Talk:George Washington's Farewell Address

message: Is the address, as the last paragraph states, actually notorious, as in famous through misdeeds? -- VGF11 04:37, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Good point--the right word is "fame" and I fixed it. Rjensen 04:46, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Word confusion? 

message: From what I understand, one of the other important aspects of his speech was to warn against "an overgrown military establishment ... inauspicious to liberty". This seems to refer to standing armies, and seems to parallel Eisenhower's "military-industrial complex" farewell address. Both speeches were prophetic, and both in vain. 
I think that should be addressed in the article.
--OC  (this comment was added by 69.125.3.77 on 3 June 2007)
:The quote to which you refer is there, to be sure, but it was not a theme.  It was just a supporting argument, in the 2nd sentence of paragraph 13, bolstering his theme of the importance of American unity.
:You may deem the sentence highly important, but Washington gave it just one sentence.  It might have been a strongly-held belief of President Washington, but it was not an "important theme" of his Farewell Address.  His main themes each got multiple paragraphs.
:Washington devoted many paragraphs to the to the theme of the advantages of American unity, and paragraph 13 was just one of them.  The argument he made in paragraph 13 was, in a nutshell, that:  Central governance of the States reduced the risk of armed conflicts, both between the States and with foreign governments, and thereby reduced the "necessity" of "overgrown military establishments" which are "inauspicious to liberty."  Thus (he concluded) if you love liberty you ought also to support the preservation of the Union between the States.  NCdave 06:33, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Another important theme 

message: That must be a typo!  It doesn't even make sense.  I think it was intended to read, "tranquility at home and neutrality abroad."  However, it is ungrammatical (a sentence fragment written as a sentence), and it is placed at the beginning of a paragraph which has little to do with the topic of domestic tranquility and nothing at all to do with the topic of neutrality abroad.  Shall we just delete it?  NCdave 05:58, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hearing no objection, I've deleted it (and made a few other wording changes). NCdave 12:07, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Tranquility abroad and neutrality at home." 

message: In [this revision] 68.231.59.250 changed the article from saying that Madison assisted with Washington's first (unused) Farewell Address, to say that Hamilton did so.  However, that seems to be an error.  According to [this article], Madison assisted with the first one (the one Washington had prepared for use after his first term), and Hamilton & Jay assisted with the second one (the one Washington actually delivered, after his 2nd term):
:Washington's Farewell Address was similar to one he had prepared at the end of his first term, when he had considered retiring from office. Toward the close of his first term in 1792 James Madison prepared notes to be used by Washington in formulating a valedictory speech. Madison submitted a draft but it was set aside when Washington abandoned his plans for retirement. 
:In May 1796 he took Madison's notes and wrote a first draft for the new address. Washington showed his manuscript to Alexander Hamilton and asked him to revise it. For the next four months various drafts were sent back and forth between Washington and Hamilton. Finally, Hamilton read his version of the address to John Jay for criticism, discussing the work paragraph by paragraph. The result, rewritten again by Washington in a final version, and admittedly a collaborative effort, nonetheless embodies the thoughts, ideas and principles of the retiring president.
So I'm going to change it back. NCdave (talk) 22:06, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Who helped write it, Hamilton or Madison? 

message: My mother owns a 100+ year old print of the Edward Percy Moran painting of George Washington practicing his farewell address in a house with three other people, titled "Washington's Farewell Address". I've uploaded a photo of the print here, http://www.flickr.com/photos/27748767@N08/2868694581/ The outside of the frame dimensions are 21 1/2" X 18 1/2". Feel free to use it in this article and in an article on Edward Percy Moran. I've searched many times but can't find anything online about this painting or prints of it, I just get hits for "Washington's Farewell Address to his Troops", a different painting by Moran.
Will someone correct the title of this image as it's used on Wikipedia? The title is "Washington's Farewell Address" NOT "George Washington's Farewell Address". It's also posted without attribution of the source of the photograph. It's hanging on my parents' living room wall and I took the photo of the print. Bizzybody (talk) 03:37, 17 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Percy Moran painting

message: Given that Wikisource has the full speech, shouldn't there be a  template tag?  I tried adding it myself but it didn't appear when I did "show preview", and I didn't want to just save the page for fear I didn't do it right.  
For that matter, I think majority of the article having external-links to the aforementioned wikisource article doesn't really "sit right" with me.  I get that the entire speech shouldn't be quoted here, but surely having excerpts from each section would be okay.  We don't do the "in section I (linking to that section in Wikisource) A was discussed; in section II, B was discussed …" in any other Wikipedia articles about notable speeches, now do we?  Just wanted to put that out there.    MicahBrwn (talk) 07:45, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wikisource 

