Most westward expansion was morally ambiguous, with blame and praise earned on both sides, but expansion was almost always made worse by a progressive drive on the part of the government.

Our friend Brad Birzer’s musings on his trip to the West (God’s country, the home of all good men, etc.) raise some important issues. As someone who still calls the West home, and misses it desperately (even when he is there) I understand how it can breed melancholy. A stunningly beautiful landscape with stunning and usually pleasant weather, sadly, attracts people who prioritize those things above God, family, and other goods that might have kept them at home; small wonder, then, that the West has moved into moral disorder over the last few decades.

On Dr. Birzer’s more important point, the problem of western expansion, I would like to simply encourage him in further beating up on Thomas Jefferson—always a good thing, and particularly appropriate in this instance. It probably was inevitable that Americans would settle the bulk of habitable North America. From their beginnings, Americans have been a restless people perhaps too enamored of adventure and material self-betterment. Our national character is not perfect, but it is a thing we must recognize. However, that this expansion was made far more harmful to America and Americans as well as the peoples who “got in our way,” is beyond question. Old fashioned greed, being a part of our fallen nature, is to be expected, but was made far worse by a combination of racism and power. When our thug-in-chief at the time, Andrew Jackson, decided that peaceful, law-abiding Cherokee, living in European-style settlements, were to be removed with deadly force because their land was too valuable to let them keep, we saw the worst in America come forth. Most westward expansion was far more morally ambiguous than this, with blame and praise earned on both sides, but expansion was almost always made worse by a progressive drive on the part of the government.

Central in making westward expansion damaging to America were two government programs: Jefferson’s land system and the Homestead Act. Jefferson’s system for laying out towns, counties, and other land groupings dispensed with the traditional American concern to found ordered towns, then spread people out to villages and homesteads. From a community-centered way of life, his insistence on large, square blocks of land, nice and even and equal (“just like the French”) isolated families on their farms, destroyed habits of town-building, and resulted in people on the plains going literally insane from loneliness. Our cities, towns, and rural areas all have been immensely impoverished by the rigid uniformity and hostility to natural clustering inherent in Jefferson’s Jacobin land planning.

As to the Homestead Act, the government “gave” people false hope, leading thousands to settle on pitifully small plots of land in areas where soil was thin and weather savage. Many died, more gave up and went back east to factories. And even those who succeeded did so, all too often, by preying upon the week. And, of course, the Act further isolated Americans from one another. Many groups tried to settle together, and many succeeded (the most truly Irish city in America? Butte, Montana). But the Act scattered too many Americans to the winds.

So, Brad, as in so much else, you are right to blame Jefferson, and more generally the progressive programs of the government. Americans were going to spread west, but we need not have lost so much of ourselves (and done so much harm) in the process.

This essay was first published here in July 2010.

The Imaginative Conservative applies the principle of appreciation to the discussion of culture and politics—we approach dialogue with magnanimity rather than with mere civility. Will you help us remain a refreshing oasis in the increasingly contentious arena of modern discourse? Please consider donating now.

The featured image is a painting at the U.S. Capitol, “Boone at Cumberland Gap,” and is in the public domain, courtesy of Wikimedia Commons.

All comments are moderated and must be civil, concise, and constructive to the conversation. Comments that are critical of an essay may be approved, but comments containing ad hominem criticism of the author will not be published. Also, comments containing web links or block quotations are unlikely to be approved. Keep in mind that essays represent the opinions of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Imaginative Conservative or its editor or publisher.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email