Garfield, Guiteau, and the Alienated American

So I’ve been watching the (mostly) very good Netflix mini-series “Death by Lightening.”

If you haven’t yet watched it, it’s about the unlikely presidential campaign and early administration of President James Garfield, and the events leading up to his tragic assassination by Charles Julius Guiteau, a crazed gunman (brilliantly portrayed by Matthew Macfayden) who was upset he had been turned down for a government job.

The show has a macro plot about Garfield’s various political showdowns with his arch nemesis, the corrupt politician, and fellow Republican, and excellently-named, Senator Roscoe Conkland as well his drunken brawler Vice President, Chester A. Arthur, over corruption at the New York City customs collection office (I was astounded to learn that at this point, before the introduction of the federal income, two-thirds of all federal revenues came in the from of tariffs collected from the port of New York).

The second parallel plot—and the more interesting one—is the personal one between Guiteau and Garfield, and, specifically, the huge role that political patronage (i.e., doling out jobs in the government and private sector to loyal party regulars)played in American political life at this time.

The whole thing got me thinking about George Washington Plunkitt.   

In 1905 in New York City, a local political boss from New York City’s infamous Tammany Hall organization gave a series of lectures on politics, which came to be known as: 

“George Washington Plunkitt of Tammany Hall”

These remarks remain one of the best talks on political science ever given because they reveal a fundamental truth about politics, government, and human nature that neither elites nor the common public ever want to ever admit:

That most people want something material and substantive from politics.

Yes, this is partly indirectly about the economy and all that. But what was lost when got rid of patronage actually giving away for normal, not particularly ideological or who think Big Thoughts about politics and policy a way of participating meaningfully in government.

By making government more professional we made it so only the professional, college-educated elite get to participate. And this class of people are way more dogmatic, unrealistic, and ideological than someone who wants a job for his cousin in the Department of Transportation.

Here’s the relevant quote:

 “This civil service law is the biggest fraud of the age. It is the curse of the nation. There can't be no real patriotism while it lasts. How are you goin' to interest our young men in their country if you have no offices to give them when they work for their party? Just look at things in this city today. There are ten thousand good offices, but we can't get at more than a few hundred of them. How are we goin' to provide for the thousands of men who worked for the Tammany ticket? It can't be done. These men were full of patriotism a short time ago. They expected to be servin' their city, but when we tell them that we can't place them, do you think their patriotism is goin' to last? Not much. They say: "What's the use of workin' for your country anyhow? There's nothin' in the game." And what can they do? I don't know, but I'll tell you what I do know. I know more than one young man in past years who worked for the ticket and was just overflowin' with patriotism, but when he was knocked out by the civil service humbug he got to hate his country and became an Anarchist.

This ain't no exaggeration. I have good reason for sayin' that most of the Anarchists in this city today are men who ran up against civil service examinations. Isn't it enough to make a man sour on his country when he wants to serve it and won't be allowed unless he answers a lot of fool questions about the number of cubic inches of water in the Atlantic and the quality of sand in the Sahara desert? There was once a bright young man in my district who tackled one of these examinations. The next I heard of him he had settled down in Herr Most's saloon smokin' and drinkin' beer and talkin' socialism all day. Before that time he had never drank anything but whisky. I knew what was comm' when a young Irishman drops whisky and takes to beer and long pipes in a German saloon. That young man is today one of the wildest Anarchists in town. And just to think! He might be a patriot but for that cussed civil service.”

But starting in the early 20th century, we started professionalizing more and more of the federal bureaucracy by subjecting by subjecting them to civil service exam-style restrictions.

While there is something to be said for qualifications for say, military recruits and intellegence officers and air traffic controllers, do we really need to make sure that the guy doing data entry at the Small Business Administration, or the gal doing event planning at the Department of Education is the absolutely most qualified?

By trying to professionalize the government, we have completely cut Americans off by it and helped create the radical polarization we see today.

Roxton Ford a writer and is the publisher of The Roxton Ford Letter — a daily newsletter featuring commentary about culture, criticism, and commerce. You can find out more at www.roxtonford.com