The Classical Theory Of Management

Conflicting views and contrasting ideologies have always existed throughout the history of United States politics. Alexander Hamilton, who led Federalist Party, believed that a powerful central government was necessary while Thomas Jefferson, who led the Jeffersonian Republican Party, favored an agrarian nation with most of the power left to the states. Although Alexander Hamilton and Thomas Jefferson were similar in that they both harbored good intentions and tried to keep the best interests in mind for the future of the United States, their policies were drastically different. Without doubt, both of their contrasting ideas served a vital role in forming the government.

First, when the political parties emerged in the 1790’s it was evident that their ideologies were vastly different. The Republican Party wanted a representative form of government that functioned “in the interest of the people.” This party, led by Thomas Jefferson, supported a limited central government, with individual states retaining a majority of the control. Jefferson’s vision was for a nation of farmers, and farmers do not need big government to survive. They feared a large central government would take away the rights of the people. On the other hand, the Federalist Party, led by Alexander Hamilton, supported a strong central government that would pursue policies in support of economic growth, which in turn would provide the freedom the people wanted. Hamilton’s followers also supported a diverse economy.1 It is important to note here however, that both parties knew they would have to become national parties in order to win any elections and both parties had followers in the north and in the south. There was no sectional divide in the parties.

Two competing political philosophies have always existed throughout the United States’ relatively short history: one seeking to increase the power of the central government, and one seeking to decrease it. During the 1800s these two conflicting philosophies were acted out by the Federalist and the Democratic Republican parties, respectively. The Federalists, led by Alexander Hamilton, advocated the importance of a strong central government in leading the country forward, while the Democratic Republicans, led by Thomas Jefferson, promoted increasing the common man’s role in government. Although both political parties had good intentions for the future of the United States, the Federalist Party was much more effective at uniting the American

Although the Jeffersonian beliefs of strict construction and the inherent efficiency of capitalism allow for short term economic gain due to the minimal inefficiencies in the market and political system, the Hamiltonian ideologies of a strong central government and bank (more here? And implied powers), especially regarding the state of the United States economy at the time, are more effective in increasing long term economic growth and the quality of life of the nation’s citizens. However, a balance must be struck between the two polar principles in order to control inflation and maintain long term economic growth, which includes eliminating tariffs but installing subsidies that target specific markets and restraining the overexpansion of credit.

Though both Alexander Hamilton and Thomas Jefferson served as members of President Washington’s cabinet, the two held very different views on the newly founded U.S. government, interpretation of its constitution, and the role of the “masses” in that government. These conflicting views would develop in two political parties, the Federalists led by Hamilton and the Democratic-Republicans led by Jefferson. Although both political parties presented enticing aspects, Hamilton’s views were much more reasonable and fruitful when compared Jefferson’s views; idealistic and too strict in reference to the constitution.

The topic of this paper is the argument on what the American government should be based off of either anti federalist ideas of federalist ideas. Hamilton will be one to proclaim that the federalist ideas are the best for he makes the point that without a strong centralized government the government will fall and it cannot stand with no centralized government. On the other hand Patrick Henry would be on the side of the anti-federalist because he believes that the government needs to be separated for if it becomes too strong no one can tell where the government will go with all that power but he is sure that if we give the states more power it would be much safer. The reader should very much care on this topic for in the most part this may very well help you understand what you are a part of and what you should see and know about. This can also show you what the government would be like and how it would act, you will also find what your government is and are doing and what they may do later.

Government had attempted to repress the split in society by not having political parties, however the growth continued to rocketed during the debates of Jefferson and Hamilton’s regards on federal authority. Hamilton was a federalist, he believed in a strong national government he wanted to give the nation additional powers. Hamilton was sympathetic towards slaves and believed in abolishment, for he had grown up in the North and wasn’t given the advantages of being wealthy but still achieved to become successful thought his hard work. He remained determined to breakout of his awful origins. Jefferson was anti-federalist; he was a firm believer in state right’s, he thought that a government with too much power might harm state authority. Jefferson’s theory was that agricultural stability would lead one to having security in society, this was one of the reason he believed slavery helped communities. He had also grown up in the South with every benefit that would have been wished for, Jefferson had little interest in business and was set on his agricultural ideas. Hamilton and Jefferson both lead such strong political groups behind them because they had the courage to make change for their people. Although both Hamilton and Jefferson had strong arguments against one another on the thoughts of a national bank and building a stronger economic plan, Hamilton’s notions has proven to be more fit for society.

