The Anti-Federalist Papers

De: Patrick Henry

Narrado por: John Clicman

Duración: 7 h y 56 m

Resumen del Editor

The Anti-Federalist Papers is the collective name given to works written by the Founding Fathers who were opposed to or concerned with the merits of the United States Constitution of 1787.

Starting on 25 September 1787 (8 days after the final draft of the US Constitution) and running through the early 1790s, these anti-Federalists published a series of essays arguing against a stronger and more energetic union as embodied in the new Constitution. Although less influential than their counterparts, The Federalist Papers, these works nonetheless played an important role in shaping the early American political landscape and in the passage of the US Bill of Rights.

Public Domain (P)2020 Author's Republic

repetitive

overall the book informed the reason we have a federal government, and why states shouldn't govern themselves.. if the states govenors knew how to run a state and whats involved they would be happy its the way it is.. becuase they would be at war with there neighbors all the time and California it self would have internal wars from sandiego to San Francisco over land , water, and general laws that govern the people...

Never taught this in school, great!

We were never taught anything about the ani-federalists. If we had been taught been taught this, we would have hung every politician long ago. At this time everything in this great book has come to pass, and our overlords are poisoning our population. They are invading our country with terrorists. Get ready, cause it’s gonna get a lot worse, unimaginably worse. In my opinion.

We failed, they were all right. . . . . . . . . .

The American Aristocracy has grown into a Corrupted Global Government, the Anti-Federalists tried to prevent that.

Not All Americans Agreed with the Founding Fathers

Another topic from our history that is not taught in school, not every American agreed with the “Founding Fathers” as they drafted the Constitution or with the creation of the Bill of Rights. The Anit-Federalist papers bring to light many points that challenged the direction taken at the Constitutional Convention in the drafting of the Constitution and the subsequent Bill of Rights and Amendments that came. The challenges were not a call to arms to rebuff the passages being drafted but to offer other views and concerns of the citizens.
I create a number of notable clips while listening such as chapter 9 which to me closely resembles the troubles of our current government today. In that we have willingly continued to elect the same congress persons and state representatives to the effect of making their position perpetual. In doing so, the author of this Anti-Federalist paper advocated for life long government positions as it would result in creating a homogeneous representation of the party not of the people. Even in 1787 this writer acknowledged the fallacy of our Constitution that separates the powers of impeachment by the house and the trial by the senate. The author writes this plebian house will have little power of who it accuses if the accused is tried by his friends.
The same author goes on to relate that the election cycle we have today maintains two thirds of the body following an election and those in power would bring over the new members to the good old way if the old did not return.

The wrong side won

The Anti-Federalists were against excessive debt, against a permanent Federal army, against wars for non-defensive reasons, and against slavery. They predicted an endless expansion of taxes, regulations and federal power (to the detriment of State power and individual liberty) as well as the establishment of a corrupt political/oligarchical class in a seat of power that would no longer be accountable to the States and the people.

We now have a federal government that has loaded each tax payer with 225k of debt (not including unfunded liabilities), innumerable federal agencies staffed by overpaid bureaucrats who are employed for life and accountable to no one (except maybe their billionaire/corporate overlords), and a permanent multi-trillion dollar military industrial complex that has bases in half the world and engineers one counterproductive foreign regime change after the next. The Federalists assured us none of this would happen. If it weren’t for the Bill of Rights (which the Federalists didn’t think necessary) the American revolution would have been dead on arrival. It is no surprise that today we witness continued efforts by those in DC to undermine these amendments which have always been the bulwark against a return to full despotism. Remember, Liberty has been the exception and Tyranny the rule throughout human history.

Meanwhile Switzerland, which is often mentioned favourably by the Anti-Federalists, has a top federal rate of income tax of 12% and the highest wealth per capita in the world despite being landlocked with almost no natural resources and a challenging geography and climate. It hasn’t fought a single war since America has existed despite being surrounded by neighbors who were more often at war than not during this period.

We need Sons of Liberty 2.0

Required reading for every American

If I could design a curriculum for anyone who wants to understand the way this country is governed or how it should be governed, I would start with the constitution followed by the anti-federalist and then the federalist. I consider the anti-federalist most important for those who would preserve liberty.

Reading the anti-federalist has made clear The problems we face now have always existed. In spite of fawning history that would have made the founders totally perfect and altruistic, they were real men no different from ourselves. They knew mans ambitions, weaknesses, strengths vices and most of all, the corruptibility of power. To their credit, they sought to thwart that corruptibility

This is an absolute must read for anyone who would understand the dangers this magnificent country faces and what has gone wrong.

poor reading

The person reading this did not pay close attention to the punctuation and therefore the sentences had no flow and were hard to follow. Also, all the papers were not included but were a compilation of multiple papers. I would rather read them all.