Brutus no.1, EXPLAINED [AP Government Foundational Documents]

Summary

In this educational video, the focus is on 'Brutus No. 1,' a key document in the anti-federalist debate against the U.S. Constitution. The video contrasts 'Brutus' with 'Federalist 10,' highlighting the former's opposition to a powerful central government. 'Brutus' argues for a confederated government, fearing that the Constitution's 'necessary and proper' clause and supremacy clause would undermine state powers. The video discusses concerns about taxation, court authority, and the impracticality of representative democracy in a large republic, quoting Baron de Montesquieu to emphasize these points.

Takeaways

• 📜 The video discusses 'Brutus No. 1', an Anti-Federalist paper arguing against the ratification of the U.S. Constitution.
• 🗳️ 'Brutus' is a pseudonym used by the author, who is critical of the centralization of power proposed by the Constitution.
• 🏛️ The Federalist Papers supported the Constitution, while Anti-Federalist papers like 'Brutus No. 1' opposed it, with both published in New York newspapers.
• 🌐 'Brutus' argues for a confederated government, where states retain significant power, as opposed to a strong central government.
• 📖 The 'Necessary and Proper Clause' and the 'Supremacy Clause' are highlighted as problematic by 'Brutus', fearing they would undermine state autonomy.
• 💵 'Brutus' is particularly concerned about the federal government's power to tax, which he believes would lead to the withering of state governments.
• 🏢 'Brutus' also criticizes the federal court system, suggesting it would render state courts obsolete and further centralize power.
• 🌳 The size of the nation is a point of contention for 'Brutus', who questions the feasibility of a republic governing such a vast territory effectively.
• 🗳️ 'Brutus' quotes Baron de Montesquieu to argue that a republic cannot sustain itself over a large territory due to representation challenges.
• 🔗 The video aims to help students understand foundational documents for AP Government classes and encourages engagement through subscriptions.

Q & A

What is the main topic of the video?

The main topic of the video is the discussion of 'Brutus No. 1', an anti-federalist paper, and its arguments against the ratification of the U.S. Constitution.

Who is Brutus in the context of the video?

In the context of the video, 'Brutus' refers to the pseudonym used by the author of 'Brutus No. 1', one of the Anti-Federalist Papers, which argued against the ratification of the U.S. Constitution.

What is the key debate between 'Federalist 10' and 'Brutus No. 1'?

The key debate is whether the United States should adopt a republican-style government with a strong central authority as proposed in 'Federalist 10', or maintain a confederated government with more power distributed to the states as argued in 'Brutus No. 1'.

What is the 'necessary and proper clause' mentioned in the video?

The 'necessary and proper clause' refers to Article 1, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution, which allows Congress to make any laws that are necessary and proper for carrying out its enumerated powers.

What does the supremacy clause in Article 6 of the Constitution state?

The supremacy clause in Article 6 of the Constitution states that federal laws have greater authority than state laws, meaning that when there is a conflict, federal law prevails.

Why does Brutus argue that state governments will lose power under the new Constitution?

Brutus argues that state governments will lose power because the 'necessary and proper clause' and the supremacy clause would allow the federal government to override state laws and absorb state powers, leading to the eventual demise of state governments.

What is Brutus's main concern regarding the collection of taxes?

Brutus's main concern is that if the federal government collects taxes, state governments will struggle to raise sufficient funds to support themselves, leading to their decline and the concentration of power in the federal government.

How does Brutus view the role of federal courts in relation to state courts?

Brutus is concerned that federal courts, having supremacy over state courts, would render state courts obsolete and unnecessary, further centralizing power and undermining state authority.

What does Brutus argue about the size of the nation and its impact on a republican form of government?

Brutus argues that a large nation, both in terms of territory and population, cannot effectively maintain a republican form of government because it is impractical for representatives to understand and address the needs of such a diverse and widespread population.

Who does Brutus quote to support his argument about the size of a republic?

Brutus quotes Baron de Montesquieu, who in 'The Spirit of the Laws' stated that a republic should have only a small territory to be sustainable.

What is the main point Brutus makes about the relationship between the people and their rulers in a large republic?

Brutus argues that in a large republic, the people will be less acquainted with their rulers, making it difficult for them to hold them accountable and to replace them if they misbehave, thus undermining the trust and confidence necessary in a free republic.

Outlines

00:00

🗽 Introduction to Brutus' Argument Against the Constitution

The paragraph introduces the viewer to 'Brutus Number One', part of the Anti-Federalist Papers, which opposed the ratification of the U.S. Constitution. It contrasts with 'Federalist 10', which supported the Constitution. 'Brutus' is noted for its critique of a powerful central government, drawing parallels to the Roman general who opposed Julius Caesar's centralization of power. The main concern of 'Brutus' is the potential for state governments to lose power due to the 'necessary and proper clause' and the 'supremacy clause' in the Constitution, which could lead to the central government overshadowing state laws and authority.

