Our book is about George Mason’s vision of American society as an alternative to Madison’s constitutional design.
Our intent is to argue that Mason’s egalitarian concept of government, had it been implemented in 1787, would have been a better path for liberty for middle and working class citizens, than Madison’s framework, that ended with the agencies of government in the hands of an unelected deep state ruling class tyranny.
The difference between the Mason’s vision and Madison’s constitution is the difference between a decentralized state sovereignty framework, which would have promoted the economic interests of common citizens, and Madison’s centralized ruling class aristocracy, which permanently elevated the financial interests of wealthy American citizens over the interests of common citizens.
The 38 delegates who signed the constitution on September 17, 1787, created rules that benefitted themselves, as the nation’s wealthy social class, to the detriment of the financial interests of common citizens.
Our argument is not simply that the individual wealthy citizens who met in secret in 1787, had common financial interests in forming the constitution.
The key factor to understand in the creation of the rules of Madison’s document is that the aristocracy had a unified, coherent social class awareness of the type of rules that would benefit their social class.
Madison’s logic in Federalist #10 was based upon the false premise that the common citizens already had a social class consciousness, as if that imaginary consciousness competed with the natural aristocracy.
Madison’s rules, as he explained in Federalist #10, would extend the republic in such a way as to eliminate the possibility that middle class citizens would ever form a social class awareness to disrupt the status quo financial privileges of the ruling class faction.
Our premise in arguing for a new Mason constitution is that Madison’s constitution ended in November of 2020, with massive election fraud. Madison’s constitution, and the representative republic is over, and the central government is too massive and too broken to be repaired. .
Mason objected to Madison’s consolidated all powerful central government, and insisted that Madison’s constitution violated the spirit of liberty of the American Revolution.
William Hyland writes,
“Mason’s struggle with Madison and Washington over the powers in the Constitution was a fight over the meaning of political liberty, and the last real battle of the Revolution…Mason was convinced that the fundamental principles of the Revolution stood in jeopardy.” [George Mason: The Founding Father Who Gave Us The Bill of Rights, William G. Hyland, Jr.].
Our book is divided into three parts.
In the first part, we explain Mason’s individualist concept of government and contrast that concept of the with the events surrounding the Constitutional Convention of 1787, which ended in a centralized deep state bureaucracy that operates independent of the will of the citizens.
In the second part of the book, we rely on the constitutional theory of James Buchanan to add the details of rules to Mason’s philosophy of individual freedom. Buchanan argued that public officials and politicians do not shed their individual financial self-interest when they enter politics.
Buchanan asserts that there is no mysterious volonté générale collective public interest or some type of Keynesian social welfare public purpose, independent of the interests of citizens who vote in legitimate elections.
The main point of Buchanan’s public choice theory is that voluntary obedience to the “rule” of law leads to a spontaneous social order where each individual pursuing their own interests, leads to a distribution of wealth and income that is considered fair because citizens agreed to the creation of the constitutional rules.
The resulting spontaneous order occurs, after the constitution is created, when citizens engage in free exchange to improve their own welfare.
In the third part of the book, we rely on the economic theory of Joseph Schumpeter to describe the concept of how the evolution of an entrepreneurial capitalist system would function, under Buchanan’s constitutional rules.
The main point of Schumpeter’s evolutional theory is that the unfair, unequal distribution of wealth at the beginning of an economic period is modified over time to create new markets, and new distributions of wealth that displace the initial unfair distribution of wealth, embedded in Madison’s rules.
The new distribution of income and wealth is fair because each individual citizen has an equal opportunity, after the constitution has been created, to pursue financial prosperity, in a society where all citizens obey the rule of law.
While our book is interesting as a matter of historical interpretation of the American political system, the intent of the book is not exclusively historical analysis.
We argue that Mason’s concept of individual liberty would be a better pathway back to liberty, today, after Madison’s representative republic collapsed in the corrupt election of 2020.
The value of the book’s thesis is that Mason’s concept of government, placed within Buchanan’s constitutional framework and Schumpeter’s entrepreneurial capitalist economy provides a pathway for natural rights citizens out of the Marxist Democrat Leviathan..
We argue that there is only one path back to liberty that begins with legislative commissions in each state examining the flaws in Madison’s centralized framework.
A new constitutional framework that begins with the Preamble of state sovereignty, based upon individual freedom, as the purpose of the national constitution, would allow the citizens of each state to choose between the status quo and a superior form of social organization.
We begin, in Chapter 1, by explaining the historical anomaly of Mason’s obscurity in scholarly documents, compared with the better known so-called “Founding Fathers.”
To use a contemporary term, Mason’ s reputation was “cancelled” by the media of the day because he betrayed his social class allegiance to Madison’s ruling class natural aristocracy.
The fissure between Mason and the other ruling class delegates, especially with George Washington, never healed. [An Uneven Friendship, Peter Henriques, 1989.].
The strategy for cancelling Mason, then, is the same strategy adopted today by the ruling class deep state that, “We are all in this together,” most recently used to promote mass citizen vaccination of the covid vax.
The success of Madison’s strategy was based upon the false idea that the interests of the wealthy families and corporations in America are the same as the middle and working classes. At the very last moment of the Convention, Madison changed the wording of the Preamble from “We, the people of the assembled states,” to the imaginary collective of “We, the people.”
When Mason opposed Madison’s document, he demonstrated that he was not all in this together, with the other elites. Mason did not realize Madison’s intent to create an elected aristocracy until the morning of September 4, 1787, when he first read the Brearly report, with the entirely new wording on the Office of the President.
In reality, “We, the people,” was only the 38 ruling class elites delegates who signed the document, on September 17, 1787.
Madison’s strategy of using “We, the people,” was successful, then, because the ruling class had a coherent social class consciousness, while the middle and working class citizens did not.
After September 17, the document was transmitted in bits and pieces to the Congress of the United States, Assembled, with no instructions or procedures. It took about 2 weeks for the document to be transmitted from the Congress to the states for the ensuing corrupt ratification process.
The constitution created by Madison was written by the members of the natural aristocracy, in a private building, with doors locked and window shades pulled down. The elites had a common social class background and a unified ideology of the aristocracy.
The delegates shared a common mission to overthrow the Articles of Confederation, and replace it with an unfair, and unbalanced set of rules that eliminated the threat posed to their rule by too much citizen democracy at the state government level.
Within six weeks, of November 1, 1787, five states, over half the required nine states, had ratified, not because common citizens approved of the rules, but because the ruling class aristocracy in each state was already organized in the fraudulent ratification scheme.
The new government was not “of the people,” it was government of the natural aristocracy, who obtained their very own unelected branch of government, called the Senate.
Mason was an egalitarian who defied the social class consciousness of Madison’s natural aristocracy, and for his opposition, he was forever cancelled by the ruling class of the day.
The political strategy of “We. the people,”continues to be successful, today, because the common citizens still do not have a social class awareness of their own economic interests, and Madison’s constitution left them with no political method of removing the uni-party deep state oligarchy.
The synthesis of thought of Mason, Buchanan, and Schumpeter provides the starting point of the national debate over what form of government replaces Madison’s flawed constitution.