6 ms·

I’m surprised by how many people in this thread (and I assume a good portion are American) are unfamiliar with the existence of these. I knew our social studies

I’m surprised by how many people in this thread (and I assume a good portion are American) are unfamiliar with the existence of these. I knew our social studies education sucked in the US but I didn’t know it was that bad. The arguments of the Federalist Papers and the Anti-Federalist Papers (and therefore their existence) is supposed to be taught in a middle school level history class in a unit on the formation of the republic after the revolution. At least it was in mine and I can’t understand why it wouldn’t be in others since it’s at the core of the debate around the passage of the constitution and then shortly thereafter passage of the Bill of Rights. The two sets of papers also reflect on issues people had with The Articles of Confederation.

jcims 6y ago
I was in middle school in the 80’s and found history to be excruciatingly boring. I don’t think any of it stuck because I just didn’t care, it was just a bunch of adults adulting and I had no understanding. It wasn’t until I was in high school that I had any appreciation for the human side of it all and how it was so much more than things that happened before I was born. So, to be fair, it’s entirely possible this was part of our education and I just reserved zero synapses to its retention.
mjn 6y ago
I recall discussing in school the Federalist Papers, and in general that the authors of those papers had opponents. I believe in particular some essays by Brutus arguing for a bill of rights were emphasized. What wasn't really mentioned in my school, at least, is a specific body of work called "The Anti-Federalist Papers". That might be because the collection and name is of fairly recent origin, dating only to the 1960s. The essays themselves are of course much older, but collecting them into a numbered series of essays mirroring the way the Federalist Papers are numbered is more recent.
- arminiusreturns 6y ago
  On the same topic, it wasn't till searching on my own I found out about the arguments against the bill of rights. Namely, and I find this quite compelling but still don't know where I stand on it, that by formulating a list of rights that were protected, the government would then default to assuming those not listed weren't protected, which is anathema to the foundational idea of unalienable rights in the first place. In general I think one of the things I learned from this and other similar why didn't the education system teach this is that there is a marked lack of analysis of opposing viewpoints in times of history in the current education system.
thomasfromcdnjs 6y ago
I just read the Federalist Papers from front to back, it was absolutely beautiful. My short review of the book would read; "It is not just an excellent display of political knowledge, nor just an astute vision of governance, but mostly an acknowledgement and exposé on human nature. " I am from Australia and wish we taught it in schools also. I didn't know there were Anti-Federalist Papers so time to buy some more wine and get going. Note: Ben Shapiro does a nice video on what the Federalist Papers are about. ==== It was one of the harder reads I've done such that it almost feels like a life accomplishment. I'd personally recommend just googling the top 5-10, choosing some that you like and just listening to the audio book versions e.g. -> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4PiSeeJQkrQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4PiSeeJQkrQ I always prefer reading myself but in this case my comprehension was slightly better just listening to some of the essays. ==== “It has been frequently remarked, that it seems to have been reserved to the people of this country, by their conduct and example, to decide the important question, whether societies of men are really capable or not, of establishing good government from reflection and choice, or whether they are forever destined to depend, for their political constitutions, on accident and force.” - Hamilton
- DSingularity 6y ago
  Just so you know, Ben Shapiro is a man who also says things like "Israelis like to build. Arabs like to bomb crap and live in open sewage". While I actively seek pundits/academics/scholars I disagree with to avoid existing in a thought-bubble I also try to avoid those whom have espoused racist views in the past. You lose legitimacy in my eyes once you demonstrate that you are a racist.
  - thomasfromcdnjs 6y ago
    Fair enough. He use to have a list of "Giant List Of All The Dumb Stuff I’ve Ever Done". And that tweet was on there, he said something along the lines of it was also out of context. But as you said, keep following your own morale compass.
    - ceejayoz 6y ago
eastbayjake 6y ago
In my (public school) experience, the Anti-Federalist Papers were taught only as an excerpted footnote while giving more airtime to the contents of the Federalist Papers. Another one of those "winners write history" effects - the losing argument is only remembered as a foil to the winning arguments.
- the_only_law 6y ago
  They both felt like footnotes to me. In fact I feel like my entire education was just "yeah this exited and this is a breif summary of what it was". The only history course I remember having much substance was the madatory "state history" course we had to take in 7th grade. Of course, I may have just not been paying attention.
crazygringo 6y ago
The Federalist Papers are widely known and covered in school. But there is no "supposed to be taught" -- anyone who knows American history knows that, for federal reasons, educational curricula are set at state or even local levels. Your school district appears to be highly unusual... and I'm pretty amazed at the concept of teaching this in middle school. May I ask where you went, out of both curiosity and envy? ;) The relevant Wikipedia article even states: > ...the essays they wrote have largely fallen into obscurity. Unlike, for example, The Federalist No. 10 written by James Madison, none of their works are mainstays in college curricula or court rulings. [1] [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Federalist_Papers https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Federalist_Papers
- krustyburger 6y ago
  I don’t think the parent meant that they engaged with the texts themselves at the middle school level, but rather that the existence of both sides of the debate was covered as an historical fact.
  - mixmastamyk 6y ago
    Yes, US History was in seventh grade for me.
- kodt 6y ago
  Yeah the only thing I recall is that 8th Grade is commonly taught the US Constitution. In some states passing a constitution test is required for graduation. But again it is done at the state level, and I have never seen anything requiring the Anti-Federalist papers be covered.
plandis 6y ago
What school did you go to? Was it private? We only covered this at my public school (in Ohio) in AP US History class, meaning that the vast majority of students were never exposed to either set or arguments
- tomjakubowski 6y ago
  Do you mean that it was not covered in the non-AP US history courses at your high school? Curious how you know that if so.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

jcims 6y ago

I was in middle school in the 80’s and found history to be excruciatingly boring. I don’t think any of it stuck because I just didn’t care, it was just a bunch of adults adulting and I had no understanding. It wasn’t until I was in high school that I had any appreciation for the human side of it all and how it was so much more than things that happened before I was born. So, to be fair, it’s entirely possible this was part of our education and I just reserved zero synapses to its retention.

