This is a LibriVox recording, all LibriVox recordings are in the public domain. For more information or to volunteer, please visit LibriVox.org, recording by Robert Scott. The Anti-Federalist Papers, Section 49, The Impartial Examiner, Letter 1. The Impartial Examiner, Virginia Independent Chronicle, Letter 1, 20 February, 1788. To the free people of Virginia, countrymen and fellow citizens, that the subject which has given rise to the following observations is of the highest consequence to this country requires not the aid of logical proof that it merits the most serious attention of every member of this community is a fact not to be controverted. Will not a bare mention of the new folderal constitution justify this remark? To foreigners or such whose local connections form no permanent interest in America this may be totally indifferent, and to them it may afford mere matter of speculation and private amusement. And such advert to the high indistinguished characters who have drawn up and proposed a set of articles to the people of an extensive continent as a form of their future government, an emotion of curiosity may induce them to examine the contents of those articles, and they may perhaps from having contemplated on a former situation of those people that they had struggled against a potent enemy, that they had by their virtuous and patriotic exertions rescued themselves from impending danger, that they had used like endeavors to establish for themselves a system of government upon free and liberal principles, that they had in pursuance of those endeavors chosen a system as conducive to the great ends of human happiness. The preservation of their natural rights and liberties, that this system has prevailed but few years, and now already a change, a fundamental change therein is meditated. Strangers I say having contemplated on these circumstances may be led to consider this nation as a restless and dissatisfied people whose fickle, inconsistent minds suffer them not to abide long in the same situation, whose perpetually seeking after new things throw away one blessing in pursuit of another. And while they are thus indulging their caprice lose all, ere any can ripen into maturity. If the unconcerned part of those among us entertain themselves in this manner, can any good American be content to deserve such reflections? Will not all rather feel an honest indignation if they once perceive their country stamped with a character like this? And yet, may we not justify such conceptions if we thus precipitate ourselves into a new government before we have sufficiently tried the virtues of the old? So incident is error to the human mind that it is not to be wondered at indeed if our present constitution is incomplete. The best regulated governments have their defects, and might perhaps admit of improvement, but the great difficulty consists in clearly discovering the most exceptional parts and judiciously applying the amendments. A wise nation will therefore attempt innovations of this kind with much circumspection. They will view the political fabric which they have once reared as the sacred palladium of their happiness. They will touch it as a man of tender sensibility toucheth the apple of his own eye. They will touch it with light, with a trembling, with a curious hand, lest they injure the whole structure in endeavoring to reform any of its parts. In small and trivial points alterations may be attempted with less danger, but where the very nature, the essence of the thing is to be changed when the foundation itself is to be transformed and the whole plan entirely new-modeled. Should you not hesitate, O Americans? Should you not pause and reflect awhile on the important step you are about to take? Does it not behoove you to examine well into the nature and tendency of the constitution now proposed for your adoption? And by comparing it with your present mode of government, endeavor to distinguish which of the two is most eligible, whether this or that is best calculated for promoting your happiness, for obtaining and securing those benefits which are the great object of civil society? Will it be consistent with the duty which you owe to yourselves as a nation or with affection which you ought to bear for your posterity, if you rashly or inconsiderately adopt a measure which is to influence the fate of this country for ages yet to come? How will it accord with your dignity and reputation as an independent people? If either, through an overweening fondness for novelty, you are suddenly transported on the wings of imagination and to hastily make up your thoughts on this great subject, or by sinking into a listless inactivity of mind, view it as an indifferent matter unworthy of any deliberate consideration. Will any respect, will any honor, will any veneration be due to the memory of yourselves as ancestors, if millions of beings who have not yet received their birth when you are all moldered into dust should find themselves fixed in a miserable condition by one injudicious determination of yours at this period? If you see no impropriety in these questions, the suggestions contained in them will not appear altogether unworthy of attention. One moment's reflection, it is humbly presumed, will render it obvious that on this occasion they are not impertently propounded. In pursuing this address, I beg, leave to premise that the only true point of distinction between arbitrary and free governments seems to be that in the former the governments are invested with powers of acting according to their own wills, without any other limits than what they themselves may understand to be necessary for the general good, whereas in the latter they are entrusted with no such unlimited authority, but are restrained in their operations to conform to certain fundamental principles. The preservation whereof is expressly stipulated for in the civil compact, and whatever is not so stipulated for is virtually and impliedly given up. Societies so constituted invest their supreme governors with ample powers of exerting themselves according to their own judgment in everything not inconsistent with or derogatory to the principles, and so long as they adhere to such restrictions their deeds ought not to be rescinded or controlled by any other power whatsoever. Those principles are certain inherent rights pertaining to all mankind in a state of natural liberty, which through the weakness, imperfection, and depravity of human nature cannot be secured in that state. In therefore agree to enter into society that by the united force of many the rights of each individual may be protected and secured. These are in all just governments laid down as foundation to the civil compact, which contains a covenant between each and all that they shall enter into one society to be governed by the same powers establishes for that purpose the frame of government, and consequently creates a convention between every member binding those who shall at any time be entrusted with power to a faithful administration of their trusting according to the form of the civil policy which they have so constituted and obliging all to do obedience therein. There can be no other just origin of civil power but such mutual contract of all the people, and although their great object in forming society is an intention to secure their natural rights yet the relations arising from this political union creates certain duties and obligations to the state which require a sacrifice of some portion of those rights and of that exuberance of liberty which obtains in a state of nature. This however being compensated by certain other adventitious rights and principles which are acquired by the social connection. It follows that the advantages derived from a government are to be estimated by the strength of the security which is attained at once with the least sacrifice and the greatest acquired benefits. That government therefore which is best adapted for promoting these three great ends must certainly be the best constituted scheme of civil policy. Here then it may not be improper to remark that persons forming a social community cannot take too much precaution when they are about to establish the plan of their government. They ought to construct it in such a manner as to procure the best possible security for their rights. In doing this they ought to give up no greater share than what is understood to be absolutely necessary. And they should endeavor so to organize, arrange, and connect its several branches that when duly exercised it may tend to promote the common good of all and contribute as many advantages as the civil institution is capable of. It has been before observed that the only just origin of civil power is a contract entered into by all the people for that purpose. If this proposition be true, and I dare presume it is not controverted at least in this country, right reason will always suggest the expediency of adhering to the essential requisites in forming that contract upon true principles. A cautious people will consider all the inducements to enter into the social state from the most important object down to the minutest prospect of advantage. Every motive with them will have its due weight. They will not pay a curious attention to trifles and overlook matters of great consequence. And in pursuing these steps they will provide for the attainment of each point in view with a care, with an earnestness proportionate to its dignity and according as it involves a greater or lesser interest. It is evident therefore that they should attend most diligently to those sacred rites which they have received with their birth and which can neither be retained to themselves nor transmitted to their posterity unless they are expressly reserved. For it is a maxim, I dare say, universally acknowledged that when men establish a system of government in granting the powers therein they are always understood to surrender whatever they do not expressly reserve. This is obvious from the very design of the civil institution which is adopted in lieu of the state of natural liberty wherein each individual being equally entitled to the enjoyment of all natural rights and having equally a just authority to exercise full powers of acting with relation to other individuals in any manner not injurious to their rights must when he enters into society be presumed to give up all those powers into the hands of the state by submitting this whole conduct to the direction thereof. This being done by every member it follows as a regular conclusion that all such powers where of the whole were possessed so far as they related to each other individually are of course given up by the mere act of union. If this surrender be made without any reservation the conclusion is equally plain and regular that each and all have given up not only those powers which relate to the others but likewise every claim which pertain to themselves as individuals for the universality of the grant in this case must necessarily include every power of acting and every claim of possessing or obtaining anything. Except according to the regulations of the state now a right being properly defined quote a power or claim established by law to act or to possess or to obtain something from others end quote for every natural right is such a power or claim established by the law of nature thus it is manifest and in a society constituted after this manner every right whatsoever will be under the power and control of the civil jurisdiction. This is the leading characteristic of an arbitrary government and whenever any people establish a system like this they subject themselves to one which has not a single property of a free constitution. Hence results the necessity of an express stipulation for all such rights as are intended to be exempted from the civil authority. Permit me now my countrymen to make a few observations on the proposed fogeal constitution. In this attempt the subject as it is arduous and difficult naturally impresses the modest mind with diffidence. Yet being of the last importance as