Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Jacquerie; central_va
Thanks for the ping central_va.

Jacquerie: The anti-federalists also got a lot wrong.

Could you point out a few or is that an oblique reference to the Articles of Confederation? Does it strike you as ironic that many of the anti's arguments are the same ones we hear from consertatives today? Even so, revisionist histories have left us with little meat to actually chew on when considering the pros and cons of the Articles. Historians would have us believe the Articles were a complete and total failure, which is patently false. Did the Federalists, who of course wanted an overbearing NATIONAL government hoodwink the anti delegates into believing the convention had been called to tweak the Articles? Can you say "budding progressives"???

46 posted on 05/22/2010 10:40:55 PM PDT by ForGod'sSake (You have just two choices: SUBMIT or RESIST with everything you've got!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies ]


To: ForGod'sSake; central_va

The Articles were treaties between sovereign states, not a government.


47 posted on 05/23/2010 5:31:11 AM PDT by Jacquerie (Islam is a barbaric social and political system in religious drag.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson