Reply #214: Point.. but

[X_Digger]

Hamilton was always a strong federalist (duh, I just realized how silly that sounded- wrote a majority of the federalist papers) in favor of a strong central government, and was always dubious to some extent about the militia- "What plan for the regulation of the militia may be pursued by the national government is impossible to be foreseen..". But even he saw a use for the average citizen in opposition to tyranny (along with insurrections and rebellions, to be sure)- "If the representatives of the people betray their constituents, there is then no recourse left but in the exertion of that original right of self-defense which is paramount to all positive forms of government, and which against the usurpations of the national rulers may be exerted with infinitely better prospect of success than against those of the rulers of an individual State. In a single State, if the persons intrusted with supreme power become usurpers, the different parcels, subdivisions, or districts of which it consists, having no distinct government in each, can take no regular measures for defense. The citizens must rush tumultuously to arms, without concert, without system, without resource; except in their courage and despair."

I read a good book a couple of years ago about the Whiskey Rebellion, I'll see if I can find the title.