A.Ham Book Club discussion

Discussion questions!

1. "Smallness in size, in effect, facilitated the smallness in thinking, that had almost proved fatal to the cause of independence." Ellis elaborates a bit on this, but is there anything else you can think of?

2. Madison made a list of everything wrong with the Articles. Which, in your opinion, is the most egregious?

3. Do you think that Ellis gives enough credit to people like G. Morris?

4. May 25 - Sept 17 seems like a relatively short time to create an entire system of government from scratch. By comparison, the Magna Carta took approximately a year to be drafted. Why do you think this is? Did we perhaps benefit from the English constitutional precedent? (& people call me a monarchist)

5. Can we truly say that the Constitution had stood the test of time?

I'll come back to questions 1-2. It's late so I hope this makes sense.
3) I was not aware of Morris' role in the Constitution so that was interesting to learn. I believe Ellis has given more credit to Morris than others although he doesn't spend a lot of time on him. I'd be interested to learn more.
4) I do believe they were able to benefit from the English Parliamentary system. I also think it helped that the Virginia Plan gave them a starting point. Furthermore, as this was the age of Enlightenment, the FFs were well read on democracies and republics.
There were a number of issues that they needed to overcome such as fear of a monarchy, distrust of a strong government, a distaste for taxes, fear of a military, etc. I think details were left out of the Constitution because they knew they could not reach consensus on some issues such as slavery. As Ellis points out, they knew some of these issues could not be settled without having some political framework in place. The Constitution may have been written in only a few months, but I'm not sure additional time would have helped. Getting into discussions such as slavery may have ended all conversations supporting a central government.
5) It could well be that the lack of details in the Constitution may have allowed it to stand the test of time. I also think having the judicial as the 3rd branch has helped keep the legislation and executive branches in check. Having said this, I think we need to work everyday to protect the Constitution. Partisan politics threaten these checks and balances.

1. I found the discussion of the confederationist argument interesting -- the notion that America was just too big to support a republic, because the inhabitants would only care about their own local interests. And I loved the way that Madison took that argument apart with his usual logic and facts.

2. Lack of consistency and unity in the laws. I also love how even back in the 1780s it was important to study history in order to understand the present. Those who advocated for a new constitution could see anarchy, civil war, and foreign conquest coming because they had studied the very same thing happening in just about every other previous confederacy.

that's all I have for now. I enjoyed this chapter. I remain as conflicted as ever about James Madison.