By whom? Some suggested/offered him Kingship, and he adamantly refused.
2007-09-20 10:48:46
·
answer #1
·
answered by gcbtrading 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
George Washington has never been considered an American king. Where did you get this idea?
2007-09-20 10:49:57
·
answer #2
·
answered by michaell 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
The Declaration of Independence, and the revolution that followed were supposed to be a repudiation of monarchy. But if you strip away the pageantry and ritual, the end result was the same. Smart, wealthy, and well connected people seize power. Their family and friends benefit, and become a ruling class. This country, as are all countries, is divided by class.
At one time that class divide was clearly drawn along racial lines. The ruling class were white men, the working class were white men, the poor were uneducated whites, and almost all blacks.
Now the divide is kind of grey around the edges, but it is still difficult to cross that line. After the second world war, the GI bill, and public universities did a great deal to help people cross the class divide, but neo-cons (the new royalists) have helped weaken the GI bill, and have slashed funding for public higher education.
2007-09-20 10:53:35
·
answer #3
·
answered by Entirely of This World 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
Old "George" would turn over in his Grave- if he heard you call him THAT! He wanted NOTHING to do with a Monarchy- and he could BARELY be persuaded to be nominated as our First President & take THAT job..! As it turned out, almost EVERYONE thought he was the right man for the job; & since there was nobody really "running against him" for the Office, I GUESS some of his critics might have considers him sort of a "king". But in ALL other ways- he really wasn't. :) (By the way; here's a piece of "trivia" for you... Washington was the SECOND man offerd the job as President; The FIRST man, Benjamin Franklin- turned it DOWN -because he was too Old!!!)
2007-09-20 11:00:28
·
answer #4
·
answered by Joseph, II 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
He wasn't. References to a King George refer to King George III of the United Kingdom.
2007-09-20 10:46:21
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
He wasn't. There was a suspiscion among many, particularly loyalists that presumed that once he attained the presidency, that he would in fact be "president for life". This is one of the notable success points of any democratic government, whether the executives and sr. administrative staff effectively relinquish power.
What Washington did, unlike almost any other leader up to that time, was willingly walk away from power. He refused a 3rd term as he and all of the other founders felt it was more important for the process of democratic institution to continue.
To the extent that actual national and military power is wielded by American presidents, they could very easily be considered kings by those who come or only know of the monarchical system.
The important difference between the US system of governance and simply "electing" kings. Is that the constitution proscribes pretty heavily what the President may or may not do. The president may not - for instance - declare war. This is for the Congress to do. They may not have someone killed for reasons outside the legal system.
This is one of the problems of more recent administrations, Truman, Kennedy/Johnson, Reagan and Bush Jr. are that they declared war as a point of executive perogative and particularly constrained by the addition of the enacted the War Powers Act in 1973.
When critics view President Bush (for example) as taking an "expansive" or "imperial" view of his presidential privileges, they are referring to the unchecked use of the power of the office of the president and more broadly the mechanisms of government by virtue of non-compliance with the law, or lack of public knowledge of the executive's activities and actions.
This is in contrast to the way presidents have historically acted. President Lincoln, conducted a war within the continental US, and still kept a public access schedule as well as made a matter of public record, every law or action taken by the administration of the president.
Practically speaking, ONLY war-related intelligence/counter-intelligence was of course kept secret, during the civil war.
2007-09-20 10:58:27
·
answer #6
·
answered by Mark T 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
When was he ever considered an American king? They offered him the title before the Constitution was written but he said no way. It was a king that caused the problems they had and that is exactly why he didn't want any more to do with kings even himself in that position.
2007-09-20 10:48:13
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
He was actually asked to becom king after his time as President was over, but being the wise man he was, he knew that this was not for the greater good of the country and declined the offer. He could have ruled this country until the day he died, but instead he realized the need for the Republic to stand as it was designed.
2007-09-20 10:49:51
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
He was not. After the Revolutionary War, some leaders of the new country asked him to be king. He refused.
2007-09-20 10:46:04
·
answer #9
·
answered by regerugged 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
He wasn't considered a king. He has been called "The father of our country" but not king.
2007-09-20 10:46:59
·
answer #10
·
answered by claudiacake 7
·
0⤊
0⤋