US Founders become "Dynastic" families

Is there anyway that the Washingtons, Jeffersons, Adams, Franklins, etc.. become "dynastic" families, in other words, still in the spotlight either in politics or business or armed forces up to the present day?

Same for other families too, such as the Lincolns and Roosevelts, etc.
 

Kaptin Kurk

Banned
I'd have to say no, at least not with a POD after the American Revolution. As cliquish and closed as the early American Republic seems to us today, it still provided too much social mobility for a powerful family to sieze midevial levels of control. If George Washington had begot natural (recognizable) children, maybe the Washingtons could have become some sort of monarch parallel, but none of the other 'dynansties' you mentioned had any chance. Only in 'British America' would such an occurence be a real possibility, either through the revolution having been aborted, crushed, or not having produced - if victorious - any federal government worthy of the name.
 
Last edited:
"dynastic" was a bit of a misnomer, I just couldn't think of a better word besides "celebrity", which seems a bit trite and without the same level of respect that I was trying to imply.

I wasn't saying have these families have some sort of monarch-like status, but rather they remain in the public eye for generations, staying active in politics and in business to where, at least for a few of them, there are still prominent members of these families in the public eye today.
 

Kaptin Kurk

Banned
"dynastic" was a bit of a misnomer, I just couldn't think of a better word besides "celebrity", which seems a bit trite and without the same level of respect that I was trying to imply.

I wasn't saying have these families have some sort of monarch-like status, but rather they remain in the public eye for generations, staying active in politics and in business to where, at least for a few of them, there are still prominent members of these families in the public eye today.

Population explosion then becomes a problem, as does social morphing. Social morphing is something that can be controlled. (Okay, so most Americans don't revere Washingto today, Roosevelt, Kennedy, Regan, or Lincoln are who we'll cite, depending on politics) But that's not non overcome-able. But when 10,000 people and 10 presidential candidates can claim descent from Jefferson, and some of them are named Tyrone Jenkins? I don't know...
 
Is there anyway that the Washingtons, Jeffersons, Adams, Franklins, etc.. become "dynastic" families, in other words, still in the spotlight either in politics or business or armed forces up to the present day?

Same for other families too, such as the Lincolns and Roosevelts, etc.

To accomplish this you need to change one of the fundamental ideals upon which the republic was founded, which is that regular/average (to use modern day terms) citizens win election to public office, serve their state/country, and then return to being a regular/average citizen when their service is completed.
 
It's not as impossible as some people say, but it's just very unlikely. Over generations families tend to change. George Bush´s great great great grandfather was a very intellectual scholar. FDR's children were some involved in politics but weren't very charismatic or succesful in it when they didn't have their father's support.

If you take a look at royal families the reason democratic dynasties rarely hold out becomes obvious.

While the history of Europian monarchies may contain many smart and capable individuals they are also a good demonstration that it takes more than good genes and good teachers. These good genes may splice up differently and the lessons may be wasted. F.x. the difference between Frederick the great of Prussia and Wilhelm II. Or if we look at Denmark, where some of the kings in 1500s were smart politicians their descendants were some mad and some stupid. (And some were ok). Or, Napoleon, pretty smart guy, his nephew... Well, I think Napoleon III actually isn´t stupid, he was good at politicking but bad at geo-politicking.

It seems these things can only last two generations at most, if the grandfather and father are smart, odds are that the son is an idiot that is better of letting parliament rule in his stead. (The opposite can be true).

So, if Washington had a son who´s the spitting image of his father and easily wins an election in the 1820s... well I´m not placing a bet on his grandson. But I think having the last name, Washington, Jefferson, Lincoln or Roosevelt would be an asset. It´s just unlikely the man/woman born with it is the second coming.
 
The Adams' have stayed relatively active. Most of the others don't really have modern descendants. As mentioned, there are Kennedys and the like in their place today. So royal houses go.
 
The Adams' have stayed relatively active. Most of the others don't really have modern descendants. As mentioned, there are Kennedys and the like in their place today. So royal houses go.

The Adams are STILL relatively active? I didn't know that.
Having modern descendants is obviously a major factor. I know that Lincoln's family died out by the...1940s, I think.
 

Wolfpaw

Banned
The Tafts are still active in Ohio, as well. IIRC, one of them was actually governor not too long ago.

I also notice that nobody has mentioned the four "dynasties" that the Presidency has had; two Adamses (father-son), two Harrisons (grandfather-grandson), two Roosevelts (cousins), two Bushes (father-son).

That being said, perhaps if the Society of the Cincinnati (or some sort of outgrowth) became more political?

Senators being elected for life may do it.
 
Last edited:

PhilippeO

Banned
Make more common for husbands of daughter of prominent people to adopt their wifes family names, and you could have longer political family.


Even now, some families managed to become important for quite long. Udall already four generation. Young family also quite successful.
 
To be clear I don´t think anyone thinks there are no political dynasties here, it´s just that to make one last from 1790 till our time is highly unlikely. It´s not ASB. It just requires a lot of luck with genes, child rearing, economics and so on.

Also the idea about senators for life might accomplish something like that.
 
Isn't it already like that? I mean, aren't most of the MAJOR politicians, generals, and big business people for the most part related in some way to the Founding Fathers? Or even some? Or is it just that they CLAIM to be related?
 

Thande

Donor
A lot of them did, it's just that it's not obvious because many of the names changed down the line due to daughters marrying sons. I would say the USA has the most dynastic politics of any country aside (obviously) from absolute monarchies, presumably because they're the only country to have been under essentially the same constitutional settlement for two hundred years.
 
Top