Book contents
- Frontmatter
- CONTENTS
- Acknowledgements
- Introduction
- Part I
- Part II
- 4 Conservative Reaction, c. 1792–1820: The Case for Rejection
- 5 Liberal Engagement, c. 1792–1820: The Argument for Cooperation
- 6 Radical Attraction, c. 1792–1820: The Need for Utopia
- 7 Epilogue: William Cobbett and America
- Notes
- Works Cited
- Index
5 - Liberal Engagement, c. 1792–1820: The Argument for Cooperation
from Part II
- Frontmatter
- CONTENTS
- Acknowledgements
- Introduction
- Part I
- Part II
- 4 Conservative Reaction, c. 1792–1820: The Case for Rejection
- 5 Liberal Engagement, c. 1792–1820: The Argument for Cooperation
- 6 Radical Attraction, c. 1792–1820: The Need for Utopia
- 7 Epilogue: William Cobbett and America
- Notes
- Works Cited
- Index
Summary
We cannot help wishing that our countrymen, in general, were a little more alive to the feelings which we conceive such a spectacle is calculated to excite; and that they could be brought to sympathize a little more in the progress of a kindred people, destined to carry our language, our arts, and our interests, too, over regions more vast than ever acknowledged the sway of the Caesars of Rome. But the bitter feelings of the colonial war still rankle in too many bosoms on both sides of the Atlantic.
Liberal British commentators on America between 1792 and 1820 rejected the brew of resentment, contempt and fear that constituted the conservative British attitude towards the new United States of America. Instead, they applauded the new republic for successfully limiting the power of the executive in government and for demonstrating that such a state could flourish politically and prosper economically, and they suggested that it had a vital role to play internationally. They were more critical of American society and intellectual achievements, though, and, unlike radical writers, they were unwilling to be persuaded by the American example that popular sovereignty was a phenomenon to be emulated in Britain or elsewhere in the world. They needed the American example to sustain their own particular political mythology, and they believed that America's role in the world was to take up the British mantle of spreading liberty throughout the globe, but they did not wish to see Britain follow the American model of widely representative government, which was a totem to liberty rather than a pattern to be followed.
The opposition Whigs, as chapter 2 showed, had taken some time to recognize and support the case for American independence, as opposed to their preferred option of reform of British governance in America and reconciliation with the colonists within the British Empire. Their attitudes had been characterized by sympathy for the colonists and, later, a pragmatic acceptance of American independence, since reform was not forthcoming, rather than the enthusiasm for and envy of American republicanism displayed by British radical thinkers.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- British Visions of America, 1775–1820Republican Realities, pp. 101 - 126Publisher: Pickering & ChattoFirst published in: 2014