TL;DR
A strand of revisionist scholarship argues the 1787 Constitution was not simply the end of chaos but a counter‑revolution engineered by creditors, speculators and mercantile interests to build a centralized apparatus for extracting wealth. That view reframes the 'Critical Period' and episodes like Shays' Rebellion as fiscal and political conflicts over debt, taxation and state privilege rather than proof of popular anarchy.
What happened
A coalition of writers and historians drawn from left‑libertarian, New Left and market‑anarchist traditions has reinterpreted the founding era as a deliberate consolidation of centralized power. Citing figures such as Kevin Carson, Murray Rothbard, Merrill Jensen and Leonard Richards, this revisionist account frames the Constitution as a response to a mid‑1780s fiscal squeeze: war debt certificates had sharply depreciated and many original holders had sold to speculators who then demanded full repayment in hard currency. Revisionists distinguish between voluntary 'economic means' and coercive 'political means' (taxation, monopoly privileges) and argue that Federalist leaders sought a national government able to enforce payments and protect privileged interests. They also dispute the standard portrayal of the 1780s as economically stagnant, noting commercial expansion after the Navigation Acts ended, and recast Shays' Rebellion as a tax revolt provoked by regressive state levies rather than an undisciplined mob.
Why it matters
- Recasts a foundational U.S. narrative: the Constitution may be interpreted as enabling state‑backed privilege rather than solely securing liberty.
- Clarifies the role of public debt and creditor demands in driving constitutional change.
- Challenges common assumptions about early American economic decline and the necessity of a powerful national government.
- Reframes popular unrest (e.g., Shays' Rebellion) as resistance to taxation and property seizure rather than mere lawlessness.
Key facts
- Revisionist scholars referenced include Kevin Carson, Murray Rothbard, Sheldon Richman, Merrill Jensen and Leonard Richards.
- Theoretical distinction emphasized: 'economic means' (voluntary production and exchange) versus 'political means' (taxation, monopoly, appropriation).
- The label 'Critical Period' and its crisis narrative are presented as largely a Federalist construction, per Merrill Jensen.
- Following the Revolution, American trade expanded into new routes including the Baltic, Mediterranean and China, according to the report.
- Under the Articles of Confederation the central government lacked power to tax or fully regulate commerce.
- War debt certificates had fallen in value; many original holders sold to speculators who later pushed for redemption at face value in specie.
- Shays' Rebellion (1786–1787) is described here as a tax revolt against Massachusetts' heavy and regressive levies (poll taxes, property taxes, specie requirements).
- Participants in the uprising included veterans and community leaders; the unrest was portrayed by elites as a threat to order.
- Federalist elites, including some with land and financial stakes, are depicted as using alarmist rhetoric to justify stronger federal authority.
What to watch next
- Not confirmed in the source
- Not confirmed in the source
- Not confirmed in the source
Quick glossary
- Articles of Confederation: The compact that governed the United States before the Constitution; it created a weak central government with limited taxing and regulatory powers.
- Shays' Rebellion: An armed uprising in Massachusetts (1786–1787) involving farmers and veterans protesting state taxation and debt enforcement.
- Speculator: An individual or firm that buys financial claims or assets, often at a discount, hoping to profit if they can be redeemed at higher value.
- Political means: A term describing appropriation of wealth through coercive state actions such as taxation, monopoly privilege, or conquest.
- Economic means: Wealth generation through production, labor and voluntary exchange without coercive state intervention.
Reader FAQ
Do revisionists claim the Constitution was a deliberate coup?
The source summarizes a revisionist argument that the Constitution functioned as a counter‑revolution to enable creditor and mercantile power.
Was the 1780s economy uniformly collapsing?
The report says that characterization is disputed by revisionists, who point to expanding trade and economic adjustment after independence.
Was Shays' Rebellion simply a mob of debtors?
According to the revisionist analysis cited, it was a principled tax revolt by veterans and community members against regressive state policies.
Did George Washington support the federal push because of anarchy?
Not confirmed in the source
The Constitution was a Coup: A Revisionist History of the American Counter-Revolution Part I: The Historiographical Battleground The history of the American Founding is frequently presented as a teleological progression…
Sources
- The Constitution Was a Coup
- Did the Constitution Betray the Revolution?: News Article
- The Separation-Of-Powers Counterrevolution
- Michael Klarman reinterprets the American founding
Related posts
- Rediscovery of CompuServe’s Adventure 751 (1980) — lost Crowther/Woods variant
- Einstein Probe detects X-ray flare from a nearby star, report says
- Proving Liveness with TLA: Using TLAPS’ New Temporal Logic Support