The Federalist Papers Read Free Page B

together effectively—so effectively that critics still argue over who wrote given sections of The Federalist and turn to statistical theory and computer analysis to bolster their competing claims of authorship? Once joined, how did these busy men of affairs transcend their situation as writers? How did they produce a timeless work of literature out of the political rancor of their moment?
    The remaining puzzles turn on the nature of influence. Publius spoke for the people but meant to curb their excesses in the body politic through federal authority. Does The Federalist confirm and save the Revolution or more deviously cap its broader intentions? Are the rhetorical strategies of inclusiveness to be taken seriously, or is Publius more realistically the spokesperson of a conservative elite? The Federalist is authoritative today as a legal citation in leading court cases, and it appears as a resource in every constitutional crisis. Where, in its pages, does the verbiage of wily politicians end and the statesmanship of proclaimed lawgivers take over? And who gets to make that determination?
    The Federalist had a limited impact on the ratification of the Federal Constitution except perhaps in New York, where the Constitution would be ratified by the narrow margin of thirty to twenty-seven votes in the state assembly called for that purpose. How does The Federalist become a universal source of national explanation? How can the modern reader take on such a dense text with pleasure and profit? Even eighteenth-century citizens complained of tedium when faced with this endless flow of newspaper articles, and it is the rare individual in any era who can pick up Publius and follow him straight through. How, then, should The Federalist be approached today?
    These puzzles are ones that every reader must solve in approaching a national text that grows slowly out of pamphlets dashed off in episodic bursts more than two centuries ago. They must be solved because no citizen of the world can afford to ignore The Federalist, despite its mysteries and arcane limitations. Its wisdom on common political problems cannot be gainsaid. Like every major work of political science and social theory, this one must also be understood with its integrities in mind. Value lies not in the ability to quote selectively from The Federalist, a favorite ploy in both politics and law, but in coming to grips with writings that envisage and then explain how a new kind of nation, an uncertain experiment at best, could thrive on the American strand. In the success of the United States, now the oldest republic in the world, Publius continues to speak to the twenty-first century, but his words offer more than confirmation. The reader will find a poignant series of cautionary tales in these pages. The many warnings about correct governance in The Federalist protect the rule of law and should be required reading for both ruler and ruled.

The Creative Circumstance
    It is easier to describe the creativity that produced the literature of public documents than to explain it. The men who crafted national understandings wrote with strong beliefs in place. Their convictions can be summarized briefly: Principles could alter history. Good ideas would convince reasonable people everywhere of their merit. The right answers to problems would spread throughout the world. As writers, they assumed that the structure of thought was of a piece with knowledge, that the correct placement of language could encompass the most complicated and intractable of difficulties, and that eighteenth-century political theory could produce a better world for all of humanity. Most important of all, they thought they possessed the means to fulfill these goals in America. “Federalist No. 1” opened with a colossal claim:
    It seems to have been reserved to the people of this country to decide, by their conduct and example, the important question, whether societies of men are really capable or not, of