I’m a little belated in posting this, but nonetheless: YAL has recieved a letter to the editor pertaining to the opinions expressed by Judge Andrew Napolitano in my interview with him for the fourth issue of Young American Revolution. For layout reasons, there isn’t going to be a section of letters to the editor in the next issue of YAR (coming out in time for CPAC). So we’ve decided to publish the letter here for your review and comments:
I have enjoyed your magazine immensely. It has definitely challenged me to reexamine some of my views. I still maintain some disagreements with what I read in its pages, some fundamental and some more nuanced. Perhaps I’ll submit an article that details them and see if it makes the cut.
In the meantime, I do have a short and specific bone to pick with you. I’m sure that Judge Napolitano makes some compelling arguments in his book, and I am delighted to know that someone else sees a parallel between slavery and abortion, even though it is framed within a slightly different analogy than my own.
However, I believe that a portion of the Judge’s comments were flatly inaccurate and that they also disregard some important context. I am of course referring to the mention of John Adams and the Alien and Sedition Acts. Adams was in fact, not at the Constitutional convention. He was serving as the first U.S. ambassador to England. It is unfortunate that he and Jefferson were unable to attend. They were two brilliant minds who were often at odds in their deep-seated views on human nature. It is likely they, and others who were absent, may have helped diminish the imperfections of the document.
Regarding the Alien and Sedition Acts, as always, context is key. America was a new and fragile nation. England, our recent adversary, and France, our recent ally, were at war again. Washington had tried to steer a neutral course between them. Despite his efforts, factions were beginning to form within the newly united States. The Alien and Sedition Acts were enacted to keep our fledgling nation out war. Hamilton and Adams butted heads over this, with Hamilton pushing for a war against France. Adams accomplished Washington’s objective. Although it may well have cost him a second term, and despite his full appreciation that it would tarnish history’s image of him forever… He kept us out of war. Now isn’t that one of the primary things that you folks are so passionate about?