involving in it the highest interest that free men can have all that is dear and valuable to the citizens of the United States a consciousness of the strong claim which this subject has to a free and general discussion has prevailed over that discouraging idea so far as to produce the present address to you. This is done with a reliance on that benevolence and liberality of sentiment with which you have hitherto been actuated. From these benign qualities it is hoped the most favorable indulgence will be granted and that the zeal with which this is written will be allowed in some measure as excuse for its defects. However imperfect therefore this may be. However inadequate to your own ideas or to the wishes of him who offers it to your consideration you are hereby entreated to let the perusal with which you may think proper to favor it be serious, candid, dispassionate as it relates to a common cause in which we are all concerned. Suffer me then in the first place to advert to a point of the sixth article in this constitution. It may perhaps appear somewhat irregular to begin with this article since it is almost the last proposed yet if it be considered that this at once defines the extent of congressional authority and indisputably fixes its supremacy every idea of impropriety on this head will probably vanish. The cause alluded to contains the following words, quote, this constitution and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof and all the treaties made or which shall be made under the authority of the United States shall be the supreme law of the land and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby. Anything in the Constitution or laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding, end quote. If this constitution should be adopted here the sovereignty of America is ascertained and fixed in the foedral body at the same time that it abolishes the present independent sovereignty of each state. Because this government being general and not confined to any particular part of the continent but pervading every state and establishing its authority equally in all its superiority will consequently be recognized in each and all other powers can operate only in a secondary subordinate degree. For the idea of two sovereignty existing within the same community is a perfect solicism. If they be supposed equal their operation must be commensurate and like two mechanical powers of equal momenta counteracting each other. There the force of the one will be destroyed by the force of the other and so there will be no efficiency in either. If one be greater than the other they will be similar to two unequal bodies in motion with a given degree of velocity and impining each other from opposite points. The motion of the lesser in this case will necessarily be destroyed by that of the greater and so there will be efficiency only in the greater. But what need is there for a mathematical deduction to shoo the impropriety of two such distinct co-existing soverities? The natural understanding of all mankind perceives the apparent absurdity arising from such a supposition. Since if the word means anything at all it must mean that supreme power which must reside somewhere in state or in other terms it is the united powers of each individual member of the state collected and consolidated into one body. This collection, this union, this supremacy of power can therefore exist only in one body. This is obvious to every man and it has been very properly suggested that under the proposed constitution each state will dwindle into, quote, the insignificance of a town corporate, end quote. This certainly will be their utmost consequence and as such they will have no authority to make laws even for their own private government any further than the permissive indulgence of Congress may grant them leave. This Virginians will be your mighty, your enviable situation after all your struggles for independence. And if you take the trouble to examine you will find that the great, the supereminent authority with which this instrument of union proposes to invest the fojral body is to be created without a single check, without a single article of convention for the preservation of those inestimable rights which have in all ages been the glory of free men. It is true, quote, the United States shall guarantee to every state in this union a Republican form of government, end quote. Yet they do not guarantee to the different states their present forms of government or the bill of rights thereto annexed or any of them and the expressions are too vague, too indefinite to create such a compact by implication. It is possible that a, quote, Republican form, end quote, of government may be built upon as absolute principles of despotism as any oriental monarchy ever yet proposed. I presume that the liberty of a nation depends not on planning the frame of government which consists merely in fixing and delineating the powers thereof, but on prescribing duty limits to those powers and establishing them upon just principles. It has been held in a northern state by a zealous advocate for this constitution that there is no necessity for, quote, a bill of rights, end quote, in the fojral government, although at the same time he acknowledges such necessity to have existed when the constitutions of the separate governments were established. He confesses that in these instances the people, quote, invested their representatives with every power and authority which they did not in explicit terms reserve, end quote, but, quote, in delegating fojral powers, end quote. Says he, quote, everything which is not given is reserved, end quote. Here is a distinction I humbly conceive, without a difference at least in the present inquiry. How far such a discrimination might prevail with respect to the present system of union it is immaterial to examine? And had the observation been restrained to that alone perhaps it might be acknowledged to contain some degree of propriety. For under the confederation it is well known that the