message: I plan on creating a new paragraph under the translation heading that sits blank for now along with beginning each with a title which states the section of the speech I am referencing and provides a brief description of the content. To start off with this title will be changed to "1-7 (hyperlinked) Opening Comments" It is my hope that this will eventually replace the table and assure you that all of these summaries will included references to the text and also be combined into a single paragraph summary of the speech but I have submitted them here section by section for review and discussion.
1 Washington advises the American people that he will not seek reelection in the upcoming Presidential election of 1796.
2 Washington tells the American people that he feels that his resignation from the presidency is in the best interest of the country and is doing so with the utmost gratitude to those who elected him.
3 Washington tells the American people that he only accepted the presidency out of a sense of duty to his country and that he had wanted to return to retirement in the last election but was convinced by people close to him and the state of foreign affairs at the time that it was his duty to serve a second term in office.
4 Washington tells the American people that he thinks they are ready for him to leave office and retire.
5 Washington tells the American people that he explained to them why he took office in the first place in his first inaugural address and that he has done his best to help form and run the new government despite the fact that he thinks he was never really qualified to do so. He goes on to reassure the American people that if ever his "limited abilities" in the office of the presidency was necessary that he is sure that they are no longer necessary.
6 Washington tells the American people that he is grateful for the positions he has held and the honors the country has given him but also that if he has done any good for the country during his presidency it was the result of the peoples continued and unwavering support for him in the face bad situations and of foreign criticism. He goes on to wish the American people all the blessings of heaven, or best of luck, that the union of the United States remains in place and strong, that the U.S. constitution, which they helped create perseveres, that every part of the government may be wise and morally pure, that they may always enjoy their freedoms, and that the example of the United States will help spread freedom to nations who are not.
7 Washington tells the American people that he is going to offer them some warnings and advise, as he did upon his inaugural address that are by no means law but instead should be considered the parting advice of a friend who is looking out for your best interest.
Within this summary paragraph I will also make reference to Washington's inaugural address which I believe is what he is referencing when he says that he has made the American people aware of why he took office, the current status of foreign affairs at the time of this address which he states is one of the reasons he served a second term, and also the political divisions between the Federalists and Democratic-Republicans which led Jefferson and Adams to request he serve a second term as president.
I am open to and hope for discussion or dissent upon this intended revision. --Epignosis (talk) 09:27, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ideas for paragraph summarizing sections 1-7 titled "Impending retirement from public life" on the "Outline" table 

message: 8. Washington says that he believes every American has come to hold their liberty dear and that there is no need for him to reinforce its virtues.
9. Washington argues that the peoples independence, peace at home and abroad, safety, prosperity, and liberty are dependent upon the unity of the Constitutional government and the Union of between the states it has created. He warns his fellow Americans that the most frequent and most dangerous attacks will be by people within the United States and abroad will seek to break this Union and weaken the United States, and as a result he urges all Americans to jealously guard it and look down upon anyone who seeks to abandon the Union, to separate a portion of the country from the rest, or weaken the ties that bind the states together.
10. Washington urges the people to consider themselves first Americans above all other local discriminations and to focus their effort and affection to the country above all else. He further urges the people to realize that any difference in religion, manners, habits, and political principals are small in comparison to the great common cause of liberty and independence which they have fought for and earned through common dangers, suffering, and successes.
11 - 12. Washington explains the benefits of the Union by discussing the ways he believes each region and the people and industries within that region benefit from trade and union with other regions and the resources, industries, and people within that region.
13. Washington argues that the greatest benefit of the union is the combined effort, resources, and means of its people and lands that will protect it from foreign attack, and allow them to avoid wars between neighboring nations that often happen due to rivalries, and competing relations with foreign nations. He also that the union will allow the country to avoid the need for an overgrown military which he believes is a threat to liberty and especially Republican Liberty.
14. Washington addresses people who believe that a government cannot control or meet the needs of such a large country and asks the American people to allow the country time to see if it can work instead of deciding that it cannot while not even attempting the experiment. He again warns Americans to be suspicious of the motives of anyone who says that it cannot work without proper evidence that it has failed.
15. Washington says that the greatest threat to the Union is sectionalism, or the creation of parties based upon their regional location, and people who seek to create a belief that there is a real difference in the interest and views of one region compared to another. He warns the people that men will seek to gain power by convincing them that other regions or the government do not care about them or have competing goals that go against their own but points to Pinckney's Treaty and Jay's Treaty as proof that the government and the Atlantic States in the east are looking out for their fellow Americans in the West. He points to these two treaties as victories of a united country and asks why people in the west would ever want to break with the east after their combined efforts have granted them these victories from foreign nations.
16. Washington provides his support for the new constitutional government as an improvement upon the earliest effort at a union in the Articles of Confederation and argues that although the people have a right to alter the government through amendments it is the duty of every American to obey its laws and subject themselves to its authority until such time as it is constitutionally amended by the whole of the American people.
17 - 18. Washington warns that any effort by political parties to obstruct the execution of the law, or to impede the actions of the constitutional branches are simply efforts to advance the will of the political faction above the will of the nation as decided through the mutual interests and counsel of the whole of nations. He further warns people that although these actions by political factions may answer popular demands of the people in the long run they will only allow unjust men to take control of the government from the people and destroy the things they have alliances and laws they have created to take control of the nation.  
19. See above --Epignosis (talk) 08:09, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ideas for paragraph summarizing sections 8-18 titled "Importance of unity, danger of factions, authority of the Constitution" on the "Outline" table 

