I discuss it at length here. Of the two interpretations of the Supremacy Clause, I think you can guess from the history which one was actually intended, despite the more obvious but sadly wishful conclusion. I think the fix was in from the get-go.
Ugh! My eyelids are getting heavy and I wouldn’t be able to give your essay the attention it probably deserves tonight so I’ll check back in the morning with a fresh cup o’ joe and have a crack at it. Thanks.
As a matter of curiosity, do you know what if anything the mercantilist Hamilton and his band of merry men may have brought to the party? He apparently was not enamored with the notion of people's sovereignty and felt a more enlightened aristocracy could better guide the country. In any case, I suppose it just goes to show that power is a necessity that without a moral influence can create all manner of unholy alliances.
Odd thing, or maybe not, for much of my life I felt Americans were a breed apart. Somehow different from other free peoples, past or present. That Americans would never let tyranny in its many forms come to our shores. Over the past 20 years or so I've come to believe there's little difference between Americans and other people around the world. We can and HAVE been manipulated very nearly to the point of serfs on the plantation of corporatism. What's next???