difficult for them to come at least in the short term. but i say that because the united states of america history always moves in cycles, and these reactionary, paranoid pop pop up excuse me, these reactionary, paranoid pop up, and then put down and then something and they pop up again. so an ongoing battle, but there's something quixotic about all these right wing movements in that they're the source of. their defeat is built into it from the start. it's just a matter of people voting, their numbers in and getting involved. the national and local level. well i will say congratulations on the book. thank you. just before the conversation i had to cram read it over the last 24 hours. so i'm looking forward to rereading and lingering over your anecdotes so that certainly

a delightful part of the book as said, i learned a lot about you and i think that was a kind of a brave choice, an interesting choice, a way to kind of thank you, kind of your own experience and observation, reflection. you named an interesting further establishment. so i want to well, check out well we'll go together the exurban tour. yeah and i say doug is my supervisor at indiana university northwest so i took a major risk him to do this it could not only lead to an awkward conversation, but termination of employment possibility. so i'm glad glad you liked it. sure of writing you have this autocratic power. yes. thank you for coming, erica. thank you.

ss the future of the alliance. ♪ >> in partnership with the

library of congress, c-span brings you books that shaped america. we explore key works of literature that had a profound effect on the country. the federalist from 1788, essays written by alexander hamilton, james madison and john j. >> in 1787 the newly drafted constitution was sent to the states for ratification. two camps emerge, the federalists and the anti-federalist. starting in october 1787, essays published under the pen name publius began appearing in newspapers, urge and the ratification of the constitution. written by alexander hamilton, james madison and john jay. theory were later combined into

a book called the federalists. because of the authors addressed a wide range of political issues including conflict between the states, taxation and foreign influence, they are still considered vital documents today for understanding the original intent of the constitution. the federalist papers continued to have an impact on the issues of contemporary america. >> welcome to books that shaped america, our c-span series that looks at how books have influenced who we are today. in partnership with the library of congress, this 10 week series looks at different eras, topics and viewpoints. we are glad you are joining us for this walk-through history. tonight, our focus is the federalist, compilation of essays written by alexander hamilton, james madison and john jay. essays known today as the federalist papers. our guest this evening is judge

gregory maddox and colleen sheehan, politics professor at arizona state university. professor sheehan, back in 1787, what were the purposes of the federalist papers? >> the federalist papers as it is commonly called, was the brainchild of alexander hamilton. hamilton was born in the caribbean on a little island called me this. hamilton came to the united states when he was a teenager, went to kings college, now columbia and attended the constitutional convention. but he was outvoted there by the other two new yorkers who attended. new york is going to be a very important state for the new

constitution. hamilton put together a team to push for the ratification of the constitution and he enlisted the support of john jay local james madison to work to persuade the voters of new york to ratify the constitution. >> judge, our partner in this endeavor, the library of congress on its website describes the federalist papers the most significant american contribution to political thought in our history. do you agree? >> i think it is true. there were a number of unique contributions to political science that came out of the federalists. in discussing the nature of government, madison said the government had to accomplish two things. it had to be able to control itself.

the three things he pointed out were essentially new things -- separation of powers, but he also focused on the checks and balances, where each house would check the other house, each branch of government would check the other branch. perhaps the most original contribution was federalism, the idea they having two governments would do more to preserve liberty than just having one government. >> let's range from the federalist number one. this is alexander hamilton. after an unequivocal experience of the inefficiency of the subsistent federal government, you are called upon to deliberate on the new constitution for the united states of america. the subject speaks its own importance. comprehended in its consequences nothing less then the existence

of that union. what was alexander hamilton saying there? >> that is the opening salvo of the federalist. it goes on to say it seems to have been reserved to the people of the country to decide the important question whether society is a minor capable of establishing good government or whether they are forever destined on accident and force. think about that. what he is saying essentially is free government has never worked. in the history of the world, there are momentary rains of glory that break forth from the gloom and while they dazzle us with fleeting brilliance, popular government is a history of failure. we have the chance hamilton is saying to do it right.