authority of Congress cannot extend so far as to interfere with or exercise any kind of coercion on the powers of legislation in the different states. But the internal police of each is left free, sovereign and independent, so that the liberties of the people being secured as well as the nature of their constitution will admit, and the declaration of rights which they have laid down as the basis of government having their full force and energy any further stipulation on the head might be unnecessary. But surely when this doctrine comes to be applied to the proposed fojral constitution which is framed with such large and extensive powers as to transfer the individual sovereignty from each state to the aggregate body, a constitution which delegates to Congress an authority to interfere with and restrain the legislatures of every state, invests them with supreme powers of legislation throughout all states annihilates the separate independency of each and in short swallows up and involves in the plenitude of its jurisdiction all other powers whatsoever. I shall not be taxed with arrogance in declaring such an argument to be felicitous, and insisting on the necessity of a positive unequivocal declaration in favor of the rights of free men in this case even more strongly than in the case of their separate governments. For it seems to me that when any civil establishment is formed the more general its influence the more extensive the powers with which it is invested. The greater reason there is to take the necessary precaution from securing a due administration and guarding against unwarrantable abuses. End of Section 49, the impartial examiner, Letter 1. Recording by Robert Scott. June the 20th, 2007. This is a LibriVox recording. All LibriVox recordings are in the public domain. For more information or to volunteer please visit LibriVox.org. Recording by Robert Scott. The Anti-Federalist Papers, Section 50, Impartial Examiner, Letter 2. Impartial Examiner, Letter 2, 27 February, 17. 1888. Continued from our last. Section 8 of the first article gives the Congress a power to, quote, lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts, and excises, end quote. If it be a true maxim that those who are entrusted with the exercise of the higher powers of government ought to observe two essential rules. First, in having no other view than the general good of all without any regard to private interest. And secondly, to take equal care of the whole body of the community, so as not to favor one part more than the other. It is apparent that under the proposed Constitution this general confederate society made up of 13 different states will have very little security for obtaining an observance either of the one or of the other rule. For being different societies, though blended together in legislation and having as different interests, no uniform rule for the whole seems to be practicable. And hence it is to be feared that the general good may be lost in a mutual attention to private views. From the same causes we may lament the probability of losing the advantage of the second rule. For it may be expected, in like manner, that the general care of the whole will be lost by separate endeavors of different legislators to favor their own states. So long as mankind continues to be influenced by interest, the surest means of affecting a union of councils in any assembly is by a union of interests. Now, if it be considered that it is this concert that it is this union in promoting the general good which alone can preserve concord in this great republic and secure its success and glory, unhappy will be the situation of America if she once precludes the beneficial effects of such a good understanding. Yet I apprehend that these evils may result in a great measure from an exercise of that branch of legislative authority which respects internal direct taxation. For in this it is scarcely probable that the interest, ease, or convenience of the several states can be so well consulted in the Fodrell Assembly as in their own respective legislatures. So different are many species of property, so various the productions, so unequal the profits arising even from the same species of property in different states that no general mode of contribution can well be adopted in such a manner as it wants to affect all in an equitable degree. Hence may arise disagreeable objects of contention, a diversity of interests will produce a diversity of schemes. Thus each state as it is natural will endeavor to raise a revenue by such means as may appear least injurious to its own interest. A source of dissension manifestly detrimental to the harmony which is necessary to support the confederation. I cannot conceive it impracticable to reform the Fodrell system in such a manner as to ensure a compliance with the necessary requisitions of Congress from the different state legislatures. Then all the several states being left to raise their own share of the revenue and being the only proper judges of the mode most convenient to themselves, it is highly probable that this important branch of government would be carried on more generally to the satisfaction of each state and would tend to promote a spirit of concord between all the parts of this great community. Because each being thus accommodated and participating the advantages of the Union, none subjected to any inconvenience thereby, all would consequently concur in nourishing and affection for the government which so cemented them. I believe it is acknowledged that the establishment of excise has been one of the greatest grievances under which the English nation has labored for almost a century and a half. Although this may seem an economical tax arising out of manufactures from which the industrious may derive advantages and whereof the wealthy by consuming the greatest share will of course contribute the largest proportion of the tax. Yet the nature of it being such as requires severe laws for its execution, it has justly become an object of general detail attestation. This