Federalist #49... Help Explain

Hi Folks...

' The people are the only legitimate foundation of power, and it is from them that the constitutional charter, is derived. " Government is and should be the servant of the people, and it should be fully accountable to them for the actions which it supposedly takes on their behalf"

So if Government restricts any constitutional rights under the constitution, that clearly impedes on constitutional rights, or could in effect curtail the people from protecting themselves and their posterity, how do we hold them accountable for such tyranny..

Rights under the constitution should not be 'infringed'... Great word... Infringed...

Therefore any licensing, or tax or waiting for some quasi government agent to give you approval, is an inconvenience therefore ,the right could be construed as a " Government Privilege""... I doubt the Federalist #49 gave the Government such powers to control our destiny and turns rights into privileges..

your thoughts..

Regards
CCJ

It did not take too many years for the federal government to impose its will by the use of lethal violent force. Bill of Rights 1791...whiskey rebellion 1794. The federalist papers are routinely ignored by the federal courts. The courts follow precedent.

countryclubjoe said:

Hi Folks...

' The people are the only legitimate foundation of power, and it is from them that the constitutional charter, is derived. " Government is and should be the servant of the people, and it should be fully accountable to them for the actions which it supposedly takes on their behalf"

So if Government restricts any constitutional rights under the constitution, that clearly impedes on constitutional rights, or could in effect curtail the people from protecting themselves and their posterity, how do we hold them accountable for such tyranny..

Rights under the constitution should not be 'infringed'... Great word... Infringed...

Therefore any licensing, or tax or waiting for some quasi government agent to give you approval, is an inconvenience therefore ,the right could be construed as a " Government Privilege""... I doubt the Federalist #49 gave the Government such powers to control our destiny and turns rights into privileges..

your thoughts..

Regards
CCJ

Click to expand...

As already mentioned, the Federalist Papers were a sales pitch. "Oh, yes. We believe all these good things. Government will be restrained by the constitution. Here are the reasons why. These are also the reasons you should stop opposing the constitution."

There is no possible way Madison, Jay, and Hamilton were sooo stupid as to actually believe government would follow and do what they were saying in their sales pitch. Just the fact that Hamilton--an avowed supporter of the English class system--was involved is all one needs to know in order to be highly suspicious. Well, that and know a little bit about the history of government and how well it does not treat the people upon who it inflicts itself.

As near as I can tell, the best use for the Federalist Papers is to cram them back down government's throat. Or, musket wadding.

Citizen said:

As near as I can tell, the best use for the Federalist Papers is to cram them back down government's throat. Or, musket wadding.

Click to expand...

That's quite quotable. Made me chuckle!

Citizen said:

As already mentioned, the Federalist Papers were a sales pitch. "Oh, yes. We believe all these good things. Government will be restrained by the constitution. Here are the reasons why. These are also the reasons you should stop opposing the constitution."

There is no possible way Madison, Jay, and Hamilton were sooo stupid as to actually believe government would follow and do what they were saying in their sales pitch. Just the fact that Hamilton--an avowed supporter of the English class system--was involved is all one needs to know in order to be highly suspicious. Well, that and know a little bit about the history of government and how well it does not treat the people upon who it inflicts itself.

As near as I can tell, the best use for the Federalist Papers is to cram them back down government's throat. Or, musket wadding.

Click to expand...

+1000000000

the things i missed out on from mandatory hs civics and uni American History...

thanks everyone for pushing the information out...

ipse

solus said:

the things i missed out on from mandatory hs civics and uni American History...

thanks everyone for pushing the information out...

ipse

Click to expand...

Oh, I missed them, too.

I was fed the usual pablum: the constitution is the greatest political document in human political history; the Founders were wise, wise, wise; etc., etc., etc.

Then, about 2008 I read a question. It brought me to a complete stop. I'll paraphrase:

If you play a game and keep losing. How long until you ask yourself whether the rules are rigged against you?

That was Kenneth Royce's question in Hologram of Liberty.

He further suggested that maybe the constitution isn't all those things our teachers said it was. He urged we take a long, calm steady gaze at the constitution. Just look at it for ourselves. Not through the lens of what we were taught in school. Just a steady gaze to see--and decide for ourselves--what was really there. "Parchment idolatry" he wrote. He suggested we let go of our parchment idolatry and inspect what was actually there.

Oh, my. What a rocket-ride of discovery ever since.

Citizen said:

Oh, I missed them, too.

I was fed the usual pablum: the constitution is the greatest political document in human political history; the Founders were wise, wise, wise; etc., etc., etc.

Then, about 2008 I read a question. It brought me to a complete stop. I'll paraphrase:

If you play a game and keep losing. How long until you ask yourself whether the rules are rigged against you?

That was Kenneth Royce's question in Hologram of Liberty.

He further suggested that maybe the constitution isn't all those things our teachers said it was. He urged we take a long, calm steady gaze at the constitution. Just look at it for ourselves. Not through the lens of what we were taught in school. Just a steady gaze to see--and decide for ourselves--what was really there. "Parchment idolatry" he wrote. He suggested we let go of our parchment idolatry and inspect what was actually there.

Oh, my. What a rocket-ride of discovery ever since.

Click to expand...

Spooner echoed the same sentiments...

Is it the parchment or those who interpret/implement the parchment.

The tool is used to restrain government while it lays on the work bench, its mere existence is supposed to get the job done...unfortunately we must pick up the tool and use it to restrain government. Bassackwards it is.

Citizen said:

Oh, I missed them, too.

I was fed the usual pablum: the constitution is the greatest political document in human political history; the Founders were wise, wise, wise; etc., etc., etc.

Then, about 2008 I read a question. It brought me to a complete stop. I'll paraphrase:

If you play a game and keep losing. How long until you ask yourself whether the rules are rigged against you?

That was Kenneth Royce's question in Hologram of Liberty.

He further suggested that maybe the constitution isn't all those things our teachers said it was. He urged we take a long, calm steady gaze at the constitution. Just look at it for ourselves. Not through the lens of what we were taught in school. Just a steady gaze to see--and decide for ourselves--what was really there. "Parchment idolatry" he wrote. He suggested we let go of our parchment idolatry and inspect what was actually there.

Oh, my. What a rocket-ride of discovery ever since.

Click to expand...

Indeed, I concur, Ordinary citizens celebrate this document-- at times to the point of idolatry, revering it without reading it.. Also so -called originalist fail to look beyond the terse text, they are guilt of not acknowledging that there exist an "unwritten constitution". Consider the Constitution's Ninth Amendment, which affirms the REALITY of various rights that are NOT textually enumerated-- rights that are concededly not listed in the document itself.. To take this amendment seriously, Americans must go beneath and beyond the Constitutions textually enumerated rights. Let me give an example, even though the text fails to specify a criminal defendant's entitlement to introduce reliable physical evidence of his/her innocence, surely this textual omission should not doom a defendant's claim of said right..

My .02

Citizen, always a pleasure Sir!
Regards
CCJ