to show that all people is really capable of governing themselves. that is what the american project was about. the federalist papers starts out by saying so. >> judge, structuring society in a sense. >> yes, i think in your quote, one that -- thing that comes across is sounds like the articles of confederation was a disasters. in many ways that was an overstate. if you read the federalist, they were quite respectful despite seeing its flaws. under the articles of confederation, congress kept the union together. it won a war, and negotiated a favorable peace treaty, it figured out what to do about the western lands. but there were problems and most of what he talks about is how to

improve the situation. not that everything was wrong, but that there were specific problems that might make this a flash in the pan if they do not get fixed. >> how different was the constitution approved in 1787 to the articles of confederation? >> some of the major problems with the articles of confederation was congress did not have the powers to govern. it could not raise taxes directly. it cannot raise an army by itself directly. it could pass laws, but had no way to enforce the laws. a had no judiciary. without the ability to raise taxes, it could not successfully borrow money. another problem was that because each state had one vote, it was not a very fair system because some states were larger.

the constitution attempted to address all of those problems by giving congress the powers the directors thought were necessary. >> why were these papers published under publius? >> publius is the pen name they chose. publius valerius publicola was a roman aristocrat who was known to be in favor of republicanism. a man of the people. they chose that name. it was common in the 18th century to have a pseudonym. it is not from whom the advice comes that is the most important thing, but whether the advice it be good. the papers are put out there.

nobody except probably one person knew who publius valerius publicola was. otherwise it is kept a secret for some time. the one person who was told is the man whom everybody respects the most. and that is washington. >> judge, do you invoke the federalist papers today in your work at the u.s. court of appeals for the armed forces? >> i have not had much occasion. the federalist papers are a source of evidence of the original meaning of the constitution. but they are not the source where you can look up a sentence and that decides a legal issue. they are a collection of the arguments that were made by supporters of the constitution that addressed key themes such

as -- when we say congress has powers and can do everything necessary to carry out those powers, what we mean by that, it is the big ideas i think in the federalist papers. whether or not you cite them in a particular case does not mean the big ideas are not still important. >> let's give you a sense of what america was like in 1787. the population was close to 4 million. washington became the president in 1789. there were 11 states admitted to the union by the end of 1789. the economy was based mostly on farming. the federalist papers themselves, 85 essays published in 1787 and 1788.

alexander wrote to 51 of those essays, james madison 29 and john jay route 5. -- wrote five. they were written under the pen name publius. the independent journal in the new york packet where the original publishers. the library of congress has an original federalist in book form and we are going to show it to you here. this is at the library of congress. they also have a letter from thomas jefferson to james madison talking about the importance of a bill of rights. here is a little bit on that. >> i am julie miller. i work with early american

documents. this is a letter from the james madison papers. this is a letter that madison wrote to jefferson in the summer of 1788. james madison was one of the authors of the federalist essays and later on he would draft the amendments that would become the bill of rights. in this period, he was not sure yet of the bill of rights. in this letter to jefferson, he says the delay of a few years will assuage the jealousies artificially created and will point out the faults which really call for amendment. he thought it would take a little time before they knew it would need to be amended. what he is saying is that a bill of rights should wait until

later on. this is thomas jefferson's reply. what jefferson does is she thinks madison for -- he thanks for the news but says he knew it already. madison has sent him a copy and jefferson says he already has a copy. jefferson flatters madison and says with respect to the federalist, the three authors have been named to me. he says i read it with care and pleasure and was satisfied there was nothing in it by one of those hands and by that he meant john jay.

and he continues and not a great deal by hamilton. jefferson continues, does the highest honor to the third, by that he means madison who he is writing to, as being the best commentary on the principles of government. these two letters by jefferson and madison preserve the context of which the federalist essays were written and also how they were received. >> arizona state university professor colleen sheehan, what was the role of the bill of rights in the federalist papers? >> first of all, i have to mention that arizona state university and the school of

civic and economic thought and leadership also has a first edition of the federalist papers. it is a real treasure here at our university. what is the role of the bill of rights and the federalist papers? basically, publius and is why we do not need a bill of rights. both hamilton and madison argue we do not need a bill of rights. the anti-federalist our argument for it -- the anti-federalist are arguing for it. the reason he said we do not need a bill of rights is because the american government is different from the british government. in the british model, the government granted rights to the people gradually. think of magna carta.

