How Would George Washington and Thomas Jefferson React to Lockdown Protests?

Would Washington and Jefferson have joined anti-quarantine protesters with AR-15’s on their shoulders, urged state governments to crush them mercilessly, or just ignored them and let Covid-19 sort them out?

The Coronavirus hadn’t been a pandemic for three weeks before protests erupted in American cities over quarantine measures. How would America’s two most revered Founders have reacted to these demonstrations?

Although the protesters were few in March and mostly limited to those of more anarchic persuasions, the continued lockdown caused the grumbling and demonstrations to go mainstream in many states. Michigan and San Diego were major hotspots for these anti-quarantine protests

Much of the restlessness stemmed from the government’s failure to give Americans a realistic expectation of when they could resume a normal life. This uncertainty and the mixed signals in the age of social media caused many simpletons to believe all forms of conspiracy theories. Even level-headed people began to believe that their state governments would unnecessarily quarantine them for several months.

But as Walter Olson shows here, this is not the first time state and local governments have quarantined citizens, and they have the constitutional right to do it in this type of situation.

Jefferson was a liberal in his day. Before the era of Progressives and New Dealers, to be a liberal meant to support maximizing personal liberty and limiting the role of government to the most necessary of functions.

Washington, meanwhile, liked to think of himself as apolitical and most Americans thought of him this way as well. But being president revealed that he too was incapable of rising above the factional fray, and he allied firmly with the conservative Hamiltonian camp.

In Washington’s day, to be conservative meant belief in an ordered, tiered society that respected tradition, common law, and the willingness to crush all those who tried to disturb the peace or rouse rabble. It didn’t have to mean supporting monarchy, but it did favor a far more powerful executive than the liberals.

Jefferson would’ve most likely sympathized with anti-quarantine protesters. It wasn’t that he didn’t believe that governments had a right to forcibly protect citizens from pandemics. Everyone believed that because pandemics were more common and deadly in their day. Governments usually didn’t even have to force people to self-quarantine. They did it gladly.

What we’ve seen lately — with some states and cities extending quarantine measures deep into the summer — Jefferson would have seen as excessive and a dangerous step toward tyranny.

When Shays Rebellion rocked western Massachusetts — Jefferson, who was serving as ambassador to France — took a far different position than most Founders. While most of them acted like the new country was breaking apart, and anarchy was at the gates, Jefferson wrote:

What country can preserve its liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms. . . . The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is its natural manure.

This differed starkly from Washington’s attitude about the threatening protests. Our first president understood the dangers of letting people run wild with grievances.

During the revolution, he seldom hesitated to hang his own men for desertion or revolt, even though they usually had a legitimate reason to do both. They were unpaid, starving, and freezing. But, no matter the circumstances, Washington believed there was a right way and a wrong way to protest, and it was the government’s authority to rule with an iron fist all those who went about it the wrong way.

He proved this during the Whiskey Rebellion. In Western Pennsylvania, farmers felt crushed under the weight of the federal whiskey tax that was wiping out their livelihood. Like many anti-quarantine protesters today, these farmers were in danger of losing their homes, land, and even their lives.

Attacking tax collectors was the only means they knew to let the federal government know they weren’t going to take it anymore. But just because the colonists had revolted partially over taxes didn’t mean they could continue to revolt as Jefferson suggested. At some point, they had to be taught a lesson, and if that meant hanging their leaders, Washington was willing to do it.

Washington personally led a 16,000-man army into western Pennsylvania — a larger force than he ever commanded during the war — and the revolt ended peacefully.

It’s impossible to say for certain how either of these men would have responded to the anti-quarantine protests since we can’t ask them, but it’s safe to bet that Jefferson would have encouraged them and written prolifically against governors like Gretchen Whitmer of Michigan and mayors like Bill de Blasio of New York City.

Washington, however, would have been aghast at protesters carrying arms to the steps of state capitols and seemingly threatening governors to end their shutdown orders or face armed revolt. He would likely have offered to lead the National Guard himself to disarm and arrest every one of those miscreants if they refused to disperse and obey their governors’ or mayors’ executive orders.

Washington and Jefferson had very different opinions on the role of government in a free society. During the French Revolution, Jefferson would strongly support the revolutionaries and wanted the United States to honor its treaty when war broke out between Britain and France. Washington, however, declared strict neutrality, a position that outraged liberals who saw the US as a revolutionary nation and a natural ally of the French radicals.

For Jefferson, individual rights and his maxim that “When government fears the people, there is liberty” and “When the people fear the government, there is tyranny” guided his understanding of the proper role between citizens and government. Washington, however, favored ordered liberty that demanded the government wield the sword when necessary to maintain it.