- 27
- 561 834
Keystone History
United States
เข้าร่วมเมื่อ 7 ส.ค. 2018
I make history info-graphics about really whatever I'm interested in at the moment.
The Palmetto State Debates the Constitution | May 1788
Maier, Pauline. “The Eighth Pillar?” Ratification: The People Debate the Constitution, 1787-1788, Simon & Schuster Paperback, New York, 2011.
The Documentary History of the Ratification of the Constitution Digital Edition, Volume XXVII: South Carolina. John P. Kaminski, Gaspare J. Saladino, Richard Leffler, Charles H. Schoenleber and Margaret A. Hogan. Charlottesville: University of Virginia Press, 2009.
The Documentary History of the Ratification of the Constitution Digital Edition, Volume XXVII: South Carolina. John P. Kaminski, Gaspare J. Saladino, Richard Leffler, Charles H. Schoenleber and Margaret A. Hogan. Charlottesville: University of Virginia Press, 2009.
มุมมอง: 880
วีดีโอ
The Old Line State Debates the Constitution
มุมมอง 1.2K2 ปีที่แล้ว
Maier, Pauline. “Looking North To Maryland.” Ratification: The People Debate the Constitution, 1787-1788, Simon & Schuster Paperback, New York, 2011. The Documentary History of the Ratification of the Constitution Digital Edition, Volume XI: Maryland, No. 1 and Volume XII: Maryland, No. 2. John P. Kaminski, Gaspare J. Saladino, Richard Leffler, Charles H. Schoenleber and Margaret A. Hogan. Char...
The Ocean State Debates the Constitution | Mar. 1788
มุมมอง 1.5K2 ปีที่แล้ว
The Documentary History of the Ratification of the Constitution Digital Edition, Volume XXIV: Rhode Island. John P. Kaminski, Gaspare J. Saladino, Richard Leffler, Charles H. Schoenleber and Margaret A. Hogan. Charlottesville: University of Virginia Press, 2009. Maier, Pauline. “Rogue Island.” Ratification: The People Debate the Constitution, 1787-1788, Simon & Schuster Paperback, New York, 201...
The Granite State Debates the Constitution | Feb. 1788
มุมมอง 1.4K2 ปีที่แล้ว
The Documentary History of the Ratification of the Constitution Digital Edition, Volume XXVIII: New Hampshire. John P. Kaminski, Gaspare J. Saladino, Richard Leffler, Charles H. Schoenleber and Margaret A. Hogan. Charlottesville: University of Virginia Press, 2009. Maier, Pauline. “A Cold Wind from the North.” Ratification: The People Debate the Constitution, 1787-1788, Simon & Schuster Paperba...
The Bay State Debates the Constitution | Jan. - Feb. 1788
มุมมอง 1.5K2 ปีที่แล้ว
Ratification: The People Debate the Constitution by Pauline Maier The Documentary History of the Ratification of the Constitution (John P. Kaminski, Gaspare J. Saladino, Richard Leffler, Charles H. Schoenleber and Margaret A. Hogan. Charlottesville)
The Constitution State Debates the Constitution | Jan. 1788
มุมมอง 1.6K3 ปีที่แล้ว
Sources: Ratification: The People Debate the Constitution by Pauline Maier The Documentary History of the Ratification of the Constitution (John P. Kaminski, Gaspare J. Saladino, Richard Leffler, Charles H. Schoenleber and Margaret A. Hogan. Charlottesville) Connecticut Colonial Charter: avalon.law.yale.edu/17th_century/ct03.asp
The Peach State Debates the Constitution | Dec. 1787 to Jan. 1788
มุมมอง 1.5K3 ปีที่แล้ว
Something I didn't realize until too late when making this video is that the Muscogee Nation no longer uses Creek to refer to themselves. If it comes up in future videos I'll do my best to avoid using it. Sources: Ratification: The People Debate the Constitution by Pauline Maier The Documentary History of the Ratification of the Constitution (John P. Kaminski, Gaspare J. Saladino, Richard Leffl...