has induced Judge Blackstone to declare that, quote, the rigor and arbitrary proceedings of excise laws seems hardly compatible with the temper of a free nation, end quote. While therefore you are free men, while you are unused to feel any other power, by such as can be exercised within the bounds of moderation and decency, it doubtless behooves you to consider whether it is an eligible step to subject yourselves to a new species of authority which may warrant the most flagrant violations of the sacred rights of habitation. If this branch of revenue takes place, all the consequent rigor of excise law will necessarily be introduced in order to enforce a due collection. On any charges or offense in this instance you whip-see yourselves deprived of your boasted trial by jury. The much admired common law process will give way to some quick and summery mode by which the unhappy defendant will find himself reduced, perhaps to ruin, in less time than a charge could be exhibited against him in the usual course. It has ever been held that standing armies in times of peace are dangerous to a free country, and no observation seems to contain more reason in it. Besides being useless as having no object of employment they are inconvenient and expensive. The soldiery who are generally composed of the dregs of the people, when disbanded or unfit for military service, being equally unfit for any other employment become extremely burdensome, as they are a body of men exempt from the common occupations of social life, having an interest different from the rest of the community they want in the laps of ease and indolence without feeling the duties which arise from the political connection, though drawing their subsistence from the bosom of the state, the severity of discipline necessary to be observed reduces them to a degree of slavery, the unconditional submission to the commands of their superiors, in which they are bound, renders them the fit instruments of tyranny and oppression. Hence they have, in all ages, afforded striking examples of contributing, more or less, to enslave mankind, and whoever will take the trouble to examine will find that by far the greater part of the different nations who have fallen from the glorious state of liberty owe their ruin to standing armies. It has been urged that they are necessary to provide against sudden attacks. Would not a well-regulated militia duly trained to discipline afford ample security? Such, I conceive, to be the best the surest means of protection which a free people can have when not actually engaged in war. This kind of defense is attended with two advantages superior to any other. First, when it is necessary to embody an army they at once form a band of soldiers whose interests are uniformly the same with those of the whole community, and in whose safety they see involved everything that is dear to themselves. Secondly, if one army is cut off another may be immediately raised already trained for military service. By a policy somewhat similar to this the Roman Empire rose to the highest pitch of grandeur and magnificence. The Supreme Court is another branch of foedal authority which wears the aspect of imperial jurisdiction, clad in a dread array and spreading its wide domain into all parts of the continent. This is to be co-extensive with the legislature, and like that is to swallow up all other courts of judicature. Four, what is that judicial power which, quote, shall extend to all cases in law and equity, end quote, in some having, quote, original, end quote, in all others, quote, appellate jurisdiction, end quote, but an established universal in its operation. And what is that, quote, appellate jurisdiction both as to law and fact, end quote, but an establishment which may in effect operate as original jurisdiction? Or what is an appeal to inquire into facts after a solemn adjudication in any court below but a trial de novo? And do not such trials clearly imply an incompetency in the inferior courts to exercise any kind of judicial authority with rectitude? Hence, will not this eventually annihilate their whole jurisdiction? Here is a system of jurisprudence to be erected no less surprising than it is new and unusual. Here is an innovation which bears no kind of analogy to anything that Englishmen or Americans, the descendants of Englishmen, have ever yet experienced. Add to all that this high, pre-rogative court establishes no fundamental rule of proceeding except that the trial by jury is allowed in some criminal cases. All other cases are left open and subject, quote, to such regulations as the Congress shall make, end quote. Under these circumstances I beseech you all as citizens of Virginia to consider seriously whether you will not endanger your solemn trial by jury which you have long revered as a sacred barrier against injustice, which has been established by your ancestors many centuries ago and transmitted to you as one of the greatest bulwarks of civil liberty, which you have to this day maintained inviolate. I beseech you, I say, as member of this commonwealth to consider whether you will not be in danger of losing this inestimable mode of trial in all those cases wherein the Constitution does not provide for its security. Nay, does not that very provision which is made by being confined to a few particular cases almost imply a total exclusion of the rest? Let it then be a reflection deeply impressed on your minds that if this noble privilege by which long experience has been found the most exquisite method of determining controversies according to the scale of equal liberty should once be taken away, it is unknown what new species of trial may be substituted in the trial in its room. Perhaps you may be surprised with some strange piece of judicial polity, some arbitrary method, perhaps confining all trials to the entire decision of the Magistrate and totally excluding the great body of the people from any share in the administration of public justice. After the most deliberate reflections on this important matter permit me, my