Upstate New Yorker Anti-Federalism
The post is in response to a friend of this blog, Mark in Spokane of Ordered Liberty, and his assertion that "the anti-federalists were overwhelmingly from the South," "almost always were stalwart defenders of the slaveocracy, and sought the extension of slavery across the continent," and that "[w]hile their rhetoric may have been about 'liberty' and 'little republics,' their actual practice was to embrace tyranny -- the tyranny of slavery," made in comment to this three-day-old post of mine — Back to the Articles. Behold, from Ratification of the Constitution (1786-1790), this map and chart:
The above indicate that the Upstate-Downstate rivalry predates the Union and that Upstate New York was a solid bastion of Anti-Federalism. Famous Anti-Federalists from the region include George Clinton (not of Parliament fame; he was fron New Jersey), and Melancton Smith, who may or may not have been Federal Farmer.
The above indicate that the Upstate-Downstate rivalry predates the Union and that Upstate New York was a solid bastion of Anti-Federalism. Famous Anti-Federalists from the region include George Clinton (not of Parliament fame; he was fron New Jersey), and Melancton Smith, who may or may not have been Federal Farmer.
Labels: America the Beautiful, American History, Governance, The Empire State
5 Comments:
The whole reason why the Federalist Papers were written.
NY was the original swing state.
PA, as well, was practically evenly divided along geographic lines. The population, and therefore the votes, was mostly along the Delaware River and, of course, in Phladelphia: bastions of Federalism.
Uh, the demographic map shows the anti-federalists still largely in the South. I didn't say that the anti-federalists were entirely located in the south, just that they were centered there. And almost all of the writers who were ardent anti-federalists came of of the south as well. So, interesting stats, but I don't see how it refutes my argument. In fact, I think it strengthens it.
The delegate votes are interesting, but not conclusive in terms of evaluating strength in a given region. As Forest MacDonald demonstrated in his biography of Alexander Hamilton, the elections for delegates to the state ratifying conventions were among the least popularly supported in American history. Because of various electoral requirements (mostly involving land ownership and property valuation) fewer than one in 25 white males were even qualified to vote for the electors. The Federalists predominated among business owners everywhere and non-slave owning property owners even in the south. So, the idea that the Federalists managed to get an impressive delegate count isn't all that surprising...
Federalism was just a patch on chaos.
The Whiskey Rebellion and Shay's Rebellion were legitimate violent resistance - Lysander Spooner's life was legitimate nonviolent resistance.
A better map is this one :
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:US_Secession_map_1865_(BlankMap_derived).PNG
Because when it came down to war, it was a division of north versus south with the northern States willing to commit total war upon the southern States in order to compel them into an even "more perfect Union"
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home