Viewing Hamilton Through a National Security Lens: Historical Realities vs. Modern Ideals

• In Event: Participation, Voting and Civil Rights in the United States

Abstract

Lin-Manuel Miranda’s Hamilton has profoundly influenced public understanding of Alexander Hamilton, but its selective narrative glosses over key aspects of his political philosophy. This paper critiques Hamilton through a national security and economic lens, revealing how the musical’s omissions reflect modern political ideals more than historical realities. While the production emphasizes Hamilton’s immigrant identity and financial innovations, it neglects his pivotal role as an economic nationalist advocating for domestic manufacturing and protectionism, as articulated in his Report on Manufactures. The paper also explores Hamilton’s complex stance on immigration and national security, particularly his support for the Alien and Sedition Acts and distrust of immigrant populations, which the musical contradicts. Furthermore, it analyzes Hamilton's portrayal of foreign policy, especially regarding the Genêt Affair and the neutrality debates, where Hamilton supported executive authority over congressional influence. These elements are critical to understanding Hamilton’s vision for American sovereignty and stability. By contrasting Hamilton’s actual positions with their portrayal in the musical, this paper argues that Hamilton represents a 2010s political ethos rooted in globalization and liberalism, rather than the pragmatic nationalism that defined Hamilton’s true legacy. In doing so, it encourages a re-examination of the founding father’s role in shaping early American policy and how cultural narratives reshape historical memory.

Author

• Dylan Victor Frederick, Christopher Newport University