05:02

💡 Brutus' Concerns Over Centralized Power and Representation

This paragraph delves into Brutus' specific concerns regarding the centralization of power in the proposed Constitution. Brutus argues that the federal government's authority to tax and the supremacy of federal law over state law would diminish state governments. He also discusses the impracticality of representative democracy in a large and populous nation, suggesting that it would be difficult for representatives to understand and address the needs of all their constituents. Brutus contends that the people's confidence in rulers in a free republic is based on familiarity, responsibility, and the power to remove them, which would be compromised in a vast republic.

Keywords

💡Federalist Papers

The Federalist Papers are a series of 85 essays written by Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay under the pseudonym 'Publius' to promote the ratification of the United States Constitution. In the video, the Federalist Papers are contrasted with the Anti-Federalist Papers, with the former arguing for the ratification of the Constitution and the latter against it.

💡Anti-Federalist Papers

The Anti-Federalist Papers are a collection of essays written by those who opposed the ratification of the U.S. Constitution, fearing a loss of state sovereignty and individual liberties. Brutus No. 1 is the first of these papers, and the video discusses its arguments against the Constitution.

💡Brutus No. 1

Brutus No. 1 is the first in a series of Anti-Federalist Papers, possibly written by Robert Yates, which argues against the ratification of the U.S. Constitution. The video focuses on this document, highlighting its concerns about the centralization of power and potential erosion of state authority.

💡Necessary and Proper Clause

The Necessary and Proper Clause, found in Article 1, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution, grants Congress the power to make laws that are necessary and proper for carrying out its enumerated powers. Brutus criticizes this clause in the video, arguing it could lead to an overreach of federal authority at the expense of state powers.

💡Supremacy Clause

The Supremacy Clause, also in Article 6 of the Constitution, establishes that federal law is the supreme law of the land, taking precedence over state laws. The video discusses Brutus's concern that this clause could render state laws subordinate and ineffective.

💡Confederated Government

A confederated government refers to a system where power is divided between a central authority and individual states, as was the case under the Articles of Confederation. Brutus argues in favor of a confederated government over a centralized republic, as he believes it better preserves state sovereignty.

💡Taxation

Taxation is a key issue in Brutus No. 1, as the author argues that the power to tax, if centralized, could undermine state governments' ability to raise revenue, leading to their eventual dissolution. The video uses taxation as an example of how state powers could be eroded under the new Constitution.

💡Federal Courts

The video mentions the potential supremacy of federal courts over state courts as a point of contention. If federal courts have the final say, state courts could become obsolete, further centralizing power and undermining state authority.

💡Baron de Montesquieu

Baron de Montesquieu was a French philosopher whose work 'The Spirit of the Laws' influenced Enlightenment thought. Brutus quotes Montesquieu in the video to argue that a republic cannot long subsist with a large territory, as it becomes impractical for representatives to be responsive to a vast and diverse population.

💡Republican Form of Government

A republican form of government is one where the people elect representatives to govern on their behalf. Brutus questions the feasibility of this form of government in a large and populous nation like the United States, as discussed in the video, suggesting it could lead to a disconnect between the people and their rulers.

Highlights

Introduction to Brutus No. 1, an anti-federalist paper arguing against the ratification of the U.S. Constitution.

Comparison with Federalist 10, which supports the ratification of the Constitution.

The debate between a republican-style government and a confederated government for the United States.

Definition of a confederated government as it was under the Articles of Confederation.

Brutus' argument that a confederacy of state governments is better than a powerful central government.

Critique of the 'necessary and proper clause' in Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution.

Concerns about the supremacy clause in Article 6, which gives federal laws precedence over state laws.

Argument that state governments will lose power due to the central authority's ability to pass any law.

Example of how state power could diminish through the federal government's taxation authority.

The impact of federal taxation on the ability of state governments to raise funds.

The potential obsolescence of state courts due to the supremacy of federal courts.

Discussion on the impracticality of a large republic form of government in a vast territory like the United States.

Quotation from Baron de Montesquieu on the ideal size of a republic.

The challenge of representative democracy in a large and populous nation.

Brutus' conclusion that a large republic cannot maintain the trust and accountability necessary for a free republic.

Call to action for viewers to subscribe and support the creation of more educational content.