The Garden State Debates the Constitution | Dec. 1787
มุมมอง 1.6K3 ปีที่แล้ว
Sources: Ratification: The People Debate the Constitution by Pauline Maier The Documentary History of the Ratification of the Constitution (John P. Kaminski, Gaspare J. Saladino, Richard Leffler, Charles H. Schoenleber and Margaret A. Hogan. Charlottesville)
The First State Debates the Constitution | Nov. to Dec. 1787
มุมมอง 1.8K3 ปีที่แล้ว
Sources: Ratification: The People Debate the Constitution by Pauline Maier The Documentary History of the Ratification of the Constitution (John P. Kaminski, Gaspare J. Saladino, Richard Leffler, Charles H. Schoenleber and Margaret A. Hogan. Charlottesville)
The Keystone State Debates the Constitution | Nov. to Dec. 1787
มุมมอง 3.5K3 ปีที่แล้ว
Pennsylvania's Ratification debates, as well as a brief political history of the state. History de Facto: th-cam.com/channels/y_E3HcDfkzt8KoT8bf8U1w.html The counter-revolution in Pennsylvania, 1776-1790 by Robert Levere Brunhouse Ratification: The People Debate the Constitution by Pauline Maier The Documentary History of the Ratification of the Constitution (John P. Kaminski, Gaspare J. Saladi...
The War of Printed Words | Sept. to Dec. 1787
มุมมอง 4.4K3 ปีที่แล้ว
Below are links to resources I used in this video, belonging to the the Documentary History of the Ratification of the Constitution Database (DHRC). This site has been an invaluable source of information in the research for this series, along with Pauline Meyer's book Ratification: the People Debate the Constitution. Freeman's Journal Criticism and Rebuttal rotunda.upress.virginia.edu/founders/...
What was the reaction to the Constitution? | September 1787
มุมมอง 11K3 ปีที่แล้ว
After the Constitutional Convention, how did the country react in the following weeks? This video follows the initial opinions of The Confederation Congress, as well as the Pennsylvania General Assembly 30 Second Classical by Audionautix is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 license. creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ Artist: audionautix.com/ Ratification: The People Debate the...
The Constitutional Convention | May to September, 1787
มุมมอง 75K3 ปีที่แล้ว
Ratification: The People Debate the Constitution, 1787-1788 by Pauline Maier The Quartet: Orchestrating the Second American Revolution by Joseph J. Ellis Alexander Hamilton by Ron Chernow Notes of Debates in the Federal Convention of 1787 by James Madison Objections to This Constitution of Government by George Mason
The Mount Vernon Conference and the Annapolis Convention | 1785 - 1787
มุมมอง 3.7K4 ปีที่แล้ว
The Mount Vernon Conference and the Annapolis Convention | 1785 - 1787
Shays' Rebellion | 1785-1787
มุมมอง 17K4 ปีที่แล้ว
How did Shays' Rebellion happen, and how does it fit into the larger story of the Articles of Confederation and the US Constitution?
The New England Town Meeting in the Early United States
มุมมอง 13K4 ปีที่แล้ว
The New England Town Meeting in the Early United States
The Early Confederation Period | 1783 - 1785
มุมมอง 4.3K4 ปีที่แล้ว
The Early Confederation Period | 1783 - 1785
How did the Articles of Confederation work? | 1781
มุมมอง 5K4 ปีที่แล้ว
How did the Articles of Confederation work? | 1781
Revolutions of 1820 in Piedmont-Sardinia: Italian Unification
มุมมอง 4.3K5 ปีที่แล้ว
Revolutions of 1820 in Piedmont-Sardinia: Italian Unification
General Pepe's Revolution: Italian Unification
มุมมอง 1.6K5 ปีที่แล้ว
General Pepe's Revolution: Italian Unification
Roots of the Risorgimento: Italian Unification Introduction
มุมมอง 3.1K6 ปีที่แล้ว
Roots of the Risorgimento: Italian Unification Introduction
Rumble in the Maghreb: The Jugurthine War Part 2
มุมมอง 3.6K6 ปีที่แล้ว
Rumble in the Maghreb: The Jugurthine War Part 2
Rome's Purchaser: The Jugurthine War Part 1
มุมมอง 8K6 ปีที่แล้ว
Rome's Purchaser: The Jugurthine War Part 1
I just speed ran through all of your videos on the Constitution and I am sad to see that it's been 4 years and the series is not done. Not just just, but also as each year goes, you can see how many less you posted by year. Please finish the series, this is one of the best I have seen in a while. How can I support your channel?
