We love ourselves too often and need reach out much more often. It is a social responsibility and it effects the environment also.
Contents hide (Top) History Structure and content Legacy See also Citations General and cited references External links Anti-Federalist Papers Article Talk Read Edit View history Tools Appearance hide Text Small Standard Large Width Standard Wide Color (beta) Automatic Light Dark From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Anti-Federalist Papers is the collective name given to the works written by the Founding Fathers who were opposed to, or concerned with, the merits of the United States Constitution of 1787. Starting on 25 September 1787 (eight days after the final draft of the US Constitution) and running through the early 1790s, these Anti-Federalists published a series of essays arguing against the ratification of the new Constitution.[1] They argued against the implementation of a stronger federal government without protections on certain rights. The Anti-Federalist papers failed to halt the ratification of the Constitution but they succeeded in influencing the first assembly of the United States Congress to draft the Bill of Rights.[2] These works were authored primarily by anonymous contributors using pseudonyms such as "Brutus" and the "Federal Farmer." Unlike the Federalists, the Anti-Federalists created their works as part of an unorganized group.[3] History Patrick Henry, author of several of the Anti-Federalist papers Following its victory against the British in the Revolutionary War, the United States was plagued by a variety of internal problems. The weak central government could not raise taxes to cover war debts and was largely unable to pass legislation. Many early American politicians and thinkers believed that these issues were the result of the Articles of Confederation, the first governing document of the United States.[4] In 1787 a convention gathered in Philadelphia to attempt to amend it. Soon, however, the gathering shifted its focus to constructing a newer and more powerful Constitution for the fledgling country. Two main competing factions emerged, the Federalists and the Anti-Federalists. The former supported a more powerful central government while the latter opposed it. During the lengthy and heated national debate following this convention, both groups wrote extensively in favor of their respective positions. The Anti-Federalist papers are a selection of the written arguments against the US Constitution by those known to posterity as the Anti-Federalists. As with the Federalist papers, these essays were originally published in newspapers. The most widely known are "a series of sixteen essays published in the New York Journal from October 1787 through April 1788 during the same period. The Anti-Federalist was appearing in New York newspapers, under the pseudonym 'Brutus'."[attribution needed] Structure and content The Anti-Federalist papers were written over a number of years and by a variety of authors who utilized pen names to remain anonymous, and debates over authorship continue to this day. Unlike the authors of The Federalist Papers, a group of three men working closely together, the authors of the Anti-Federalist papers were not engaged in an organized project. Thus, in contrast to the pro-Constitution advocates, there was no one book or collection of Anti-Federalist Papers at the time. The essays were the product of a vast number of authors, working individually rather than as a group.[5] Although there is no canonical list of anti-federalist authors, major authors include Cato (likely George Clinton), Brutus (likely either Melancton Smith, Robert Yates or perhaps John Williams), Centinel (Samuel Bryan), and the Federal Farmer (either Melancton Smith, Richard Henry Lee, or Mercy Otis Warren[citation needed]). Works by Patrick Henry and a variety of others are often included as well. Until the mid-20th century, there was no united series of Anti-Federalist papers. The first major collection was compiled by Morton Borden, a professor at Columbia University, in 1965. He "collected 85 of the most significant papers and arranged them in an order closely resembling that of the 85 Federalist Papers". The most frequently cited contemporary collection, The Complete Anti-Federalist, was compiled by Herbert Storing and Murray Dry of the University of Chicago and published in 1981. At seven volumes and including many pamphlets and other materials not previously published in a collection, this work is considered, by many, to be the authoritative compendium on the publications.[6] Considering their number and diversity, it is difficult to summarize the contents of the Anti-Federalist papers. Generally speaking they reflected the sentiments of the Anti-Federalists, which Akhil Reed Amar of the Yale Law School generalized as: a localist fear of a powerful central government, a belief in the necessity of direct citizen participation in democracy, and a distrust of wealthy merchants and industrialists.[7] Essays with titles such as "A Dangerous Plan of Benefit Only to The 'Aristocratick Combination'" and "New Constitution Creates a National Government; Will Not Abate Foreign Influence; Dangers of Civil War And Despotism" fill the collection, and reflect the strong feelings of the authors. In the table below, a selection of Anti-Federalist papers have been contrasted with their Federalist counterparts.