message: 20. Restates the danger of sectionalism and political parties in general
21. Says he beliefs it is in human nature to form political parties but it is viewed by all nations as an enemy to the government and sought to be repressed.
22. Washington argues that the natural tendency of a political parties to have more power than another, and take revenge on members of other parties leads to horrible atrocities and will eventually lead to despotism as the people seek the security of an absolute ruler who then turns his attention from promoting Public Liberty and focuses on his own elevation.
23. Even without this worst case scenario coming to be there are enough bad things that parties do make them undesirable.
24. Washington warns that political parties distract the public councils and administrators from their duties, creates ill-founded jealousies and false alarms, creates animosity of one part of the nation against another, leads to riots and insurrection, and allows foreign nations and interest access to control the government and control of the will of the country based upon their own.
25. Acknowledges that parties may be beneficial in Monarchy governments and but in popularly elected governments they are largely unnecessary and should be restrained through public opinion so that it does not consume the country.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Epignosis (talk • contribs) 08:47, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ideas for paragraph summarizing sections 20 - 25 titled "Danger of Political Parties" on the "Outline" table 

message: I have decided to remove this section of the page since it has a natural tendency to create bias simply in the decision making process of the creator. I believe that the sections I have added under summary of the farewell address provide the reader to see the major areas of focus in the speech, gain an understanding of how much of the speech is dedicated to these ideas, and decide for themselves the major themes of the speech. In case of dissension on this idea I have taken the formatting texts from the removed section for quick recreation. --Epignosis (talk) 08:39, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removal of Major Themes 

message: I have completed the summary of Washingtons farewell address and have removed the "Major Themes" section for the above stated reason. I plan to leave the outline for reference on the original document and also to review and possibly amend the opening paragraph, legacy, and citations portion of this page. 
I look forward to criticism and suggestions which will make this page complete and fair. --Epignosis (talk) 08:44, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I have reviewed, expanded upon and proofed all segments of this page. I am confident in the material but concerned with its grammar, readibility, punctuation, etc. and hope that someone will help bring this page up to a professional status.--Epignosis (talk) 09:53, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Status of Revisions 

