Was the framing and ratification of the constitution counterrevolutionary?

Answer 1

Yes, it was. The US Constitution strengthened the federal government and helped destroy freedom and liberty. The current law at that time, the "Articles of Confederation", made it clear that any powers not given to the federal government were reserved to the states. The US constitution made no such statement, and pretty much gave unlimited power to the federal government because there were tons of easy ways for the government to do things in secrecy and easily violate the Constitution without anyone knowing. More power was given to the executive branch, and the president pretty much became a king. Patrick Henry and the anti-federalists tried to warn people about what adopting the US Constitution would do. The only thing it did, was give MORE power to the national government. And just look at how corrupt it is today. Patrick Henry warned that many of the things happening today, would happen, if the US Constitution was adopted. Hate to break to alot of people, but George Washington was a traitor, and no friend to liberty. And if it wasn't for the Anti-Federalists, there wouldn't even have been a Bill of Rights. George Washington and the federalist traitors opposed a bill of rights. They wanted to create and American Empire, much like the British Empire, and that is why they pushed for the counter-revolutionary US Constitution, which did nothing but greatly STRENGTHEN the government. Here is a good site where you can read some of Patrick Henry's speeches warning about what adopting the US Constitution would do. http://www.constitution.org/afp/phenry00.htm The freedom and liberty that American fought for against evil British tyranny was quickly lost with the Adoption of the US Constitution. The US Constitution gave way too much power to the federal government and went completely against what the revolution was fought for.