[8] Topics common to Anti-Federalist and Federalist papers Subject Anti-Federalist Federalist Need for stronger Union John DeWitt No. I and II Federalist No. 1–6 Bill of Rights John DeWitt No. II James Wilson, 10/6/87 Federalist No. 84 Nature and powers of the Union Patrick Henry, 6/5/88 Federalist No. 1, 14, 15 Responsibility and checks in self-government Centinel No. 1 Federalist No. 10, 51 Extent of Union, states' rights, Bill of Rights, taxation Pennsylvania Minority: Brutus No. 1 Federalist No. 10, 32, 33, 35, 36, 39, 45, 84 Extended republics, taxation Federal Farmer No. I and II Federalist No. 8, 10, 14, 35, 36 Broad construction, taxing powers Brutus No. VI Federalist No. 23, 30–34 Defense, standing armies Brutus No. X Federalist No. 24–29 The judiciary Brutus No. XI, XII, XV Federalist No. 78–83 Government resting on the people John DeWitt No. III Federalist No. 23, 49 Executive power Cato No. IV Federalist No. 67 Regulating elections Cato No. VII Federalist No. 59 House of Representatives Brutus No. IV Federalist No. 27, 28, 52–54, 57 The Senate Brutus No. XVI Federalist No. 62, 63 Representation in House of Representatives and Senate Melancton Smith, 6/20-6/27-88 Federalist No. 52–57, 62–63 Legacy The Anti-Federalists proved unable to stop the ratification of the US Constitution, which took effect in 1789. Since then, the essays they wrote have largely fallen into obscurity.[9] The influence of their writing, however, can be seen to this day – particularly in the nature and shape of the United States Bill of Rights. Federalists, such as Alexander Hamilton, vigorously argued against its passage but were in the end forced to compromise. The Massachusetts Compromise took place during the ratification process after 5 states had already ratified. Despite being the minority power, Anti-Federalists were able to create enough stir to prevent Massachusetts from ratifying the newly drafted Constitution. They agreed that there would need to at least be amendments made before their state would ratify the Constitution, leading to the beginning of the United States Bill of Rights.[10] Other states with strong Anti-Federalist populations would follow this example, expanding this list of amendments to the 10 we know today. The Bill of Rights was constructed specifically to quell the fears of the Anti-Federalists and to address their concerns. The Anti-Federalists feared that there were not enough checks and balances to protect the citizens from a governmental abuse of power. As such, the Anti-Federalists focused on explicitly listing out the individuals' rights and freedoms including free practice of religion, press, legal rights, and arms for protection from both their fellow man and government military occupation like what they faced during the Revolution. To prevent the federal government from assuming all unspecified powers, as the Anti-Federalists feared, the 10th and final Amendment in the Bill of Rights states that all powers not specified in the Constitution would be left to the States. These States' Rights would be a cornerstone issue for the entirety of United States history, from the treatment and freeing of slaves to the modern-day healthcare systems. The Anti-Federalists were not successful in stopping the ratification of the Constitution, but their actions still impact the Federal Government centuries after the writers of the Anti-Federalist papers are gone.[11]
I can change your mind about Trump: Bibliography of Donald Trump Article Talk Read Edit View history Tools Appearance hide Text Small Standard Large Width Standard Wide Color (beta) Automatic Light Dark From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia This article is part of a series about Donald Trump Business and personal 45th and 47th President of the United States Incumbent Tenure Policies Appointments (first · second) Presidential campaigns Impeachments Civil and criminal prosecutions COVID-19 pandemic Donald Trump's signature Seal of the President of the United States vte This bibliography of Donald Trump is a list of written and published works, by and about Donald Trump, the 45th and 47th president of the United States. Due to the sheer volume of books about Trump, the titles listed here are limited to non-fiction books about Trump or his presidency, published by notable authors and scholars. Tertiary sources (including textbooks and juvenile literature), satire, and self-published books are excluded. Prior to his 2016 campaign, Trump was already the focus of many books describing his life as a businessman and politician.[1] Biographer Michael D'Antonio observed in Never Enough: Donald Trump and the Pursuit of Success (2015) that Trump "has been a topic of conversation in America for almost 40 years. No one in the world of business – not Bill Gates, Steve Jobs or Warren Buffett – has been as famous as Trump for as long." Almost one year after his inauguration as president, The Guardian noted that more than 4,500 English-language books about Trump had been published since he took office, compared to just over 800 works about Trump's predecessor Barack Obama during his first year in office.[2] This "Trump bump" for the U.S. publishing industry, as The New York Times put it, persisted throughout his time in office.[3] But afterwards, demand for books about his presidency dropped off sharply.[4] Trump's first published book in 1987 was Trump: The Art of the Deal, written by ghostwriter Tony Schwartz.[1][5][6] Trump made a practice of hiring ghostwriters and co-authors to write his books.