He was an Albanian Greek Muslim
he was albanian
his army was albanian xp
He was Albanian he wasn’t Italian
THANK YOU FOR MAKING THIS THIS IS ACTUALLY SAVING MY PRESENTATION
Totally underrated video series. This channel should have millions of views.
Dude these are so good. Thank you.
Wage labour is a curse, and completely antithetical to everything the United States stood for... until industrialization, the invention of the corporation, and a consumer market economy. Now, life begins at 65.
Lol then would it make Donald Trump a anti-federalist? Because of project 2025
Watching in 2024. Excellent telling. I love the details of our young nation.
Interesting aspect of the nation's early history. Good job.
Given the political activities surrounding the 2024 election, gun rights, police immunity and Roe v Wade, I've been seeking information about the creation of our constitution. Yes, I've read it and the Federalist papers. But I am super excited to find these videos giving the history of it's development and the debates surrounding it. Why they did what they did is important.
Please come back and finish this series!
Lewis Amy Wilson Joseph Smith Amy
SO THEY SHAY LIKE THEY DOING DONALD TRUMP LOL. Funny how many forget, before running on the Republican ticket Trump was considered a Democrat, and his views and beliefs stayed the same. Look on youtube at Young Trump talking about this country, 40 years later hes president saying the same exact things. he never changed as was democrat then, so did democrats change? If so how have republicans been the bad guy your entire life then? 2 things can not both be true.
Jackson Carol Hall Deborah Robinson Matthew
“We The People…” the three most misunderstood words th-cam.com/video/HOktqY5wY4A/w-d-xo.html (Start @2:00)
4:35 - Delaware was NOT the first state. It is a blatantly bogus claim. States were created in 1776. Changing the form of government does nothing to change the status of being a state. Delaware was a state before it ratified. And it was still a state after it ratified. If all the license plates were accurate, they'd simply say: FIRST TO RATIFY If they wanted to reflect order accurately in becoming a state, those plates would say: DELAWARE: THE LAST STATE 0:23 - It is NOT accurate to say that Delaware became a state at the same instant that the other original colonies became states. The Delaware quarter commemorates the event of how they were... The last to vote. Caesar Rodney was the last to arrive to cast his vote. So the Independence vote passed: 12 - 0 - 1 Now consider Delaware's unique status after this act. They were a dependent set of counties of Pennsylvania prior to the act. And after the act, they were STILL three counties of the newly established State of Pennsylvania. It took a separate legislative act in Philadelphia for the State of Pennsylvania to Grant Separation to Delaware before they became the 13th state. So that is how they became the LAST state. History is often distorted. And this is an example of telling a LIE often enough that people eventually believe it. The dissonance is minted right into their quarter. Next to Caesar Rodney, it says "The First State". Done knowing that nearly everyone is not going to care about what Rodney's actual significance was. LAST of the colonies.
It's pronounced petersam the h is silent. I live less than 10 miles away from that site.
It would of been strange all talking with British accents.
Fake history about his life when he was young ,fake history like always 😂
Fucking farmyard not government.
Britain interferred in America's business. Are we really America or are Ameribrit's? They keep tabs on us. Study us relentlessly, like a bug under a glass. Meddle continiously. Write propaganda to influence us. Have we ever been independentbfrom Britain? I think not.
Funny how you left out that women weren't created equal.
Thise men were British as British can be British.
America is a cheap knock off, of Britain in every way that matter's. The English wrote the Constipation, that declared, only men were created equal. So much for equality. Our whole government was created by the British. Same with God and Jesus, who proclaim that Men are God's and more precious than gold. 😂 fool's gold.
Google has given me an Irish handle and I'm not Irish.
Can a Non - Country have a revolution?
It's been a year and no continuation. What happened to you dude? I hope you return soon and continue the series.
Lopez Mary Taylor Barbara Martinez Dorothy
Muhammed Ali Pasha's Dynasty wanted to became the Royal Family of Albania🇦🇱 instead of Kong Ahmet Zogu (1922-1939) 🇦🇱🤝🏻🇾🇪
As an Albanian I think Albanian Gorvernor is a realy great Leader and Egypt is lucky to had him.
