"George Washington supported the consolidation of the federal government, calling it the goal of every true American. It seems hard to blame Lincoln for adopting the stance of Washington."
Washington, Lincoln, & any other federalists you'd care to name could hold whatever views they wanted, but to say those, or any other, trump liberty, is to not begrudge the whips in their hands & the enslavement that ensued as those views were rammed down peoples' throats.
"Washington would certainly agree that what we see today is totally beyond the pale. So would Lincoln."
I think 'yes' regarding Washington (or, at least, a very strong 'probably'); to Lincoln, it would be home, sweet home. It took Lincoln & co. to create the infrastructure from which has metastisized today's 'beyond the pale'....
"...whereas a liberal, and energetic Constitution, well guarded and closely watched, to prevent encroachments, might restore us to that degree of respectability and consequence, to which we had a fair claim, and the brightest prospect of
Just so. It wasn't well guarded or closely watched, & not that many years after these words were penned, it was annihilated.
"Would you be happy if the states could print their own money again?"
You're straying. This is a whole other - & large - topic. Stay on point.
"Whatever -you- personally own is more stable and more secure because of the stable and secure situation that you have now in contrast with the unstable situation that Washington saw in 1785. You'd think common sense would tell you that."
This comes as about as close to the crux of the whole debate as is likely to be seen this thread. My take on conservatives, & I know bunches of them, is that, deep down, they are timid, even frightened, people (& for neo-cons - conservatives to an exponent - change the word to 'terrified'...). This, coupled with a very limited ability for introspection seems to result in an insatiable appetite for 'security', which, of course, to such people, revolves around the ability to command & control as much of the external world as possible. But the instability lies within these people, and so the acquisition of power 'out there' failes to sate, their internal life is mostly appetitive, and they just keep grasping, grasping, grasping. I bet you are familiar with Franklin's contempt for people who give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety....
I wish I could add audio to this so you could hear me guffawing over your alice-in wonderland statement re: the 'stability & security' of my property. Believe it or not, timid sir, but me & mine can can preserve the stability & security of ourselves & our property just fine...except, of course, against your pals, the federalists.
posted on 06/25/2002 10:37:08 PM PDT
What is the difference between a Federalist and an anti-federalist? They both seem benign to me. The real villians were the radical republicans = Nationalists.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson