A book titled Young Patriots by Charles Cerami describes the process by which our current constitution was formed, over 230 years ago. Its longevity alone makes this a remarkable document. The book focuses on the roles of James Madison and Alexander Hamilton, who cooperated at this point in time to create a framework for a relatively strong federal government. In the background was George Washington, who was highly regarded by almost everyone involved, Benjamin Franklin and Thomas Jefferson, all of whom made important contributions. Almost every state recognized the weakness of the existing Articles of Confederation and the need for a stronger unifying document. But there were stark disagreements on such fundamental issues as the powers to be given the federal government versus reserved to the states, the role and power of the President, the composition of Congress, the role of federal courts, the need for a Bill of Rights. These same issues resonate today. Madison and Hamilton, aided by others, drove the process and decision-making that led to the final product. They also were critical in the ratification process, which needed nine states to put the Constitution into effect. Eventually all 13 states ratified and became part of the United States.
Hard to talk about this without mentioning the issue of slavery, which most states wanted to eliminate but which apparently was perceived to be a deal-breaker for some southern states. It is not our finest moment that this issue was punted, eventually resulting in the civil war and permitting a system which haunts us to this day with lasting race issues. But it was and is a remarkable document, providing the foundation for freedom and for economic success, which has led to such progress and prosperity for the residents of the country. The book is an easy and informative read.
An interesting coincidence in history, Kevin, is that Abraham Lincoln and Charles Darwin were born on the same day and I wonder how American history would have been if Darwin had published DESCENT OF MAN in 1861 instead of 1871. He gives scientific credence to the elimination of the inferior unfit people of the world as a farmer would cull inferior livestock. The Confederacy would have claimed the scientific high ground and may very well have succeeded.
there is no basis for referring to the African Americans who were the primary source of slaves as “inferior” or “unfit” and I don’t think Darwin viewed them that way. In the same environmental circumstances, Africans accomplish just as much as anyone else.
There is another view of the Constitutional convention by the late Dr Gary North a historian. https://garynorth.com/conspiracyinphiladelphia.pdf. Good reading.
Here’s a summary from the Duck Duck Go AI:
“In “The Descent of Man,” Darwin suggested that racial differences were linked to evolutionary progress, implying that some races were more “civilized” than others. This perspective has been criticized for promoting racist ideologies and justifying imperialism, as it framed the extermination of “lesser” races as a natural consequence of evolution.”
As I pointed out, Kevin, this book would have been the South’s “scientific” justification for slavery if it had been published 10 years earlier. Thank God it wasn’t.
fwiw – I just ordered on amazon
How does it compare to “Ratification: The People Debate the Constitution, 1787-1788 Paperback – June 7, 2011
by Pauline Maier (Author)”?
I am also currently reading “Worse Than Nothing: The Dangerous Fallacy of Originalism Paperback – June 6, 2023
by Erwin Chemerinsky (Author)”. An interesting and repeated criticism of originalism by Chemerinsky is that originalism lacks discretion. Lacking discretion to do what? Think about that!