Bercow features in Fallout London - check it out chaps!
There was no magic number nine. The Constitution of the United States was written in compliance with Article 13 of the Articles of Confederation which requires that 9 of 13 States must meet in a congress to agree to any amendments and those amendments had to be ratified unanimously by all the State legislatures. Yes, they put that lower requirement for adoption on Article 7 of the Constitution of the United States, but they were bound by their previous agreement established by Article 13 of the Articles of Confederation. And let’s get something straight, they didn’t not adopt a new government, all they did was balance the legislative process by adding a Republican form of government, a Confederation of Republics, assembled in a bicameral legislature, and they made the cost of membership in the Union more equitable by making the apportionment of taxes by an assessment of each States proportion of the population instead of an assessment on the different forms of property within each State. This is curious in a lot of ways because under the Articles of Confederation the Slaves were considered as property and taxed as property, but under the Of the United States they were either to be taxed as free persons or as property, and the same was true of the apportionment of representation either the Slaves would be counted as free persons or as property. When they are counted as free persons, then the State would have more representation but higher taxes, when counted as property the States would have lower representation and lower taxes, which in a way is a win/win for the southern States because in either case they would have more representation because of counting the slaves and lower taxes because they are not assessed taxes based upon property. The problem didn’t come into view until after the Civil War, which is why they quickly wrote the 14th Amendment to establish citizenship to exclude freed slaves from being assembled in the State Legislatures according to their number in their States and exclude them from being a part of the State’s delegation to the federal legislature in that same proportion. Some slave states had more slaves than they had white peoples, so the State Legislatures and the State’s Federal Delegations would change overnight giving control of the States to the slaves, that’s why they had to try to claim that the slaves were not citizens, nut they had accepted them as citizens when they agreed to the 3/5 compromises, and once everyone was considered a free person, all had to be counted and representation had to be apportioned according to their proportion in the population. So, was the 3/5 compromises a good deal for the Slave States or the Slaves, considering the time bomb of the prevention of importation and migration of slaves starting in 1808 would eventually end slavery!
Everything I'm studying agrees with the video. The Constitution was illegal. This is why it's so important Virginia, not Congress, called the convention. "In the opinion of Congress" a convention should be held to amend the Articles, but it was the intention of Virginia to replace them. This is why they avoided Congress as much as possible. It did not abide by the Articles at all. This is why they appealed to the right of revolution such as is found in the Declaration of Independence. It was America's second (peaceful) revolution.
@@leahunverferth8247 Look genius, the Articles of Confederation were amended according to Article 13 of the Articles of Confederation, which required 9 of 13 States to assemble to agree to those amendments and 13 of 13 States to ratify those amendments before they were adopted. If you lay them side by side you can clearly see what was amended. So my suggestion to you is to actually read the Articles of Confederation before you make your next uninformed comment! There are too many things that the States had agreed to, especially the first 4 articles for them just to be set aside, and they did transfer quite a bit, but it was never the intention to replace the Articles of Confederation, the intention was to balance the legislative process and make the appointment of taxation more equitable, which they did! I can always tell when someone has never read the Articles of Confederation!
@@nfpnone8248 I've read them. Have a little humility friend. Here's something you're missing - The Constitution was ratified through conventions, not state legislatures like the Articles required. This is hugely significant. It was revolutionary - the peaceful overthrow of an old government for a new one. This is one big reason why the anti-federalists opposed it. They believed the articles merely needed amended and were angry when the convention ended with an entirely new document proposed. But of course the requirement of unanimous approval by the states of each amendment was impossible hence the need for a new governing document in the first place.
@@leahunverferth8247 Please stop wasting my time with your interpretation of our history! And Humility, I don’t even think you know what the word means! I was going to leave it at that, but! So you believe that the people wrote the Constitution of the United States, and that the people formed conventions in each State to ratify the constitution? Then why is it that the people are not mentioned once in the Constitution of the United States, why is all representation and suffrage apportioned to the States, and finally, why is the original confederacy formed by the Articles of Confederation, a discrete democracy of the States, empowered with the power of Concurrence over all laws and all treaties, which is all domestic policy and foreign policy, The people are not represented, the States are represented to participate in the legislative processes in congress governed by legislative processes to reach a majority consensus of the States as the Union! By the way, a State is the constitution of the People in their Collective Capacity, an exact representation of ALL THE PEOPLE OF THE STSTE, of each State assembled as each State’s Most Numerous Legislative Branch, not voters who only form the Most numerous legislative branch!
