[September 17th is
Constitution Day, so to celebrate this week I’ll AmericanStudy a handful of
contexts for that foundational American document. Leading up to a special
weekend post on threats to the Constitution in 2019!]
On three equally
significant ways to frame the Constitution’s
opposition.
1)
Revolutionary Radicals: It’s no coincidence that
two of the most prominent Anti-Federalists (a label which, to be fair, was
imposed by the Constitution’s advocates and generally
rejected by the group themselves, but which I’ll use in this post as a
shorthand for the Constitution’s critics) were also two of the Revolution’s
most famous firebrands, Samuel
Adams and Patrick
Henry. The Revolution itself can be reductively but not inaccurately
divided into more radical and more conservative camps, as exemplified by Samuel and his second cousin
John Adams. Moreover, as illustrated by John’s
critique of the Boston Massacre’s participants, the proto-federalists
tended to be a bit more suspicious of populism, while radicals like Sam and the Sons of
Liberty encouraged and amplified popular passions. Again, all those issues
are more nuanced than these couple of sentences can allow, but they do help
explain how men like Adams and Patrick Henry ended up in the Anti-Federalist
camp.
2)
Advocates for Rights: Perhaps the single most
important Anti-Federalist text was George Mason’s Objections to this Constitution of Government (1787). Mason’s objections were strong
enough that he became one of three
Constitutional Convention delegates not to sign the final document, but he
ironically would eventually turn those objections into the impetus for drafting
one of the Constitution’s most famous sections, the Bill of Rights (about which
I’ll write more in tomorrow’s post). An emphasis on individual rights had been
part of the American Revolution since its origins, as illustrated by another
document of Mason’s (and predecessor to the Bill of Rights), the 1776
Virginia Declaration of Rights. Thanks to Mason and other Anti-Federalists,
those emphases were carried forward into not just the debates over the
Constitution, but also its final, ratified form. (It’s also important to note,
as I’ll discuss tomorrow as well, that Mason, like many of these advocates for
rights, was a
slave-owner.)
3)
Future Democratic-Republicans: Despite the
expressed desire on the part of many of the founding generation (George
Washington in particular) to avoid the creation of political parties, the Federalist/Anti-Federalist
debate was certainly also an origin point for the development of such parties
in the U.S. Declaration author Thomas Jefferson was, from what I can tell, not
one of the most prominent Anti-Federalist voices at the time (nor was he present at the Constitutional
Convention), but he was definitely
in that camp, and would continue developing that perspective during his conflicts
with Alexander Hamilton throughout Washington’s terms as President. That
arc culminated in Jefferson’s creation of the Democratic-Republican Party, in
the contested
and crucial presidential election of 1800, and in the origins of a
two-party system that (with many evolutions of course) has endured to this day.
All of which, like so much else, can and should be linked to the
Federalist/Anti-Federalist debates.
Next
ConstitutionStudying tomorrow,
Ben
PS. What do you
think?
No comments:
Post a Comment