The Federalist Papers

Imagine what the United States would be like today if the Constitution was never ratified and the Articles of Confederation were allowed to continue. Would America still grow into a global superpower? Would the United States more closely resemble the European Union? Or would the country even still exist in any recognizable form?

How do the authors define the terms “republic,” “democracy,” and “Federalist”? In what ways are the definitions of these words different to 18th-century readers than they are to 21st-century readers, if at all?

How would you characterize the authors’ view of humanity? Is it wholly optimistic, wholly pessimistic, or some combination of the two?

At times, Hamilton has been labeled by both contemporaries and modern scholars as elitist, monarchist, and anti-democratic. Do you think those claims are fair? What passages in The Federalist Papers support that characterization? What passages contradict it?

Name three events of the 21st century that show how Federalism still applies to modern Americans. How has the balance between state and federal power evolved since the 18th century? And how has this balance been tested by specific current events?

Explain the Constitution’s and by extension The Federalist Papers’ view on individual liberty. Is individual liberty viewed as an unalloyed good? Or are there reasons to curtail liberty for the benefit of building a strong unified government able to withstand attacks from within or without? Where do the authors believe the line should be drawn? And do you agree?

Looking back on both American history and the present day, on which matters are the authors’ predictions of how the Constitution would operate most accurate? By contrast, what are some of the most glaring things that the authors fail to anticipate?

Summarize Hamilton’s argument for why the inclusion of a bill of rights in the Constitution would be at best unnecessary and at worst actively harmful. Do you find his explanation compelling? Why or why not?