mjn 6y ago

I recall discussing in school the Federalist Papers, and in general that the authors of those papers had opponents. I believe in particular some essays by Brutus arguing for a bill of rights were emphasized. What wasn't really mentioned in my school, at least, is a specific body of work called "The Anti-Federalist Papers". That might be because the collection and name is of fairly recent origin, dating only to the 1960s. The essays themselves are of course much older, but collecting them into a numbered series of essays mirroring the way the Federalist Papers are numbered is more recent.

arminiusreturns 6y ago
On the same topic, it wasn't till searching on my own I found out about the arguments against the bill of rights. Namely, and I find this quite compelling but still don't know where I stand on it, that by formulating a list of rights that were protected, the government would then default to assuming those not listed weren't protected, which is anathema to the foundational idea of unalienable rights in the first place. In general I think one of the things I learned from this and other similar why didn't the education system teach this is that there is a marked lack of analysis of opposing viewpoints in times of history in the current education system.

thomasfromcdnjs 6y ago

I just read the Federalist Papers from front to back, it was absolutely beautiful. My short review of the book would read; "It is not just an excellent display of political knowledge, nor just an astute vision of governance, but mostly an acknowledgement and exposé on human nature. " I am from Australia and wish we taught it in schools also. I didn't know there were Anti-Federalist Papers so time to buy some more wine and get going. Note: Ben Shapiro does a nice video on what the Federalist Papers are about. ==== It was one of the harder reads I've done such that it almost feels like a life accomplishment. I'd personally recommend just googling the top 5-10, choosing some that you like and just listening to the audio book versions e.g. -> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4PiSeeJQkrQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4PiSeeJQkrQ I always prefer reading myself but in this case my comprehension was slightly better just listening to some of the essays. ==== “It has been frequently remarked, that it seems to have been reserved to the people of this country, by their conduct and example, to decide the important question, whether societies of men are really capable or not, of establishing good government from reflection and choice, or whether they are forever destined to depend, for their political constitutions, on accident and force.” - Hamilton

DSingularity 6y ago
Just so you know, Ben Shapiro is a man who also says things like "Israelis like to build. Arabs like to bomb crap and live in open sewage". While I actively seek pundits/academics/scholars I disagree with to avoid existing in a thought-bubble I also try to avoid those whom have espoused racist views in the past. You lose legitimacy in my eyes once you demonstrate that you are a racist.
- thomasfromcdnjs 6y ago
  Fair enough. He use to have a list of "Giant List Of All The Dumb Stuff I’ve Ever Done". And that tweet was on there, he said something along the lines of it was also out of context. But as you said, keep following your own morale compass.
  - ceejayoz 6y ago

eastbayjake 6y ago

In my (public school) experience, the Anti-Federalist Papers were taught only as an excerpted footnote while giving more airtime to the contents of the Federalist Papers. Another one of those "winners write history" effects - the losing argument is only remembered as a foil to the winning arguments.

the_only_law 6y ago
They both felt like footnotes to me. In fact I feel like my entire education was just "yeah this exited and this is a breif summary of what it was". The only history course I remember having much substance was the madatory "state history" course we had to take in 7th grade. Of course, I may have just not been paying attention.

crazygringo 6y ago

The Federalist Papers are widely known and covered in school. But there is no "supposed to be taught" -- anyone who knows American history knows that, for federal reasons, educational curricula are set at state or even local levels. Your school district appears to be highly unusual... and I'm pretty amazed at the concept of teaching this in middle school. May I ask where you went, out of both curiosity and envy? ;) The relevant Wikipedia article even states: > ...the essays they wrote have largely fallen into obscurity. Unlike, for example, The Federalist No. 10 written by James Madison, none of their works are mainstays in college curricula or court rulings. [1] [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Federalist_Papers https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Federalist_Papers

krustyburger 6y ago
I don’t think the parent meant that they engaged with the texts themselves at the middle school level, but rather that the existence of both sides of the debate was covered as an historical fact.
- mixmastamyk 6y ago
  Yes, US History was in seventh grade for me.
kodt 6y ago
Yeah the only thing I recall is that 8th Grade is commonly taught the US Constitution. In some states passing a constitution test is required for graduation. But again it is done at the state level, and I have never seen anything requiring the Anti-Federalist papers be covered.

plandis 6y ago

What school did you go to? Was it private? We only covered this at my public school (in Ohio) in AP US History class, meaning that the vast majority of students were never exposed to either set or arguments

tomjakubowski 6y ago
Do you mean that it was not covered in the non-AP US history courses at your high school? Curious how you know that if so.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]