The Anti-Federalist Papers
Gelesen von LibriVox Volunteers
Patrick Henry
During the period of debate over the ratification of the Constitution, numerous independent local speeches and articles were published all across the country. Initially, many of the articles in opposition were written under pseudonyms, such as "Brutus", "Centinel", and "Federal Farmer". Eventually, famous revolutionary figures such as Patrick Henry came out publicly against the Constitution. They argued that the strong national government proposed by the Federalists was a threat to the rights of individuals and that the President would become a king. They objected to the federal court system created by the proposed constitution. This produced a phenomenal body of political writing; the best and most influential of these articles and speeches were gathered by historians into a collection known as the Anti-Federalist Papers in allusion to the Federalist Papers. (Summary by Ticktockman) (19 hr 51 min)
Chapters
Bewertungen
a word against drawing comparisons to modern times
musicman243
this is probably one of the more tolerable version of this collection. it would probably be nice to have this and The Federalist papers combined in one volume in chronological order in order to see the entire argument being made. people have to realize that a lot of these politicians on both the Federalists and Anti-Federalists sides were frankly quite hypocritical even in their own views. many of the old Anti-Federalists would support slavery as an American institution, and a lot of the Federalists would support corporatism and the supremacy of wealth culture, both of which would become very huge points of contention in the United States for years to come. it is very erroneous to compare 18th century politics to 21st century issues because the times and the technology aren't the same.
Some 230+ years later...
RofVT
Personally I think any form of government is a threat to individual freedom. Any. Though I’ll say this, that the writers of these documents were forward-thinking and not at all reactionaries like the “Federalists”.
Eddie Trevino
i haven't even listened to all and i am hooked. great investment of your time to listen...
Frighteningly predictive of what was then the future...
awake yet?
Informative book with good audio quality.
So True! Look Around You!
Bobby Maxwell
Patrick Henry was correct. For sixty years we have been experiencing the problem of wealthy "elites" buying the system. Hell, you can't even access some news on social media and... Tucker! Yes, The Corporate Party always wins! Dems and Reps is a soap opera to provide the illusion that the politicians care about you and that you have a voice. They don't. And you don't. Respectively. Don't worry, you'll soon be living under a Communist, United Nations world government and The Great Reset will soon kick it off. Hey you won't own anything and you'll be happy! You're every movement will be monitored and if you don't follow their rules; you won't eat. Think China today. Don't you think the precautions were worse than the virus? 377 healthy people died. Most deaths were co-morbid or co-occurring with heart attacks, cancer, etc. and doctors were paid more for billing the comorbid virus. Hey, they have us by the short and curlies! Small businesses are crushed but the mega-corporations are raking it in. Ordo Ab Chao.
dangerous wrong think
Bill Cosby
The author wanted to create a smaller less centralized country. The problem with this is that a smaller more plebian state is unable to guarantee the rights of nonbinary LatinXs to choose their gender. We need an all powerful leviathan state to secure the liberty of Black Rock, ADM and Mondolez International against people who would choose to own their own house, or bake a cake not made from ingredients supplied by Conagra. It is necessary for the state to remove some liberties from wrong thinking people to ensure and fortify the future of our Democracy for all person-kind. Hooray for Madison and the Leviathan State
Fantastic! Five stars!
Michael Tweet
WHY DO WE NO LONGER PICK APART SUBJECTS SO ELOQUENTLY AND CONCISELY?! Thank you, LibriVox et al. Eloquence in modern speech has been stripped down to two syllables that exemplify our collectively shortening attention span and our aversion to inquiry into public affairs and exigent circumstances, much on the basis of they not being our own charge and replaced instead with gaudy sensationalization of irrelevat and/or obfuscatory actions or deeds: "'Mur'ca."