dear countryman, to declare to you in the most unfaigned manner that not perceiving anything in the proposed plan of government which is the most unethical and unethical of the law of law. This seems calculated to ensure the happiness of America. I could not as a fellow citizen resist the inclination to impart these sentiments to you. Unmoved by party, rage, unassailed by passion, uninfluenced by any other interest but the genuine effusal of zeal for this our common country, I confess to you in the language of sincerity and candor that after the first reading of this new code I could not behold it but with an eye of disapprobation. Unwilling, however, to reject at first sight an object of such high moment I resolved to distrust the propriety of a construction passed on so early a period. This led me to pursue it with the utmost diligence I was capable of, and, believe me, the foregoing observations have risen from the fullest conviction that the system involves in it the most dangerous principles. And so far from exalting the standard of American liberty I fear that, should it be adopted, this glorious work which already has cost the lives of many worthy patriots will ere long be leveled with the dust. Let it not be conjectured from hence that any illiberal conceptions are formed by the writer hereof respecting the intentions of those gentlemen who have offered this plan of fogeal government. He knows no circumstance inducing him to suppose they had any other object in view but the good of their country. When we contemplate the great, the magnanimous hero who has conducted our armies through all the trying vicissitudes of danger and difficulty there is no man so disingenuous. There is no man so ungrateful as to impute any transactions of his to sinister motives. Every true American is well assured that steadiness of virtue, that benignity of soul, have the chief rule in all his actions. Yet every American and every other person are satisfied also that there is no infallibility in human nature. To be man is to be subject to error. The best, the greatest, the wisest are liable to commit mistakes. Let it be remembered then that this code of government is solemnly proposed to every free man in America. For what? For the purpose of binding them without their approbation? No. For an implicit acceptance? No. For their adoption merely and complement to the general convention? No. What then? Every man's duty to his country points out to him the end of this proposition. Every man knows that it is for a free, a candid, and impartial discussion and determination thereon. Whether they will approve and adopt it or whether they will disapprove and reject it. Can any citizen therefore be so weak? Can any be so timid? So pusillanimous as to acknowledge that he has no right to exercise his own judgment with regard to this matter? If there should be any haughty spirits among us who think that this subject ought to be handled by none but a few persons of eminent character, let such recollect that the dignity, the importance of their country, should inspire sentiments more exalted than the highest characters. Sentiments that should correspond with the worth of America, not with the consequence of any mere individuals. Will you then, Virginians, erogate too much by boldly asserting the privilege to judge for yourselves in what so nearly concerns the cause of liberty? No, no, my countrymen, you will not erogate too much. You will not. I avow it by the souls of those brave patriots who fought for the same cause in the late war. You will in this affair act as becomes you. The rank you hold amongst the nations of the earth requires this of you. And you will forfeit that rank. You will forfeit the character of free men and shoe that you deserve to be enslaved if you decline that privilege. The happiness of a multitude of people is certainly the highest advantage. And if you will contribute a full share of duty to effect this, so shall you obtain a due share of glory. No pomp of character, no sound of names, no distinction of birth, no preeminence of any kind should dispose you to hoodwink your own understandings. And in that state suffer yourselves to be led at the will of any other men whatsoever. The part you have acted here to fore, the brave, the noble efforts you have made, are proof enough of your fortitude and totally exclude every idea of pusillanimity. Herein you have evanced the highest sense of public virtue. Herein you have manifest to the whole world that the cause of liberty has hitherto had the prevailing influence over your hearts. And shall men possessed of these sentiments shall those valiant defenders of their country who have not feared to encounter toil and danger in a thousand shapes who have not startled even at the prospect of death itself. Shall you, O Virginians, shall you I say, after exhibiting such bright examples of true patriotic heroism suddenly become inconsistent with yourselves, and were failed to maintain a privilege so incontestably your due? No, my countrymen, by no means can you and I conceive that the laudable vigor which flamed so high in every breast can have so far evaporated in the space of five years. I doubt not, but you will in this trying instance acquit yourselves in a manner worthy of your former conduct. It is not to be feared that you need the force of persuasion to exercise a proper freedom of inquiry in the merits of this proposed plan of government, or that you will not pay a due attention to the welfare of that country for which you have already so bravely exerted yourselves. Of this I am well assured, and do not wonder when imagination presents to my view the idea of a numerous and respectable body of men reasoning on the principles of this foedral constitution. If herein I conceive that you are alarmed at the exceedingly high and extensive authority which it is intended to establish, I cannot but see the strongest reasons for such apprehensions, for a system which is to supersede the present different governments of the states, by ordaining