[7][8][9] In some cases the ghostwriters are credited on the cover, while in other instances, including Time to Get Tough (2011) and Crippled America (2015), Trump makes mention of the writer's contributions in the acknowledgements sections. Works written by Trump himself include self-help books, personal finance books, political policy treatises, and autobiographies.[1][10] "...Schwartz has noted that, during the year and a half that they worked together on The Art of the Deal, he never saw a single book in Trump's office or apartment. Yet Trump has taken authorial credits on more than a dozen books to date, and, given that he's a proven marketing master, it's inconceivable that he won't try to sell more."[11] The Washington Post journalist Carlos Lozada observed that a continuous theme throughout Trump's written works is a focus on Trump himself, such as citing examples from his business in real estate investing and work on television. Parties and individuals discussed in books by Trump are reduced to a zero-sum game, according to Lozada: "Trump's world is binary, divided into class acts and total losers." Trump often makes use of hyperbole to illustrate his points in his works. In other books, Trump repeats the same stories of what he views as key successes from his business career; for example, a tale about a 1980s business deal improving the Wollman Rink in Central Park, New York.[10] Trump's published writings shifted post-2000, from generally memoirs about himself to books giving advice about finance.[10]
It looks rather biblical: Scott, Rosen reintroduce Antisemitism Awareness Act in Senate “It’s critical the Department of Education has the tools and resources it needs to investigate antisemitism,” said Sen. Tim Scott (R-S.C.). U.S. Capitol building in Washington, D.C. Credit: Maxim Kapytka/Pexels.U.S. Capitol building in Washington, D.C. Credit: Maxim Kapytka/Pexels. Facebook Twitter WhatsApp Email Print (Feb. 12, 2025 / JNS) Sens. Tim Scott (R-S.C.) and Jacky Rosen (D-Nev.) reintroduced the Antisemitism Awareness Act in the Senate on Wednesday. The bipartisan bill directs the U.S. Department of Education to use the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s (IHRA) working definition of antisemitism when investigating acts of Jew-hatred on campus. “In the continued aftermath of the Oct. 7 attacks on Israel by Hamas and Iran, we have seen college campuses across our nation become hotbeds of antisemitism where Jewish students’ rights are being threatened,” Scott said. “It’s critical the Department of Education has the tools and resources it needs to investigate antisemitism and root out this vile hatred wherever it rears its ugly head.” Subscribe to The JNS Daily Syndicate and never miss our top stories and analyses Email By signing up, you agree to receive emails from JNS. The legislation would enshrine in law U.S. President Donald Trump’s 2019 executive order instructing federal agencies to consider the IHRA definition of antisemitism in enforcing Title VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, which prohibits any recipient of federal funds from discriminating on the basis of race, color or national origin. Title VI notably applies to virtually every university in the country. The IHRA definition includes both a “non-legally binding working definition” of antisemitism as well as 11 “contemporary examples” of antisemitism, including “holding Jews collectively responsible for actions of the state of Israel,” and “denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, e.g., by claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavor.” Related Articles Karim Khan, chief prosecutor of the International Criminal Court, briefs the Security Council meeting on the situation in Libya on Nov. 23, 2021. Credit: Eskinder Debebe/U.N. Photo. White House officially sanctions ICC chief prosecutor Karim Khan Feb. 13, 2025 U.S. President Donald Trump speaks to reporters at the White House in Washington, D.C., Feb. 4, 2025. Photo by Liri Agami/Flash90. Nobel laureates make bold peace prize offer to Trump in bid to save hostages from Hamas Feb. 13, 2025 The Iron Dome aerial-defense system fires interceptor missiles at enemy rockets fired from Lebanon, April 12, 2024. Photo by Ayal Margolin/Flash90. Iron Dome developer elected to National Academy of Engineering Feb. 13, 2025 A previous iteration the bill passed the House by a wide margin in 2024, but the previous Senate majority leader, Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), did not bring it to a vote in the upper chamber before the end of the 118th Congress. Critics of the legislation argue that the IHRA definition is too restrictive, with some on the left, like Rep. Jerry Nadler (D-N.Y.), saying that it precludes legitimate criticism of Israel. From the right, Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) argued during the 2024 House vote Christians could be accused of antisemitism “for believing the Gospel that says Jesus was handed over to Herod to be crucified by the Jews.” The Senate version of the act has 32 co-sponsors, including Schumer, who was not a co-sponsor of the previous Senate version. Jewish groups such as the the Anti-Defamation League, the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations, the American Jewish Committee and the Jewish Federations of North America have also endorsed the legislation. Reps. Josh Gottheimer (D-N.J.) and Mike Lawler (R-N.Y.) reintroduced the House version of the bill in the lower chamber earlier in February.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
