People understand it but can’t see what there is to debate.
**********************
Please continue.
OK. Fair enough. Billthedrill and I had an e-mail exchange in which he suggested that people agree with the Anti-Federalist writer and don’t see a need to comment or contest his stance.
I agree. Our own 'what if' scenarios may be so biased that we consider the writers points of contention minor. We know what happens, they were staring into a great abyss.
Publius responds-
...that people agree with the Anti-Federalist writer and don’t see a need to comment or contest his stance.
Again, I agree for the same reason. I have always been interested in Colonial history and this effort is greatly appreciated in advancing my knowledge of our Founding Fathers and the beginnings of our United States.
I am somewhat surprised that the Anti-Federalists were labeled as such, they seem to be for some form of union, recognizing the necessity. I am looking forward to further installments to see how the debate develops. I find the essays and comments enlightening as well as providing a rich resource of information to further research.