Transcripts

hey there and welcome back to heimlich's

history and further welcome to another

video in our foundational documents

series for ap government in this video

we're going to be considering brutus

number one so if you're ready to get

them brain cows milk participatory style

well then let's get to it so in the last

video i talked about federalist 10 and

the ap overlords are concerned that you

understand the debate between that

document and brutus one now by way of

reminder the federalist papers argued

for the ratification of the constitution

while the anti-federalist papers of

which brutus number one is the first

argued against ratification of the

constitution and both sets of essays

were published in new york newspapers to

try to persuade the public one way or

the other now while federalist 10 argued

for the merits of a republican-style

government for a large nation like the

united states brutus is going to take an

anti-constitutional dump all over that

argument and let's see how he does it

and by the way there is a debate who

actually wrote brutus one so i'm just

gonna call him brutus and if it helps

you remember what this document is all

about just remember that brutus was one

of the guys who assassinated julius

caesar who happened to lead a very

powerful centralized government okay so

let's get into the document the main

question brutus is attempting to answer

is this the first question that presents

itself on the subject is whether a

confederated government be the best for

the united states or not now a

confederated government in case you

don't know is the kind of government

that the united states had under the

articles of confederation the states had

all the power and the central government

had very little in fact you might say

that there were 13 governments in the

early united states one for each state

that were loosely tied together by a

weak central authority okay so

continuing or in other words whether the

13 united states should be reduced to

one great republic governed by one

legislature and under the direction of

one executive and judicial or whether

they should continue 13 confederated

republics under the direction and

control of a supreme federal head for

certain defined national purposes only

okay so the question is this which is

better for this new freedom-loving

nation a confederacy of state

governments or a powerful central

government and brutus argued in no

uncertain terms that a confederacy is

better than the republic that the

constitution would establish there are

several arguments brutus makes in

support of this claim chief among them

is that oh so odious necessary and

proper clause in article 1 section 8 of

the constitution which says that

congress can make any law which shall be

necessary and proper to the execution of

its enumerated powers and causing a

further stench in brutus's nostrils is

the supremacy clause in article 6 which

says that federal laws have greater

authority than state laws so what's the

problem with that well brutus help me

out it appears from these articles that

there is no need of any intervention of

the state governments between the

congress and the people to execute any

one power vested in the general

government and that the constitution and

laws of every state are nullified and

declared void so far as they shall be

inconsistent with this constitution and

so what happens in that case all power

that is reserved for the individual

states must very soon be annihilated

except so far as they are barely

necessary for the organization of the

general government so brutus main

concern is that by creating a central

authority who can by the necessary and

proper clause pass any law imaginable

and by which the supremacy clause can

crush any state law under its big hairy

feet that state governments will just

shrivel up and die but this is not just

theoretical for brutus he gives several

examples of how this death of state

power could happen but we'll only look

at the most pressing example the

collection of taxes in the business

therefore of laying and collecting taxes

the idea of confederation is totally

lost and that of one entire republic is

embraced it is proper here to remark

that the authority to lay and collect

taxes is the most important of any power

that can be granted it connects with

almost all other powers everyone who has

thought on this subject must be

convinced that but small sums of money

can be collected in any country by

direct taxes hence when the federal

government begins to exercise the right

of taxation in all its parts the

legislatures of the several states will

find it impossible to raise monies to

support their own governments without

money they cannot be supported and they

must dwindle away and as before observed

their powers will be absorbed in that of

the general government in other words

any government that exists can only

collect a small amount of taxes

otherwise the citizens will grow weary

of that taxation and throw the

government off so if the federal

government is going to collect taxes and

there's only a small amount that people

will tolerate how will the states also

collect taxes and if states cannot

collect taxes they'll shrivel up and die

and now you've got one big powerful

government left in their way now brutus

goes on to make the same argument about

the federal courts if the federal courts

trump state courts then state courts

will soon be rendered obsolete and

unnecessary and then the final part of

the argument is about the size of the

nation and how by its sheer girth a

republican form of government is not

well suited to be installed and brutus

pulls out the big guns for this argument

quoting the baron de montesquieu who

said in his treatise the spirit of the

laws it is natural to a republic to have

only a small territory otherwise it

cannot long subsist wait why can't a

republican government work in a big

territory with a lot of people well

brutus will answer that question with a

question is it practicable for a country

so large and so numerous as they will

soon become to elect a representation

that will speak to their sentiments

without their becoming so numerous as to

be incapable of transacting public

business it certainly is not okay he

answered it with a question and an

answer but whatever his point is with a

nation as large as the united states

both in territory and in people how

could elected representatives possibly

keep their fingers on the pulse of

everyone whom they represent and

brutus's answer is simple it's not

possible and the problem in that

situation is as follows confidence which

the people have in their rulers in a

free republic arises from their knowing

them from their being responsible to

them for their conduct and from the

power they have of displacing them when

they misbehave but in a republic of the

extent of this continent the people in

general will be acquainted with very few

of their rulers the people at large

would know very little of their

proceedings and it would be extremely

difficult to change them okay that's

what you need to know about brutus one

if you need help getting an a in your

class and a five on your exam may then

click right over here and grab a view

packet for more of the videos on the

foundational documents you can have a

look right here and if you want me to

keep making these videos then let me

know by subscribing heimler out