Final answer:
Washington recognized problems beyond Massachusetts, acknowledging the economic hardships in the eastern states, while hoping for a measured government response to Shays' Rebellion. He emphasized the necessity of peaceful commerce and warned against entangling alliances and the ill effects of political parties.
Step-by-step explanation:
No, Washington did not believe that there were only problems in Massachusetts. He was well aware of the discontent spreading through the eastern states due to various economic hardships. The stoppage of commerce channels after the American Revolutionary War had severely impacted the eastern states, and Washington knew money was scarce, which led to people becoming uneasy. In a response about the Shays' Rebellion in Western Massachusetts, he wrote about his concerns over the troubles in the eastern states and expressed hope that the government's reaction would not be severe towards the Shays's rebels, despite their unjustifiable acts.
Furthermore, Washington's stance on numerous issues affecting the nation was complex. He stressed the importance of maintaining friendly trade relations with foreign countries while avoiding unnecessary political alliances that could entangle the nation in Europe's conflicts. He also warned against the dangers of political parties and their potential to bring about mischief to the political landscape.
The economic crisis in 1786 and 1787 that peaked with Shays' Rebellion represented the wider context of unrest and dissatisfaction among citizens, particularly those in Western Massachusetts who were indebted farmers facing high taxes and a lack of value in state and Continental paper money.