@@nfpnone8248 The point of state conventions as opposed to state legislatures was to appeal directly to the people. State conventions and state legislatures could be comprised of the same men, yet it was a separate body. Delegates to the convention would be elected directly by the people and had no power to make laws which lessened resistance from state government officials and allowed only one vote per state. The state legislatures would obviously not be interested in ceding any power to a federal government, just as the Confederation Congress would not take part in its own demise, hence these bodies were avoided altogether. The ratification was put to the people through state conventions who have the right to "alter or to abolish” a system of government “and to institute new Government” as is stated in the Declaration of Independence. The Supreme Court decision in McCulloch V. Maryland (1819) rightly argues this. “What right had they to say, We, the people? My political curiosity, exclusive of my anxious solicitude for the public welfare, leads me to ask, Who authorized them to speak the language of, We, the people, instead of, We, the states? States are the characteristics and the soul of a confederation. If the states be not the agents of this compact, it must be one great, consolidated, national government, of the people of all the states.” - Patrick Henry June 4, 1788 at Virginia's convention debate. The next day: "“Have they said, We, the states? Have they made a proposal of a compact between states? If they had, this would be a confederation. It is otherwise most clearly a consolidated government." I have no idea how you missed the opening words to the Constitution. The anti-federalists were right to see the Constitution as a rejection of Compact Theory and a government of one consolidated people - that's the very reason they opposed it. Though the central government was not as strong as Madison in the Virginia Plan would have liked, the compromise between it and the New Jersey plan still created a strong central government that is wholly inconsistent with the Articles and was a rejection of them. It's also just obvious that a convention to purportedly revise the Articles which instead comes out with a completely new document has displaced that old governing document (or is trying to, if the people ratify). “If today the Congress of the United States should call a national convention to ‘revise’ the Constitution, and such a convention should throw away the existing instrument of government entirely and submit a new frame of government to a popular referendum, disregarding altogether the process of amendment now provided, we should have something analogous to the great political transformation of 1787-89. The revolutionary nature of the work of the Philadelphia Convention is correctly characterized by Professor John W. Burgess when he states that had such acts been performed by Julius or Napoleon, they would have been pronounced coups d’etat.” Anyone who would like to know more should check out an article called "The Illegality of the Constitution" by Richard S. Kay as a good starting point from which I shared this quote.
It’s not “We the People”! It’s “We the People of the United States” as in, “We the delegates of the united States, in congress assembled”, which has need the case from the beginning when the delegates of the States drafted and agreed to the Deliberation of Independence assembled in a General Congress. What you must understand is the United States, in congress assembled, is the Union, and the “United States of America” is the name of the confederacy, which is a discrete democracy of the States assembled in a congress. The Articles of Confederation was also written in a general congress and it established a legislative assembly of the States in a congress. The Constitution was written in a legislative assembly in a congress, and they agreed to improvements to balance the legislative process and make the cost of membership in the Union more equitable, forming a More Perfect Union of the States assembled in a Congress. What the preamble means is, the current Union wrote the Constitution of the United States in order to ordain and establish a More Perfect Union, for “The United States of America. The States as the Union amended their participation versus compliance agreement to form a More Perfect Union of the States. “The People” as individuals are not a party to the Constitution of the United States, as it only concerns “The People Collectively” which constitutes the States”, Huge Difference!
Ordeur?
Is this the guy that quarried the pyramids?
EXCELLENT.
In the Bask country they 2 languages, American idi..t. stupid video. So the Basks were racists for using that word to other people.
Bercow the bent.
Are you coming back? It’s been over a year
I would love to have been there, if there is ever an excuse to rewrite it in any way count me in as a witness!
More Italian history pls! ❤
And im a Albanian
Hello he is from Albania
Man what a cliffhanger, please make a video on Virginia!!
Im trying to make a discord rp for this time and your the only guy ive found that goes into enough detail
The information is enlightening, but what is the reason for the music ? It is a distraction.