Anti-Federalist papers Brutus I part 1 (paywall removed)

               Brutus I is an anti-federalist who wrote a series of pieces to the citizens of New York. As with Centinel, much of the argument made has stood the test of time. It’s a simple argument. The constitution grants too much power to a central authority, and representative democracy would lead to a few powerful people leading the country unable to truly represent those they are put in place to serve. I think the entire first paragraph is important in this context. 

                “When the public is called to investigate and decide upon a question in which not only the present members of the community are deeply interested, but upon which the happiness and misery of generations yet unborn is in great measure suspended, the benevolent mind cannot help feeling itself peculiarly interested in the result.”

                This is powerful and in line with Jefferson’s ideas that the rules should be scrapped and rewritten every generation. The idea that the representatives in government have the right to decide for those citizens yet unborn seems both well intentioned and extremely short sighted. They were there then, and we were not. Well we are here now, and the framers are not, yet government still exists. This alone is the first weakness in the mystic document many of us, myself included for many years, hold in such high esteem.

                The largest idea in this essay, in my opinion, is that the people have the right to both form the government, and unmake it. A principle that did not carry forward over time. Brutus also writes that if this constitution does indeed carry forward the blessings of liberty to the future generations, they will hold it in high esteem. They will look upon it knowing it has created the conditions for humanity to rise to its “highest point of perfection”. Brutus also writes: “But if, on the other hand, this form of government contains principles that will lead to the subversion of liberty — if it tends to establish a despotism, or, what is worse, a tyrannic aristocracy; then, if you adopt it, this only remaining asylum for liberty will be [shut] up, and posterity will execrate your memory.” If one looks objectively at our history and our present, you will see this quote held up quite well unfortunately. 

                Further arguing against the Constitution, Brutus brings up the idea of consolidating all the independent States under one document and government. By decreeing all laws made by congress the supreme law of the land, and that all judges are bound by these laws as in article VI. the States would have no power to fight back against the government. In this he was also correct. The Federal government can make State law irrelevant. We have in our time seen State government push back against Federal government, often winning. We have also seen the Federal Government push back against States that have in the past over reached. The lack of consistency in this regard does not exactly make a great point for Federal government though. In short, the idea of independent states confederated together to work towards each other’s benefit voluntarily will die with this document.          

                Next is the idea of direct taxation by the Federal government. We all know how the states were enslaved to the federal government after the country was formed,(Thanks Hamilton) but Brutus called it before Hamilton was ever Secretary of Treasury. The argument which came to fruition, is that the taxation by the Federal government, directly for the benefit of the Federal government, would make it harder for the States to collect taxes and discharge their debts and operate. (This is exactly how it went down) Brutus knew, as all citizens of the time did that the most important power that can be laid upon a government is the power to raise money through taxation. Income tax wasn’t even the government’s wet dream back then either. Imagine how Brutus would react to that new governmental power. 

                In part two of Brutus, we will discuss the thoughts on trade and a standing Army. It was known that the standing Army was the literal threat to liberty everywhere. If a founder saw our police forces today, they would acquiesce that the United States had indeed turned to despotism. We will discuss that idea further in the next blog. In closing consolidation of power and taxation has indeed led to an aristocratic ruling class. We look to our “betters” to “lead” us all the while releasing responsibility for our own welfare and happiness to that of a benevolent overlord. 

                In Liberty