While both Alexander Hamilton and Thomas Jefferson played tremendous roles in the development and founding of the United States, their beliefs were vastly different. Hamilton believed that America’s power should be based in a federal government. On the other hand, Jefferson believed that the power should be distributed amongst the states construed of local governments. These beliefs and views on the order in which America should be run, strongly influenced their actions and how they supported and changed the American government. Jefferson and Hamilton strongly opposed each other in regard to the practicality of a national bank and believed that the bank should act in different roles.

Jefferson and Hamilton were two political figures whose contrasting opinions about the United States’ politics and economy significantly affected America’s path of development. The two men saw a very different future for the country based on the duties and powers of the federal and local governments, “Much of their approaches reflected a difference in their philosophical differences over England and France” (Farless, “Washington’s Administration and Differences Over Foreign Affairs”). As a result, their influence on the industries and policies also varied. Something very interesting is that both founding fathers viewed political ambition with distrust (Farless, “The Election of Jefferson and the Revolution of 1800”).

The argument between Federalists and Anti-Federalists might seem long gone to American citizens, but still their philosophical foundations shape the teams, scope and size of the battlefield. These philosophies go back to two lone men, Alexander Hamilton and Thomas Jefferson. Both fought aggressively for a government based on their ideas, and both did make portions of the now-standing American government. This essay will outline the political, social and economic philosophies of both men, how their philosophies influenced the government today, and a closing opinion.

The United States, in the nineteenth century, had established themselves as independent state, with gaining expansion of land, rights, and freedoms in the western part of the world after succeeding from the British tyrannical rule. However, the United States had been cogitating on whether a federalist view, a strong national government limiting state’s powers, or anti-federalist view, opposing the constitution and pushing for state’s rights, should rule the government of the new independent state. Given the conditions of the early nineteenth century in the United States, Thomas Jefferson, an anti-federalist, had a more valid philosophy of government, than federalist Alexander Hamilton. Thomas Jefferson believed that a weaker national government

Alexander Hamilton and Thomas Jefferson are undoubtedly some of the most influential figures in early American history. The two were determined to turn the United States into a flourishing country, but each tried to shape America into a completely different place. They sparked the beginning of the country’s two party system with their incredibly different stands on the role of government. Hamilton founded the Federalist party, which focused on establishing a thriving land under a strong federal government with a stable, industrial economy. The core beliefs of the other party, Democratic-Republicans, led by Jefferson, were that the central government should do nothing more than necessary, and the good common people should be the most involved.

This country was shaped by many great men, with one simple idea of being able to live free lives and make their own choices. One of these men was Alexander Hamilton, who helped create a new political idea that he, and his colleagues, called Federalism. This system was one of the shaping forces of the Constitution and Declaration of Independence, which proved to be the roots of America’s political system. The purpose of this paper is to explain Hamilton’s idea of Federalism, and how it is still in affect today.

The classical approach to public administration was focused on finding the best way to perform and manage tasks. This classical approach to Public Administration is often associated with Weber, Wilson, Taylor, and Gulick. Under the classical approach was four areas of focus which was the Bureaucratic, Scientific, Administrative, and Managerial approach. Each area represented the four main theorists that the classical approach was associated with. Max Weber's bureaucratic approach focused on the rational-legal model which viewed bureaucracy from a rational view and argued that bureaucracy is the most efficient and rational way in which one can organize the human activity and that hierarchies are necessary to maintain

The last approach to classical management was bureaucracy. Bureaucracy was extremely popular in large organizations because it allows companies to perform many tasks while eliminating judgments of managers. Although bureaucracy works well with most organizations it may not be the best approach to organizations that require fast thinking and decision making.