What does Veeky Forums think about Alexander Hamilton?

What does Veeky Forums think about Alexander Hamilton?

he had an unfortunate tendency to duel, and lose

always thought it was funny that they put the provision of the constitution that says you have to have been born in the territory that became the US or be living there when the constitution was ratified to be president, simply to keep him from running

Shouldn't have thrown away his shot

I liked him after the 2008 series "John Adams", due to how shamelessly they treated him and how everyone hated him.

However because of the stupid musical I hate him now, and are backing Jefferson due to how shitty the Puerto Rican guy depicted him in his school play.

What was their endgame? Would he'd made a good president and why did they not want him as one?

Ha

Political rivals didn't want an Anglophile with a monarchist fetish

Isn't it a bit hipsterish of you? I thought the play was pretty good.

>Hamilton had always had respect for Jews. His birthplace of Charlestown had a large Jewish population with whom Hamilton came into contact on a regular basis. As a boy, he had learned Hebrew and could recite the Ten Commandments in its original language. He believed that Jewish achievement was a result of divine providence and warned that those who discredit the Jews "destroy the Christian religion."

What did he mean by this?

Insufferable contrarian would probably be a better description.

I liked a lot of the play too, but depicting Jefferson as a bumbling idiot and demented, radical revolutionary is about as much of an inaccurate caricature as when "John Adams" depicted Hamilton as an bellicose, obsessive, proto-fascist.

Jefferson was capable of thinking for himself, and recognized when the revolution in France crossed the line. But he still had sentiment for the idea of supporting sister republics, especially in a world still very much ruled by kings. And I think he was wary of the federalist "realpoitik", and their eagerness to get in bed with a country that had caused the colonies so much damage.

He liked that $$$

Since the play was based on a book, how similar are they to one another, if you read itn of course? Are similar inconsistenciesas as you describe exist in the book as well?

>the new liberal hero was a reactionary, anti-democratic aristocrat

Being a leftist and telling people I prefer Jefferson is suffering. They can really only think of the slavery issue.

>why did they not want him as one
he was very vocally against the idea of having presidents stand for reelection, and felt that once president was elected they should remain in office for life (or until they retire) so they can actually make hard decisions that will benefit the country long term but may hurt in the short term. This was a really unpopular idea since obviously there was tremendous potential for abuse if the president isn't beholden to the electorate once he's been elected.

A lot of people were worried that if he was elected president he'd just declare himself dictator, that was a very real concern in early america, and many were quite shocked that George Washington didn't declare himself king after taking office.

i hate that faggot

>Thomas Jefferson is played by a black actor

I've only read like half the book (even though I got it in 2015), so I haven't gotten to most of the Jefferson parts yet.

But essentially Hamilton was ambitious from the beginning, and his perpetual fear of the mobs stemmed from the fact he grew up on an island where the white population was outnumbered 5-1 by black slaves. His childhood also led him to hate slavery, because of how brutal the white masters were to prevent insurrection. He always had a problem with keeping his dick in his pants, he had an admirable sense of honor, he often protected loyalist citizens like one of his school teachers from being torn apart by whig mobs. He probably spoke better French than Jefferson, and though he admired many Frenchmen like Talleyrand for his diplomatic brilliance, he was never truly grateful for all France did in helping the US win independence. He was an excellent war secretary, but his conduct on the battlefield was nothing remarkable.

The book does him more justice, primarily because it actually shows more of his faults than being an "obnoxious brainiac with a high libido"

Who gives a fuck

Imagine if a musical about Frederick Douglass had him played by a white actor

Then the play would probably have to do with race. Race wasn't issue in the Hamilton play. If the Frederick Douglass play had nothing to do with race (somehow) I wouldn't give a fuck.

Hah yes you would.

Also a solid third of the ad hominems that Lin Manuel Miranda lunged at Jefferson were that he was a slave owner. And two of the characters (Hercules Mulligan and whathisface that Hamilton liked to flirt with) were depthless cardboard cutouts of the early abolitionist movement.

um yes it was. they originally tried to exclude white actors

is the meta of hiring actors to be considered part of a work?

>reactionary, anti-democratic aristocrat

He was none of those things.

Yes. Thankfully that settled on allowing white men to portray George III, and other incompetent villains.

Hamilton: the pre-post-racial play for a changing America

>Hah yes you would
I didn't realize you knew me so well
I was talking about the play itself

>those eyes

He was a reptile-mason. He sold the USA out to the banks, and he was a sociopath.

Just calling a spade a spade; and a hypocrite a hypocrite

Except I wouldn't care. You're just making assumptions about me. Little sayings doesn't change that.

Best founding father, his was right all along

>tfw the usa will never be practically a constitutional monarchy

"No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President"