no -although he belonged to no political party, he had definite federalist leanings - one of the characteristics of the federalist party was a belief in a strong federal government and less power in the hands of the states - the feds were also pro industry and pro city - also, the national bank created by alexander hamilton (he and gw were like minded on most things) was one of the things people in the confederate states hated, and one of the main causes of dissention between the north and south, despite what you learned in school, slavery wasnt the main cause of the civil war - it was $$$ (although slavery did have a lot to do with$)
2006-09-28 17:45:02
·
answer #1
·
answered by krisr22 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Monuments and memorials, modern neighbourhoods, true regional taste this is exactly what Washington, DC is; a place unlike any other; just like this page hotelbye . Washington it's your property overseas with free museums and America's top yard. Washington is recognized all over the world as a symbol of the United States. Here, the area you cannot miss is the Capitol. Capitol could be the seat of the House of Representatives and the Senate. The big dome, on the basis of the dome of St. Peter's in Rome, sticks out especially other Washington buildings. Like Washington itself, the developing has developed through the years since the main portion was developed between 1793 and 1812. The final improvement, in 1958-62, enlarged the key façade where presidents take the oath. On another area, a marble terrace offers wonderful views on the mall and the city. The inside is resplendent with frescoes, reliefs, and paintings, especially the rotunda underneath the great cast-iron dome with a roof painting by Constantino Brumidi and huge paintings of views from American record on the walls.
2016-12-23 02:43:01
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Absolutely not.
Almost everything Washington did as President was to put the interest of the United States over the interests of the south. Almost all of Washington's decisions (National Bank, assumption of states debt) was to establish a strong central government. He both feared and hated the idea of any rebellion.
Look at his reaction to the Whiskey Rebellion. He made the point that it was wrong and different than the war for independence because the people had representation now so the people didn't have the right to rebel.
Financially it would have been better for him to continue slavery. But WASHINGTON NEVER MADE DECISIONS BASED ON PERSONAL FINANCIAL INTERESTS. If he did, he wouldn't have supported the American Revolution. He believed in the United States, and he philosophically was against slavery. He would have seen the end of slavery as a good thing and there is no way he would have gone against the government that he built. All the founding fathers were against rebellion. (Jefferson was philosophically for and against everything, so he doesn't count!)
2006-09-27 14:57:44
·
answer #3
·
answered by coach_pearce 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
If you count his southern ideals then maybe, it is impossible to say. However, you have to realize that a major part of the Confederacy was states rights. So the Southern question shouldn't be as heated as it is currently. Just because the south lost the war does not mean that they were inherently evil! Yes, I am aware that there are other issues here. George Washington was a great American hero, but you have to look at the Civil war as a neutral thing and really look at all the political points.
2006-09-26 14:52:16
·
answer #4
·
answered by summer 3
·
1⤊
0⤋
That's a very interesting question. General Robert E. Lee, an Honourable American who was against slavery, joined the confederacy because of states rights and loyalty to Virginia. In the case of Washington, he also loved Virginia, but I suspect that his commitment to the unity of the States would have weighed more in his decision. So I would lean toward his supporting the Union.
2006-09-26 16:34:44
·
answer #5
·
answered by Mr Ed 7
·
2⤊
0⤋
George Washington, being a founding father of The United States of America would not have joined The Confederate States of America. Most rich people didn't fight, and GW was also known for being kind to his slaves. Additionally, he could afford to hire servants, and wouldn't have been bothered enough by slavery's end to take up the cause.
2006-09-26 14:49:23
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Most of the Founding Fathers would have joined the Confederacy, since the Confederacy stood for self-determination, and the Union stood for imperialism.
2006-09-26 16:38:21
·
answer #7
·
answered by manabovetime 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
George Washington was a Fedralist, one who supports a strong central government. He had lots of money and he was from the North. He'd have more to gain economically keeping the union together. Based on these facts, I'd say that he wouldn't join the Confederate states.
2006-09-26 15:27:53
·
answer #8
·
answered by chris 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Hard to say in 1776. While beginning to lead the Continental Army he did some very serious soul searching. He was very pro-Virginia like Robert E. Lee was. He also knew if the Colonies were going to survive during and after the war they would have to be united.
2006-09-26 14:54:51
·
answer #9
·
answered by travis_a_duncan 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Washington did own slaves, but he'd also want to do what is best for the country. We'll never know.
2006-09-26 14:48:57
·
answer #10
·
answered by Stephanie 4
·
0⤊
0⤋