message: As I have said before while I am confident and willing to defend my historical research on and summary of this document I am afraid my skills as a writer and editor are severely inadequate. Despite the excellent peer review I fear that any effort that I would make to try improve this article further based upon the suggestions included within it would result in only a different rendition of a poorly written and edited article. As a result I would like to ask for a user who possesses these skills to provide a final editing and wordsmithing of this article and then submit it for a final rating. 
I have provided all the information I can and as a result I am going to step aside on this article, except of course if someone would like to discuss its content or the content of this message, and allow users who are more skilled in this area to make this article as professional as possible. 
Just as Washington did, I would ask that you please take these final suggestions into consideration when editing and finalizing this article. 
::1 - I believe that all the information included within the article is important for understanding the message of Washington's letter although it may not be presented in the correct format.
::2 - I believe it is important to avoid overgeneralizing this article per my previous posts have shown that this sometimes leads to confusion of the message portrayed in the document.
::3 - I believe it is important to provide a summary of the entire letter, despite the fact that readers could simply reference the original, since the vocabulary and wording of the original is extensive and of an older tradition of writing that can also lead to confusion and the inclusion of bias when the text is not fully understood. 
::4 - I am ready to defend my summary of the article as it is written if you are unable or unwilling to do so please do not distort the summary as included in this article. 
I hope you will take up the challenge and help raise this article to the "featured article" status that it deserves since it was and is to this day considered to be one of the most important documents in United States History by politicians and historians alike.
Thank you and I look forward to your questions, concerns, and contributions,
--Epignosis (talk) 01:28, 9 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  In need of an editor/writer to complete this article. 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on George Washington's Farewell Address. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110823160852/http://www.mountvernon.org/learn/meet_george/index.cfm/ss/21 to http://www.mountvernon.org/learn/meet_george/index.cfm/ss/21/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080913210131/http://www.nato.int/docu/basictxt/treaty.htm to http://www.nato.int/docu/basictxt/treaty.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:45, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Can we remove this ? It's nonsense. Washington's farewell address was *not* "forgotten until the musical Hamilton came along". That's pure nonsense. I would just rip it out as childish "aren't we speshul !" crap except guaranteed, some thirteen year old will insist on putting it back and then there would be an edit war and other interesting junior high school activities 116.231.75.71 (talk) 10:44, 17 December 2017 (UTC)
replies: text:   fact is the Address was neglected.  1) "This is the story of the most famous American speech you've never read...George Washington's Farewell Address is now almost forgotten." says John Avlon  Washington's Farewell: The Founding Father’s Warning to Future Generations   2) NPR says, "https://www.npr.org/2017/01/08/.../what-we-can-learn-from-washingtons-farewell Jan 8, 2017 - "When Lin-Manuel [Miranda] brought it back for [the Broadway musical] Hamilton, it was really the first time in a long time it had gotten that kind of attention."  3) Matthew Spalding & Patrick J. Garrity argued there was in the late 20th century a "Renaissance" of interest in George Washington, "Remarkably, this Renaissance has paid relatively little attention to Washington's most famous writing.  The Farewell Addresses 1796...:"  A Sacred Union of Citizens: George Washington's Farewell Address  (1996) p 2.  Rjensen (talk) 11:49, 17 December 2017 (UTC)
replies: text:  Oh b.s. Three nitwits on NPR, falling all over themselves over a lying, factually distorted piece of crap musical, spout a bunch of nonsense and suddenly it's gospel. Okay, you twats belive whatever you want, you're so [i]speshul[/i]. But it's nonsense. Mat and Pat have absolutely no factual basis for their dipsit claim. They pulled it out their shared rear and now you want to worship it. Bow down to a turd if you like, what do I care 116.231.75.71 (talk) 12:29, 19 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  "In popular culture" ... 

message: I have improved the last sentence of the first paragraph of this section of the summary. Please do reply here if you have anything to contribute to the improved version. The old version is clearly inaccurate after a cursory reading of the corresponding section of the actual address. Ecirpcire (talk) 01:33, 29 September 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unity and sectionalism 

message: I feel the article should be retitled George Washington's farewell address since the work was only later referred to as the "Farewell Address". The current capitalization seems to only be coming from the titles of web pages about the text, not from RS that say that's the proper way to display it. UpdateNerd (talk) 13:46, 29 December 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: See the previous discussion at . wbm1058 (talk) 18:33, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: What was the final conclusion of that discussion? It simply says "no consensus," which suggests to me that the question can be reopened. Am I missing anything?  —Dilidor (talk) 18:59, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: No. The previous arguments should simply be taken into account when considering this question. The link was just an "FYI". wbm1058 (talk) 19:26, 29 January 2019 (UTC)

text: I think the closer comparison would be to the Gettysburg Address, rather than to other farewell addresses. This is Washington's speech at the end of his career, just as the other is Lincoln's speech at Gettysburg. The article on Gettysburg capitalizes both, so my view is that we leave this article as is.  —Dilidor (talk) 10:52, 30 January 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: The majority of the sources call it just "Farewell Address". In my view, it makes sense to capitalize when displayed that way, but when called "George Washington's farewell address", there's a qualifier which takes away the proper-noun status. It's also rarely referred to this way anywhere but the article title. UpdateNerd (talk) 11:42, 30 January 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Capitalization of "Farewell Address"