Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
The only refuge left for those who prophesy the downfall of the State governments is the visionary supposition that the federal government may previously accumulate a military force for the projects of ambition. The reasonings contained in these papers must have been employed to little purpose indeed, if it could be necessary now to disprove the reality of this danger. That the people and the States should, for a sufficient period of time, elect an uninterrupted succession of men ready to betray both; that the traitors should, throughout this period, uniformly and systematically pursue some fixed plan for the extension of the military establishment; that the governments and the people of the States should silently and patiently behold the gathering storm, and continue to supply the materials, until it should be prepared to burst on their own heads, must appear to every one more like the incoherent dreams of a delirious jealousy, or the misjudged exaggerations of a counterfeit zeal, than like the sober apprehensions of genuine patriotism.
Extravagant as the supposition is, let it however be made. Let a regular army, fully equal to the resources of the country, be formed; and let it be entirely at the devotion of the federal government; still it would not be going too far to say, that the State governments, with the people on their side, would be able to repel the danger. The highest number to which, according to the best computation, a standing army can be carried in any country, does not exceed one hundredth part of the whole number of souls; or one twenty-fifth part of the number able to bear arms. This proportion would not yield, in the United States, an army of more than twenty-five or thirty thousand men. To these would be opposed a militia amounting to near half a million of citizens with arms in their hands, officered by men chosen from among themselves, fighting for their common liberties, and united and conducted by governments possessing their affections and confidence. It may well be doubted, whether a militia thus circumstanced could ever be conquered by such a proportion of regular troops.
Those who are best acquainted with the last successful resistance of this country against the British arms, will be most inclined to deny the possibility of it. Besides the advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation, the existence of subordinate governments, to which the people are attached, and by which the militia officers are appointed, forms a barrier against the enterprises of ambition, more insurmountable than any which a simple government of any form can admit of. Notwithstanding the military establishments in the several kingdoms of Europe, which are carried as far as the public resources will bear, the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms. And it is not certain, that with this aid alone they would not be able to shake off their yokes. But were the people to possess the additional advantages of local governments chosen by themselves, who could collect the national will and direct the national force, and of officers appointed out of the militia, by these governments, and attached both to them and to the militia, it may be affirmed with the greatest assurance, that the throne of every tyranny in Europe would be speedily overturned in spite of the legions which surround it.
Let us not insult the free and gallant citizens of America with the suspicion, that they would be less able to defend the rights of which they would be in actual possession, than the debased subjects of arbitrary power would be to rescue theirs from the hands of their oppressors. Let us rather no longer insult them with the supposition that they can ever reduce themselves to the necessity of making the experiment, by a blind and tame submission to the long train of insidious measures which must precede and produce it.
If the representatives of the people betray their constituents, there is then no resource left but in the exertion of that original right of self-defense which is paramount to all positive forms of government, and which against the usurpations of the national rulers, may be exerted with infinitely better prospect of success than against those of the rulers of an individual state. In a single state, if the persons intrusted with supreme power become usurpers, the different parcels, subdivisions, or districts of which it consists, having no distinct government in each, can take no regular measures for defense. The citizens must rush tumultuously to arms, without concert, without system, without resource; except in their courage and despair. The usurpers, clothed with the forms of legal authority, can too often crush the opposition in embryo. The smaller the extent of the territory, the more difficult will it be for the people to form a regular or systematic plan of opposition, and the more easy will it be to defeat their early efforts. Intelligence can be more speedily obtained of their preparations and movements, and the military force in the possession of the usurpers can be more rapidly directed against the part where the opposition has begun. In this situation there must be a peculiar coincidence of circumstances to insure success to the popular resistance.
The obstacles to usurpation and the facilities of resistance increase with the increased extent of the state, provided the citizens understand their rights and are disposed to defend them. The natural strength of the people in a large community, in proportion to the artificial strength of the government, is greater than in a small, and of course more competent to a struggle with the attempts of the government to establish a tyranny. But in a confederacy the people, without exaggeration, may be said to be entirely the masters of their own fate. Power being almost always the rival of power, the general government will at all times stand ready to check the usurpations of the state governments, and these will have the same disposition towards the general government. The people, by throwing themselves into either scale, will infallibly make it preponderate. If their rights are invaded by either, they can make use of the other as the instrument of redress. How wise will it be in them by cherishing the union to preserve to themselves an advantage which can never be too highly prized!
It may safely be received as an axiom in our political system, that the State governments will, in all possible contingencies, afford complete security against invasions of the public liberty by the national authority. Projects of usurpation cannot be masked under pretenses so likely to escape the penetration of select bodies of men, as of the people at large. The legislatures will have better means of information. They can discover the danger at a distance; and possessing all the organs of civil power, and the confidence of the people, they can at once adopt a regular plan of opposition, in which they can combine all the resources of the community. They can readily communicate with each other in the different States, and unite their common forces for the protection of their common liberty.
Well, like Bush said about the Constitution...
Well, like Bush said about the Constitution...
The Federalist Papers are not the Constitution.
Thanks for the free bump.
Well, like Bush said about the Constitution...
The Federalist Papers are not the Constitution.
Thanks for the free bump.
Exactly my point...
How did the Civil War turn out?
Fact always beats speculation.
They hate anything that doesn't make the government a dictatorship.
You're a big fan of Hamilton, are you?
You do know that Hamilton hated FREE TRADE, wanted a strong national CENTRAL BANK, and wanted to repress states rights in favor of a much strong central government, RIGHT?
You're a big fan of Hamilton, are you?
You do know that Hamilton hated FREE TRADE, wanted a strong national CENTRAL BANK, and wanted to repress states rights in favor of a much strong central government, RIGHT?
Yes, Hamilton was a devious bastard whose intentionally pulled the wool over our eyes with a Central Bank.
However, he never wrote about those things in the Federalist Papers, can you find where he advocated a Central Bank in the Federalist Papers? No, because if he had, the Constitution would never have been ratified.
That's why we have Article V. Hopefully one day we can amend the Constitution to permanently ban Private Centralized Banking.
--------------------
Anyway, your failure to respond to Federalist 28 and 46 has not gone unnoticed!
We don't have a private Central Bank.
We don't have a private Central Bank.
This is coming from a guy who said the allodials were burned.
You're a big fan of Hamilton, are you?
You do know that Hamilton hated FREE TRADE, wanted a strong national CENTRAL BANK, and wanted to repress states rights in favor of a much strong central government, RIGHT?
Yes, Hamilton was a devious bastard whose intentionally pulled the wool over our eyes with a Central Bank.
However, he never wrote about those things in the Federalist Papers, can you find where he advocated a Central Bank in the Federalist Papers? No, because if he had, the Constitution would never have been ratified.
That's why we have Article V. Hopefully one day we can amend the Constitution to permanently ban Private Centralized Banking.
--------------------
Anyway, your failure to respond to Federalist 28 and 46 has not gone unnoticed!
We don't have a private Central Bank.
In 1791, The first Bank of the United States was brought into being as one of the three major financial innovations proposed and supported by Hamilton, first Secretary of the Treasury. In addition to the national bank, the other two measures were establishment of a mint and imposition of a federal excise tax. Three goals of Hamilton's three measures were to[citation needed]:
Establish financial order, clarity and precedence in and of the newly formed United States.
Establish credit—both in country and overseas—for the new nation.
To resolve the issue of the fiat currency, issued by the Continental Congress immediately prior to and during the United States Revolutionary War—the "Continental".
