The United States of America will, in a little over a week as of this writing, be celebrating the 250th anniversary of our Declaration of Independence from the nation that was, at the time, the greatest military power on the planet. Great Britain said, "You are all subjects of the king," American patriots said, "Oh yeah?" And we proceeded to show Britain the "what else," and won our freedom.
Our current Constitution came along some time after that, and while, if you're reading RedState, I'm going to presume you're more familiar than most people with the Constitution, there are some contemporary documents that you should also read and understand: The Federalist Papers.
The Federalist Papers were written in 1787 and 1788, to present arguments in favor of the proposed United States Constitution. It's not a stretch to say that, if the Constitution is the "what" of how our country works, or at least how it was supposed to work, then the Federalist Papers present a lot of the "why." The Papers consist of 85 essays, mostly written by Alexander Hamilton, who wrote 51 of the papers; James Madison is reported to have written 29, while John Jay wrote five. They were published anonymously by the New York Independent Journal, the New York Packet, and the New York Daily Advertiser, with all three men writing under the pseudonym "Publius." These papers document, in large part, why our lasting Constitution, one of the most effective governing documents in human history, works the way it does.
The Papers begin with the argument for doing away with the nation’s original governing system, the Articles of Confederation, and instituting the Constitution, which is still in place, generations of efforts by the left notwithstanding.
Hamilton writes in the introduction:
AFTER an unequivocal experience of the inefficiency of the subsisting federal government, you are called upon to deliberate on a new Constitution for the United States of America. The subject speaks its own importance; comprehending in its consequences nothing less than the existence of the UNION, the safety and welfare of the parts of which it is composed, the fate of an empire in many respects the most interesting in the world. It has been frequently remarked that it seems to have been reserved to the people of this country, by their conduct and example, to decide the important question, whether societies of men are really capable or not of establishing good government from reflection and choice, or whether they are forever destined to depend for their political constitutions on accident and force. If there be any truth in the remark, the crisis at which we are arrived may with propriety be regarded as the era in which that decision is to be made; and a wrong election of the part we shall act may, in this view, deserve to be considered as the general misfortune of mankind.
Some key quotes:
Nothing could be more ill-judged than that intolerant spirit which has, at all times, characterized political parties. The Federalist No. 1, by Alexander Hamilton.
We should note that the way the nation was originally set up, the vice president was intended to be the second-place winner, in effect, of the presidential election. The vice president was expected to set aside any partisan notions and work in the country's interest. Needless to say, that didn't last.
The pride of states, as well as of men, naturally disposes them to justify all their actions, and opposes their acknowledging, correcting, or repairing their errors and offences. The Federalist No. 3, by John Jay.
That certainly applies today. Politicians aren't alone in an unwillingness to admit their mistakes, although any modern political organization that is seriously considering giving Kamala Harris another shot at the presidency has to come in for special mention. Talk about not correcting or repairing their errors.
Then, there's this:
Little more can reasonably be aimed at, with respect to the people at large, than to have them properly armed and equipped; and in order to see that this be not neglected, it will be necessary to assemble them once or twice in the course of a year. The Federalist No. 29, Alexander Hamilton
This was one of the sources of the Second Amendment, although the assembly notion was left out. But it is those words: "properly armed and equipped" that are echoed in the "well-regulated militia" preparatory clause of the Second Amendment.
Read More: DHS Guarantees Secure July 4th Celebrations for America’s Big 250
Morning Minute: I'm Going All-In on America 250 - and You Can't Stop Me
We should note as well that there were two sides to the discussion around ratification of the Constitution. The other side of it was (in case you hadn't guessed) documented in the Anti-Federalist Papers, also written in 1787 and 1788. These were not organized into essays, but have been compiled by historians from the writings of anti-federalists including George Mason, Patrick Henry, Richard Henry Lee, and Robert Yates. These writings argued against a strong central government and argued for a Bill of Rights, which was in fact added to the final product.
It’s the work of some days or weeks to get through the whole thing, but it’s worth it. The Federalist Papers and their counterparts will yield great insight into why things were set up the way they are in the United States, and why they still work, for the most part, after over two centuries.
