We must return to Federalist principals

[American]

"The only constant is change"....You can either change or be left behind. Progression is the key. Not digression. So going back to relive a Constitution drafted over a century ago when our country was pre-pubescent is defeating. This life, this time we live in is far removed from 1776. Right? And thankfully so. We are so caught up on Revolution and adherence to Originality and procedure and constitution that Life passes us by. I for one wanna catch that bus brother. "You gotta try and see a little further..."...

This has to be one of the most ignorant posts I have every seen on the subject matter. It's almost beyond words.

 

[Real Korimyr #9]

I, for one, think the Federalists were right when this country was founded and are still right today. Fifty petty little fiefdoms could never hold a nation together-- only a strong Federal government can.

 

[other]

Read a history book kid, then atleast you'll know that your beliefs fall in line with the anti-federalist. Of course if you do read a history book, you might read about how weak the US was under the Articles of Confederation, and you might change your views.

Maybe you should read the books. In the mean time, I'll fill you in a little...

First, I ask, what in his OP is "anti-federalist" as opposed to "federalist"?? His OP states:

From the very beginning the Founders had a healthy distrust of a strong central government. The Constitution would never have been ratified had it not contained strong, clear, and precise language that limited the central government and strengthened the power of the States.

While decades of power grabbing have severely watered down those guarantees the words are still there simply waiting for the People to demand a return to those hallowed principals.

Join with others finding, supporting, and electing representatives who commit themselves to bringing sound fiscal, moral, and Constitutionally sound government back to us. Their gender, race, party, whatever are of no importance, their principals are.

Note that it was the Federalists that were proponents of the constitution, which established a federal system. The Anti-Federalists opposed the constitution and the federal system it sought to establish, mostly under the presumption that it would be abused and lead to tyrannical centralized authoritarianism. Both sides were suspiscious of strong central authority, federalists just less so because they realized the need for a limited central power to maintain some semblance of unity between the states.

The OP is calling for support of the Constitutional federal system as was originally established. That is/was not an Anti-Federalist viewpoint.

 

[StaggerLee]

This has to be one of the most ignorant posts I have every seen on the subject matter. It's almost beyond words.[/QU

How so? Perhaps you took it out of "it's " context. Or maybe you just believe differently and aren't equipped with the tools to handle it, so you make poignant, empty remarks...If you have an opinion on something that differs from your own, do tell. Otherwise, you're just creating a negative environment that really "shows your ass". So please, elaborate.

 

[StaggerLee]

There's no need to be abrasive and negative. For all intents and purposes, you really should have kept that in your head. That's the type of remark i tell my little girl never to make without justification. This is a forum for the expression and sharing of ideas not a place to throw darts at each other. Opinions and difference are valued here, but nobody deserves to be another's dart board. I hope your day gets better.

 

[prrriiide]

This life, this time we live in is far removed from 1776. Right?

You couldn't be more wrong. You should read James Madison's notes on the Constitutional Convention. Very enlighteneing. Here are a couple of excerpts:

The evils we experience flow from the excess of democracy. The people do not want virtue, but are the dupes of pretended patriots. In Massts. it had been fully confirmed by experience that they are daily misled into the most baneful measures and opinions by the false reports circulated by designing men, and which no one on the spot can refute. - Elbridge Gerry, Delegate from Mass, May 31, 1787

LINK

Sir, there are two passions which have a powerful influence on the affairs of men. These are ambition and avarice; the love of power, and the love of money. Separately each of these has great force in prompting men to action; but when united in view of the same object, they have in many minds the most violent effects. Place before the eyes of such men, a post of honour that shall be at the same time a place of profit, and they will move heaven and earth to obtain it. The vast number of such places it is that renders the British Government so tempestuous. The struggles for them are the true sources of all those factions which are perpetually dividing the Nation, distracting its Councils, hurrying sometimes into fruitless & mischievous wars, and often compelling a submission to dishonorable terms of peace. And of what kind are the men that will strive for this profitable pre- eminence, through all the bustle of cabal, the heat of contention, the infinite mutual abuse of parties, tearing to pieces the best of characters? It will not be the wise and moderate; the lovers of peace and good order, the men fittest for the trust. It will be the bold and the violent, the men of strong passions and indefatigable activity in their selfish pursuits. These will thrust themselves into your Government and be your rulers. -And these too will be mistaken in the expected happiness of their situation: For their vanquished competitors of the same spirit, and from the same motives will perpetually be endeavouring to distress their administration, thwart their measures, and render them odious to the people. -Benjamin Franklin, Delegate from Penn, June 2, 1787

LINK

The framers of the Constitution were shockingly perspicacious in their deliberations on the composition of the government. The times, they may be a-changin' but human nature...not so much.

If you want to read the full proceedings, you can find them here. I think this subject alone should be a required history course in every high school in the country.

 

[LiberalAvenger]

You couldn't be more wrong. You should read James Madison's notes on the Constitutional Convention. Very enlighteneing. Here are a couple of excerpts:



LINK



LINK

The framers of the Constitution were shockingly perspicacious in their deliberations on the composition of the government. The times, they may be a-changin' but human nature...not so much.

If you want to read the full proceedings, you can find them here. I think this subject alone should be a required history course in every high school in the country.

"The evils we experience flow from the excess of democracy."

I disagree. I believe the evils we experience flow from the exploitation of democracy for evil purposes.

 

[prrriiide]

"The evils we experience flow from the excess of democracy."

I disagree. I believe the evils we experience flow from the exploitation of democracy for evil purposes.

I believe that in 1787-speak, that is what Mr. Gerry said.

 

[StaggerLee]

Pride,

I certainly appreciate the readings. It's been along while since i've visited any of those passages. But my point in my previous statement was only to prove my point in my earlier argument with 1776. The rudiments of man, including body and spirit and all it's imaginations and faults and subtleties ARE indeed in tact as they were in 1776. Those fundamentals which define our "True nature" as creatures of this physical life will only change with the genocide of mankind. However, when i stated that life is far removed from 1776, i was really pointing towards "day to day" which includes invention, technology mainly and from invention and technology then come an array of new ideas, ideals and eventually attitudes and even more from attitudes varying sets of values and mores. We find ourselves, when compared to how "life was lived and from what motivations" far removed from 1776.

 

[American]

I, for one, think the Federalists were right when this country was founded and are still right today. Fifty petty little fiefdoms could never hold a nation together-- only a strong Federal government can.

That's right, hold together....not run them.

 

[prrriiide]

This was one of the most hotly contested issues of the whole Constitutional Convention - the role of the "general government" vs the role of the states. It really is very surprising (to me anyway) just how many of the framers were far more wary of a federal government that was too weak as compared to state governments than one that was too strong.

If you read the proceedings of the convention, you will come to see the arguments in favor of a strong national govenment in a whole new light, and understand the reasonings of the Framers in doing what they did. The arguments and viewpoints of both sides of the equation make very valid points, but after reading the debates, it is clear why they did what they did.

 

[prrriiide]

Something must be "written in stone". "We" change from day to day. One person's progress is another's regression. This bunch wants this, another that. Chaos, chaos.

I am not an advocate for frequent changes in laws and constitutions. But laws and institutions must go hand in hand with the progress of the human mind. As that becomes more developed, more enlightened, as new discoveries are made, new truths discovered and manners and opinions change, with the change of circumstances, institutions must advance also to keep pace with the times. We might as well require a man to wear still the coat which fitted him when a boy as civilized society to remain ever under the regimen of their barbarous ancestors.

Thomas Jefferson, July 12, 1816

And we've changed it 27 times.