2 votes

A Really Good Interview of an Anti-Constitutionalist

Louis Michael Seidmann is a Georgetown law professor who recently wrote an op-ed in the NYT called "Let's Give Up on the Constitution" He was recently interviewed by EconTalk, which is part of the Library of Economics and Liberty.

It is a long interview, and I'm only half way through, but I think it's really worthwhile to give at least part of it a listen. Seidmann is rare in that he is willing to say what he believes. He is against the whole idea of using constitutions to limit government power. The host pushes back somewhat, very respectfully.

It is worthwhile to give it a listen just to hear what the other side is thinking, in a more or less articulate fashion without all the buzzwords and talking points of the MSM. I always find it more interesting t listen to those I disagree with rather than just hear what I already beleive spoken back to me.

http://www.econtalk.org/archives/2013/02/seidman_on_the.html




Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Put it this way. "I believe

Put it this way.

"I believe in capitalism, free markets, and a limited government that protects our basic rights"

"because it is moral"

vs.

"because it leads to prosperity"

That is kind of the issue. Prosperity is dependent on reality in a way that morality is not.

Plan for eliminating the national debt in 10-20 years:

Overview: http://rolexian.wordpress.com/2010/09/12/my-plan-for-reducin...

Specific cuts; defense spending: http://rolexian.wordpress.com/2011/01/03/more-detailed-look-a

Fluke and now

This clown. Georgetown is a piece. It is overrated and overpriced. Got to give him credit though. He says out loud what Gore believed, Clinton believed, Bush believed, Obama believes, ect. And it is sick.

That guy is ?

many comments to make here but I'll just leave it with this: there is no "constitutional obedience" going on that we need to stop in order to have this guy's UTOPIA. We have it right now.

I agree-- in fact when the

I agree-- in fact when the host lists some unconstitutional stuff going on now, he actually responds that the constitution hasn't prevented those things from happening. So it seems like this guy should be really happy with the way things are going.

The original Anti-Constitutionalists

were freedom-loving patriots. Not statists or socialists or fascists.

The Anti-Federalists fought against the mischief of the "well-born few." They considered the drafting of the Constitution and the ratifying conventions as illegitimate because the Articles of Confederation never vested any authority in Congress to repeal the entire document - only alterations could be made and only with the consent of every state, not 9 states of 13. The convention proved the "perpetual union" spoken of in the Articles was merely rhetorical flourish.

During a time of crisis the designing politicians of the day were able to slickly sell a National Consolidated government which created a new central government with unprecedented powers to the unwitting, but well-intentioned American people. Crisis control isn't a new concept.

To be against the Constitution is not to be against freedom. In fact, we should thank the Anti-Federalists for their skepticism and suspicion of big government and special interests. It was their efforts that led to the inclusion of the Bill of Rights, which was their way of telling the country that this new government could not be trusted.

Personally

What drew me to the writings of the Anti-Federalists was more their devotion to decentralized government. If you have not read the Brutus papers, I really hope you will some day. Those were by far my favorites.

Yeah Man!!!!!

I can tell by your user name that you're "in the know"

Yep

Federal Farmer was one. The name Brutus was taken so I went with option two.

Did not all 13 states agree

Did not all 13 states agree to ratify the new Constitution?

Plan for eliminating the national debt in 10-20 years:

Overview: http://rolexian.wordpress.com/2010/09/12/my-plan-for-reducin...

Specific cuts; defense spending: http://rolexian.wordpress.com/2011/01/03/more-detailed-look-a

It took effect after 9 (in

It took effect after 9 (in reality 10) states signed on. And not the state legislatures -- as proscribed by the AoC. They were separate conventions outside of the legislatures.

100% Accurate answer^

.

Senator Peter Schiff 2016

All True

One of my favorite founding fathers, George Mason, was against ratification.

In regard to the law professor, though, he is anti-constitutional in the sense that he is against constitutions.