the american government is very different. government does not grant rights to the people. the people delegate powers to the government. the people are sovereign. and so madison was concerned that if there were a bill of rights that any rights not listed would be assumed that we do not possess them. ultimately, he comes around and introduces the bill of rights and the first congress to bring the antifederalists on board to create unity. if we go about this carefully, we can make this work. the bill of rights can become a sort of schoolmaster perhaps to the american people, where we teach ourselves our own rights and responsibilities. >> objects, the bill of rights

was a victory for the anti-federalist. it is something we take for granted today. >> that is correct. about half the states when they ratified the constitution proposed additional amendments. most of the states had adopted the constitution immediately after the declaration of independence in 1776. in most of the states they had a supper bill of rights. -- separate bill of rights. the federalists were caught off guard. they had to respond to the argument why don't we have one? they did not get around to do it until federalist 84. one of the arguments was to say that rights were protected when there is no power to violate them which somehow suggests the government had more power,

hamilton also said we do have a bill of rights, it is spread throughout the constitution. he cited in article three section two the fact that in a criminal trial you have to have a jury. there is a guarantee of habeas corpus and a guarantee of against bills of attainder. he wanted to say we do not need to specify rights, but we have done it. further he said some of these things like freedom of the press, how would you even define freedom of the press to begin with? it was not very persuasive and i think it was a good compromise. madison might have been the last politician who kept his promise and proposed a bill of rights. >> good evening and thanks for joining us here on books that shaped america.

we are talking about the federalist from 1787 and 1788. this is an interactive program as most programs on c-span are. we want your input. if you can't get through on the phone, 202-748-8003 is our text number. we will begin taking those in just a few minutes.

we want to show you a picture of an actual federalist essay. it was published in the new york daily advertising -- advertiser. were these federalist papers written for elites, where they to persuade the thomas jefferson's and the george washington's, or were they written for regular folk? >> i think they were written for regular folks heard they were written to the people of new york. they might have been more complex than the average person could understand, but they certainly were written for the people. >> let's go back to the federalist papers. this is from federalist number 10. james madison is talking about factions in america. among the numerous advantages promised by a well constructed union, none deserves to be more accurately developed than its

tendency to break and control the violence of faction. colleen sheehan, what was he referring to? >> he says that a faction could be a majority or a minority of the whole. what is decisive about affection is it is contrary to the rights of other citizens or to the permanent interests of the community. it is unjust. faction is what destroys popular government. what madison sets as the goal in federalist 10 is to control the violence of faction. because he wants the majority to rule, but not a majority faction. somehow the majority that will rule has to be a just majority. if it is not just majority to

begin with, it has to be refined through the constitutional processes. >> two websites i want to mention to you. c-span.org, books that shaped america. more specifically, if you go to the federalist page, you will get other videos that will add to your understanding of the federalist. secondly, if you want to learn more about alexander hamilton, james madison and john jay, we have a companion webcast -- podcasts talking about the authors. you can go wherever you get your podcasts and download it there. judge, john jay is the third and

the least significant? >> he wrote the fewest essays, but he was ill during part of the time. he was a tremendously important political figure. he was the president of congress, later the governor of new york, later the chief justice of the supreme court. he was very valued. he was very reasonable. he commanded a lot of respect. the fact that he did not produce as much was attributed more to the fact that he was busy and sick. in the first 10 essays she wrote a number of them but then was unable to continue. >> colleen sheehan, did the federalist papers have an impact on the united states? >> i want to say yes.

this has become a real controversy amongst scholars, how influential were the federalist papers? in terms of persuading the people of new york or the other states, some of the essays were republished and they did have some effect. but the long-term effects of the federalist papers is substantial as well. jefferson called this the best commentary on the principles of government ever written. i do not know if that is a bit of an exaggeration. but the federalist papers are a profound work of politics, bordering on political theory. in the papers, madison and hamilton in particular set forth an understanding of not only the processes of the u.s. constitution, but in the

federalist papers we can see the forest for the trees. they teach us about the purpose of the constitution, about why we have a constitution. the purpose is self-government. there is a lot to be learned from that and that is relevant to us still today. >> well, i agree with the sentiments. they started writing the federalist papers at the end of october 1787 and by the end of 1787, several states had already adopted the constitution before half of the federalist papers had been written. none of the people in georgia or delaware had read the vast majority of those papers. i do not think it is possible to say the federalist papers