man in the Palace” President James Madison. They propagandized that the real object of the war was to help Napoleon, expose the seaports to British destruction, and conquer Canada. New England party leaders discouraged enlistments, celebrated British allied victories in Europe, and rejected a vote of thanks to an American Naval hero. It was “not becoming a moral and religious people.”

The British eventually took advantage of this dissidence and occupied parts of Maine and raided New England coasts, all unprotected because New England politicians refused to put New England Militias under National control or allow Federal troops on their soil. New England States planned to nullify a draft bill if it passed Congress. .New England was ripe for secession in 1814. They were proposing to make a separate peace with Britain. As they said, “New England allied with Old England would form a dignified and manly union well deserving the name of Peace.” This was during the war while hostilities were going on. When the peace Treaty of Ghent was signed, the New England party officials decried it as proof that Madison had lied to get America into the war, because none of the original reasons given for entering the war were mentioned in the treaty.

The party of New England at this time was the Federalist Party. It was discredited as unpatriotic as a result. Also, since prosperity boomed in New England during and following the war, the party was also economically discredited. The party of “king” Madison was called the Republican Party. This was not the same party as today called the Republican Party. It was the party of Thomas Jefferson, also hated by the New England party leaders (Jefferson was a southerner). About a decade later, Andrew Jackson split the “Republican” party, taking his backwoodsmen, southerners, immigrants, and working men off to the Democratic Republican Party, later shortened to just “Democrat” as it is today. Several decades later, slavery abolitionists founded a new party and adopted the old name of Thomas Jefferson’s party, the Republican Party.

Today the center of opposition to “Imperial” President Bush who “lied” about the reasons for entering the Iraq war, also center in New England. Is this really a policy issue or just a battle for regional domination going on for 200 years. New England appears to not be happy since Jefferson (a southerner) replaced Adams (a New Englander) unless a New Englander is in the presidency (or an honorary one, like FDR or maybe Al Gore?).

The source for this information is mainly The Growth of the American Republic by Samuel Elliot Morrison and Henry Steel Commager. This book was published in 1962 before the Viet Nam War, Watergate, and just about everything else that colors current politics, so it would appear to be an unbised account. In fact, the authors appear to be "liberals" in their time.