[Torus34]

There's lots of hooting and hollering going on about our US Constitution. Copies are being handed out by 'conservatives'. This or that party is being accused by that or this party's apologist of attempting to circumvent/violate/destroy/re-write [pick one or more,] the Constitution. And yes, there's more. The Constitution's even being dragged into the childish squabbles over 'freedom' vs. wearing a mask. [Federalist Paper # 10 has a reference to just this sort of meaningless nonsense.]

Interestingly, we've a pipeline into the past directly to the minds of three of the drafters of the Constitution itself. These worthies took it upon themselves to write over 80 papers [read 'editorials'] addressed to the New York legislators and the literate people at large. In them, they expounded upon the benefits to be gained and perils to be avoided through the adoption of the Constitution.

The Federalist Papers make interesting reading. [Ed.: As one reads comments about the Constitution on political forums such as this one, it's often not difficult to determine which posters have read the Federalist Papers.] This poor old country mouse is often struck by their relevance to the goings-on of today.

Lately, I've become more aware of how, amongst cogent and head-nodding-in-agreement arguments for this or that feature of the Constitution, the problem of a demagogic leader and majority take-over of the federal government was given short shrift. While the Papers* warn against 'factions' in no uncertain terms, the extent of and mechanizations of our present-day political parties was not to be found, even as an en passant reference.

Given the present political palaver about the importance of 'democracy' and how this or that person/group/party [again, your choice,] doesn't give a hoot about it, it's also amusing to see that at one point it appears that one of the writers considers a democracy and a republic to be mutually exclusive.

And so it goes ...

Regards, stay safe 'n well.

* Capitalization intentional.

[late]

Lately, I've become more aware of how, amongst cogent and head-nodding-in-agreement arguments for this or that feature of the Constitution, the problem of a demagogic leader and majority take-over of the federal government was given short shrift. While the Papers* warn against 'factions' in no uncertain terms, the extent of and mechanizations of our present-day political parties was not to be found, even as an en passant reference.

The Founding Fathers didn't want political parties. The wars over religion were recent history to them.

Problem was, they were still human. Not long after we got started, Hamilton and Jefferson went after each other, hammer and tong, until Hamilton got the boot.

One other thing, their system was limited to men of property. For all it's flaws, this meant the bulk of the voters were educated and accomplished. A crook like Trump would never have had a chance to become president.

[Torus34]

The Founding Fathers didn't want political parties. The wars over religion were recent history to them.

Problem was, they were still human. Not long after we got started, Hamilton and Jefferson went after each other, hammer and tong, until Hamilton got the boot.

One other thing, their system was limited to men of property. For all it's flaws, this meant the bulk of the voters were educated and accomplished. A crook like Trump would never have had a chance to become president.

Good morning, late! [Ed.: You're never too, are you? ;-))]

One concern noted in the Federalist Papers was the emergence of a demagogue, perhaps similar to Mr. Donald Trump, in a State. The possibility of such a person heading the federal government and supported by a majority of the people was nicely sidestepped. [Background music: The Sidestep, from The Best Little Whorehouse in Texas.]

Regards, stay safe 'n well.

[late]

Good morning, late! [Ed.: You're never too, are you? ;-))]

One concern noted in the Federalist Papers was the emergence of a demagogue, perhaps similar to Mr. Donald Trump, in a State. The possibility of such a person heading the federal government and supported by a majority of the people was nicely sidestepped. [Background music: The Sidestep, from The Best Little Whorehouse in Texas.]

Regards, stay safe 'n well.

I am late in several different ways. I was born late, for example. If you wanted to experience the best of the Baby Boom, you should have gotten born before I did. I kept hearing 'you should have been here last year' growing up.

Yeah, the political leaders back then were usually brilliant, and people like Hamilton were eventually shown the exit.

[Torus34]

I am late in several different ways. I was born late, for example. If you wanted to experience the best of the Baby Boom, you should have gotten born before I did. I kept hearing 'you should have been here last year' growing up.

Yeah, the political leaders back then were usually brilliant, and people like Hamilton were eventually shown the exit.

Hi again, late.

This old geezer was born in 1934. Vere's first sentence, the opening line in Billy Budd, says it well. I've experienced the comings and goings of 13 presidents, a world war, a depression, several recessions and not a few lousy movies. The view from my front porch does not reach to Russia, but it does stretch back over more than a third of nation's existence. That produces a perspective of today located somewhat outside that of most folks. Add in that I self-identify as a secular humanist and that puts me outside of the two party system groups as well.

Regards, stay safe 'n well.

[Torus34]

Has anyone else spotted something that struck them as noteworthy in the Federalist Papers?

Regards, stay safe 'n well.