answersLogoWhite

0

George Washington emphasized honesty, avoidance of outside influence, resisting of political pressure, preservation of the Constitution, and avoidance of war in favor of diplomacy. Whether other Presidents heeded his advice is subject to much debate, and varies according to the President in question.

User Avatar

Wiki User

10y ago

Still curious? Ask our experts.

Chat with our AI personalities

RafaRafa
There's no fun in playing it safe. Why not try something a little unhinged?
Chat with Rafa
BeauBeau
You're doing better than you think!
Chat with Beau
ReneRene
Change my mind. I dare you.
Chat with Rene

Add your answer:

Earn +20 pts
Q: How well did future Presidents heed Washingtons advice?
Write your answer...
Submit
Still have questions?
magnify glass
imp
Continue Learning about American Government

Did we listen to Washington's warnings in his Farewell Address?

"We" weren't alive then. Nevertheless, if some we didn't listen to what he said, we wouldn't know what he said. Do you mean "heed"?


What did Emerson mean when he called the first shot of the American Revolution the shot heard round the world?

Simply put, the first shot fired in the American Revolution, described as the "shot heard round the world" , by Mr. Emerson? Metaphorically speaking, the shot would cause all the world to realize that a new era was beginning at this point in history. The first of the New World colonies to throw off the not so symbolic "yoke of oppression" mounted upon them by the Old World counties to which they were attached to or hailed from. The "shot heard round the world" would cause all tyrannical nations to sit up and pay heed to this fact. The colonies were in fact, countries unto themselves, and capable and willing to fight for the right of self government. A whole new era in history began at this point in time......BANG! as Emerson so eloquently stated, "We are off and running".


Why did US soviet relations worsen during president carter's administration?

Soviet Union invasion of Afghanistan


What was the reaction to the civil rights act of 1964?

the more northern states i would the line from northern Maryland on up although they had there own opinion and prejudices against Black people they accepted it and took heed to it and followed it so blacks achieved some kind of equality and things definitely got better in the north, from Northern Maryland on down it was definitely harder to accept this newness of equality for all people, black and white, you had angry governors and senators over looking the continued segregation, indeed separate was not equal. I know that even though martin Luther king was relieved to and elated about the signing of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 I know he was not content with the progress the south was making but the government stood by and supported the act and threatened the states that would not comply. i am quite sure about the reaction to the civil rights act of 1964 but i do not have concrete fact so it can be classified as an educated opinion based upon 10 years of studying history.


What were the positive and negative effects of European imperial rule of Africa?

ıÜüA positive effect is seen in document one called "Modern Progressive Nations," it shows how the larger nations gave to the smaller colonies. The nations built them roads, canals, and railways. Showed them the telegraph, newspaper, established schools for them, gave them the blessing of their civilization, and overall made them economized. They were part of modern culture after this occurred. Another positive effect is seen in document three called "Colonial Governments and Missionaries. " It shows how the colonial governments introduced improved medical care, and better methods of sanitation. There were new crops; tools and farming methods, which helped, increase food production. These changes meant less death to smaller colonies, and overall improve the state of living. They now could live longer and have better sanitation compared to the earlier imperialism. If we give an example, British imperialism on India had many positive and negative affects on both the mother country, Britain and the colony, India. Many people would argue which effects were more prominent in these countries and some would agree that they were equal. But in both cases there were actually both.Another example would be the building of the Panama Canal.Before without the Panama Canal, if you wanted to go from the Atlantic to the Pacific or the Pacific to the Atlantic, you would have to sail around the tip of South America at Drake's Passage and then continue your passage in the Atlantic.After the Us came and purchased the Canal Zone, they began to build it.And then after it was built,you could easily cut through the canal saving money and time.This is another example as to how imperialism benefits small countries.