“If the Constitution is adopted the Union will be in fact and in theory an association of States of a Confederacy.”

Say what! And this from the writer of the Feralist Papers. Does even he know the difference between a federacy and a confederacy. I suggest he does and that there is none as some would try to claim that there is.

I would have to assume he meant that the Confederacy was using the Constitution as its foundation. And that if the Northern Union were to actually adopt it there would be an automatic association implied. But its difficult to pinpoint the mind set of the man who worked tirlessly to bring in central banking - the seed of tyranny under which we live today.

And I thought it was supposed to be an association of the people who lived in the different States. Isn't that why individual rights were given supreme authority over not only the Federal administration but over the States as well? I suppose I could be missing something here so I'll wait to see the other opinions that get posted. Waffler, why don't you explain the difference you pointed out? It kind of left me hanging as to what you meant and why you said it. I'll leave the rating out for now.

Ahh yes, opps. That original intent and thought is dangerous to be let out when it is so dynamically and diametrically opposed to today's statist theocracy and otherwise mob mentality. And this, from arguably the most centralist / statist thinking founder of the whole group. Each individual person was the primary sovereign (having all law and rights inherent within each individual as an inalienable faculty of birth) with each level of government adding to each other. By way of example: The county Sheriff is the highest ranking law enforcement official in the entire country. The state or, the largest individual common law entity / body receiving its sovereignty from each and every, any and all sovereign individual (individual heirs to the King of the Universe expressing the law of nature or of nature's God) being authorized to represent each individual unitedly. Such sovereign state, as the united representative to the individual sovereign associates with other sovereign states in a confederacy. (Confederacy: "An agreement between two or more states or nations, by which they unite for their mutual protection and good." (Bouvier's Law Dictionary) The confederacy of sovereign representatives (states) united may then act in that limited sovereignty as a most distant single sovereign body (form the originating source)

Alexander Hamilton was effective in selling the Constitution as an improved version of the Articles of Confederation, which it is not, either in fact or in theory. To Mr. Hamilton I can only say: You Lie!

Hamilton did not like the idea of statehood. He would have done away with the states. Well, it seems today that he has almost had his wish. Big Brother in Washington has almost reserved all power for himself especially through the federal courts. The United States does not seem like a fit title for our nation anymore. In truth it should be called just what it has become-"The Federal Democratic-Republic of America!"

Pretty simple and bang on. Don't confuse 'federal' and 'national.' This was understood by all signers of the Constitution -- it would have never passed otherwise. I'm not a fan of Hamilton, but he speaks the truth here.

this quote was AWESOME!!!!!!!!

Briyth, Confederacy, Beriyth means "covenant; league; confederacy between individuals or nations. A compact of political agreement between the States and Individuals. Hamilton chose his word well.