The Federalist Papers (Signet Classics)
by Alexander Hamilton, Charles R. Kesler, Clinton Rossiter, James Madison, John Jay
|
List Price: Our Price: $3.74 You Save: $4.21 (53%) Availability: Usually ships in 1-2 business days Buy Used: from $0.58 (click here) Category: Book See more book details and other editions |
|---|
Book Reviews of The Federalist Papers (Signet Classics)
Book Review: America's Third Most Important Written Work After The Constitution And The Declaration of Independence
Summary: 5 Stars
An able demonstration of the genius within the minds of Hamilton, Madison and others among our early governmental officials. The Federalist Papers is a scholarly work of remarkable erudition that aggressively, unapologetically, and cogently defines the United States Constitution according to Federalist views, proposes changes and limits to it, and advocates points of view regarding its implementation and continued practicality in a nation rife with disagreement among its varying ideologies and regions. The Federalist Papers were composed by men who supported something akin to a meritocracy, but a meritocracy defined by birth status, wealth, and social prominence rather than non-status-borne achievement or the ability to appeal to the voting citizenry of the nation. Aspects of this system hold tremendous worth and have been of incalculable influence on the operation of the American nation for two centuries. However, untempered by an opposing party more in favor of a representative democracy participated in by all peoples low and high, the Federalist position as espoused in the Papers could readily have resulted in tyranny and a nation unrecognizable as the one envisioned by most of our nation's founders and diametrically unlike the one we have today. Neither Lincoln nor Reagan nor Clinton, for example, would likely have become President under a political system sought by Federalists. However, the Federalist Papers themselves as an early example of American citizens (albeit aristocratic citizens) impacting the national government show that our mutable, dynamic Constitution works well in bending to the needs and wants of the people it binds. Although I found these essays to be among the most difficult reading of my life, I am not unmindful of their merit and do not regret the investment of much time, effort, and disciplined devotion it took me to get through them. I would even go so far as to say it is a shame The Federalist Papers is not taught more than it is in today's schools, although in small pieces, as an ongoing enhancement of the curriculum rather than as a single reading assignment.Book Review: The Definitive Guide to Good Governance
Summary: 5 Stars
If you care anything at all about political philosophy and think about how to best structure government to balance the need for government to be effectual yet at the same time to protect the liberties of the citizens and prevent the encorachment of government upon those freedoms, then this is required reading. The Papers were written in defense of an as yet unratified US Constitution and go point by point through why the new form of government was necessary (indeed why any government is necessary) and then through the consitution explaining how the different parts of the new federal government were meant to pull against each other (as advised by Montesquieu), and make it as difficult as possible for factions (today we might use the term "special interests") to trample the rights of the minority. The language can be a bit tricky at times, especially in some of Madison's papers (though his papers are often the most powerful), but at the end one emerges with a much deeper understanding of what the founders were thinking and what they thought they were ratifying (as opposed to how it is interpretted today).
But the book can also be applied more generally. The debate on how to balance the need for effectual government against the need to restrain the government from oppressing the people is applicable more generally. As you read you will almost certainly see some echoes of modern debate between the desire of modern politicians to expand government to remedy any number of social ills, and of others who regard the same acts as being the beginnings of tyranny. In some places, you will see where history has proven the founders wrong in terms of what artifacts of government would be sufficient to prevent future expansion of government, and other places where they were almost prescient.
Why every American child is not required to read this in High School civics classes, I will never understand.
Book Review: Must reading for any American
Summary: 5 Stars
How many Americans actually understand the Constitution and how their government was meant to function? If you are relying on the public schools and the media to give you that education, you are going to have a very great misunderstanding of what the Constitution was meant to mean and an even greater misunderstanding of how far the government of the United States today has veered from the vision of the wise men who met in Philadelphia in 1787.
These are a collection of papers that were published in New York in 1788 for the purpose of convincing the people, and through them, their representatives, to ratify the Constitution (which New York did a year later.) The papers themselves are fairly well organized discussing the basic utility of Union before a discussion of each of the three main departments of government (legislative, executive, and judicial.)
This edition has dozens of notations regarding people, places, and historical events and assemblies that the educated populace of the 1780s would be aware of, but the average person in 2006 may not be so familiar with.
One thing that I did as I was reading the book was that I was trying to consider what the three men who wrote these papers would think about these notions if they around today. It is also clear upon reflecting while reading about subsequent history, that they were wrong on a number of issues, especially considering the relative strength of the judiciary, which has in reality become arguarably the strongest of the three branches of government, not the least as argued by Hamilton.
This book should be a required text in every United States government class (senior year in high school or 101 class in college) rather than the one or two excerpts that are common fair in those watered-down classes. This book is also must reading for anyone who cares about constitutional governance.
Book Review: A good preamble to the Constitution
Summary: 5 Stars
"The Federalist Papers" is a good preamble to how our Constitution came to be written by giving us the thought processes Madison, Hamilton, and Jay expressed while they were defending reasons for replacing the Articles of Confederation. Although I haven't finished reading all the papers, I've already learned many things and dispelled several preconceptions about our Constitution that I had previously thought was fact. For instance, our Constitution has intentionally created in it a 'factional' system (first defended by Madison in Paper No. 9) that promotes discord and disharmony. The factions are designed to prevent the majority from totally controlling the federal government so that minorities can have an almost equal sway over all governing facets. The thought process here has to do with experiences of Athens and other pure democracies that ultimately turned into a rule by mob mentality. Another interesting point is Publius's accounts of social norms of the day, and his assumption that these norms would continue on and on which is a fallacy in today's Union with it's limitless special interests, both monied and pauperism, and the politically correct idea of diversity being a good thing for our society. Publius had no idea of Communism or Socialism and what that type of faction could cause in creating havoc in this country and our government.
If my opinion is worth anything to anyone, reading these papers along with the Antifederalist papers is well worth one's time for the reasons I've stated above plus many more.
Book Review: Excellent material, difficult to read
Summary: 5 Stars
I rate this book 5 stars because the content is so vital to understanding what our founding fathers were thinking as they tried to convince the Americans in New York that a "Foederal" government, rather than individual states or territories, was the best way to bring the new union together.
OK, now readability. Does anyone else have trouble understanding the writing style of the late 17th century? I appreciate that the book is true to the original newspaper articles, but sometimes my eyes glaze over and I lose the gist of what the author was trying to say. For example: "The disciplined armies always kept on foot on the continent of Europe, though they bear a malignant aspect to liberty and oeconomy, have notwithstanding been productive of the signal advantage, of rendering sudden conquests impracticable, and of preventing that rapid desolation, which used to mark the progress of war, prior to their introduction." I think he's saying that a standing army will prevent foreign powers from easily invading your country. But I have to do this "translation" in my head as I read each sentence, so the reading really gets bogged down.
So, this work is not something that most people can just breeze through - it takes some thought and understanding of the culture and style of the time. If there is a modern-language translation available, I would buy that as a supplement, because the content definitely is worth learning!