that, quote, laws made in pursuance thereof shall be supreme, and shall bind the judges in every state, anything in the constitution or laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding, end quote, must be alarming indeed. What cannot this omnipotence of power affect? How will your bill of rights avail you anything? By this authority the Congress can make laws which shall bind all, repugnant to your present constitution, repugnant to every article of your rights, for they are a part of your constitution, they are the basis of it, so that if you pass this new constitution you will have a naked plan of government unlimited in its jurisdiction, which not only expunges your bill of rights by rendering ineffectual all the state governments, but is proposed without any kind of stipulation for any of those natural rights the security, whereof, ought to be the end of all governments. Such a stipulation is so necessary that it is an absurdity to suppose any civil liberty can exist without it, because it cannot be alleged in any case whatsoever that a breach has been committed, that a right has been violated, as there will be no standard to resort to, no criterion to ascertain the breach, or even to find whether there has been any violation at all. Hence it is evident that the most flagrant acts of oppression may be inflicted yet, still there will be no apparent object injured, there will be no unconstitutional infringement. For instance, if Congress should pass a law that persons charged with capital crimes shall not have a right to demand the cause or nature of the accusation, shall not be confronted with the accuser or witnesses, or call for evidence in their own favor, and a question should arise respecting their authority therein. Can it be said that they have exceeded the limits of their jurisdiction when that has no limits, when no provision has been made for such a right, when no responsibility on the part of Congress has been required by the Constitution? The same observation may be made on any arbitrary or capricious imprisonments contrary to the law of the land. The same may be made if excessive bail should be required, if excessive fines should be imposed, if cruel and unusual punishment should be inflicted, if the liberty of the press should be restrained. In a word, if laws should be made totally derogatory to the whole catalog of rights which are now secured under your present form of government. You will doubtless consider whether the inconveniences may not be very disagreeable and perhaps injurious to which this country may be subjected by ex-ice laws, by direct taxation of every kind, by the establishment of foedral courts. You will advert to the dangerous and oppressive consequences that may ensue from the introduction of standing armies in times of peace, those baneful energies of ambition against which free nations have always guarded with the greatest degree of caution. You will determine likewise as to the propriety of being excluded from keeping ships of war without the consent of Congress. This situation of these states renders a naval force extremely desirable, being bounded on one side by the sea. Their coasts are accessible to every lawless adventurer and without ships to guard them, they are subject to continual depredations. The expediency of this species of defense is manifest. The great advantages to be derived from it, the strength, the consequence, which it adds to a nation, are such that every well wiser to this country would rejoice to see a large navy established, as the circumstances of the state can at any time admit of, this therefore seems to be a very improper restraint upon the states, a restraint which may perhaps eventually prove very injurious. Upon the whole, my fellow citizens, if you judge this proposed constitution to be eligible or ineligible, you will accordingly instruct your delegates when they are about to meet in convention. The wisdom of the legislature has judged it advisable to fix the time for deciding on this momentous business at the distance of several months, that you may become thoroughly acquainted with the subject which so nearly concerns your greatest interests. I know it is a favorite topic with the advocates for the new government, that it will advance the dignity of Congress and that the energy which is now wanting in the fogeal system will be hereby rendered efficient. Nobody doubts, but the government of the Union is susceptible of amendment. But can anyone think that there is no medium between want of power and the possession of it in an unlimited degree, between the imbecility of mere recommendatory propositions and the sweeping jurisdiction of exercising every branch of government over the United States to the greatest extent? Between the present feeble texture of the confederation and the proposed nervous ligaments, is it not possible to strengthen the hands of Congress so far as to enable them to comply with all the exigencies of the Union to regulate the great commercial concerns of the continent, to superintend all affairs which relate to the United States in their aggregate capacity, without devolving on that body the supreme powers of government in all its branches? The original institution of Congressional business, the nature, the end of that institution events the practicability of such reform and shoo that it is more honorable, more glorious, and will be more happy for each American state to retain its independent sovereignty, for what can be more truly great in any country than a number of different states in the full enjoyment of liberty? Exercising distinct powers of government yet associated by one general head, and under the influence of a mild, just and well organized confederation duly held in equilibria? Willstall derives those external advantages which are the greatest purpose of the Union? This separate independency existing in each, this harmony pervading the whole, this due degree of energy in the fogeal department altogether will form a beautiful species of natural grandeur. These will add luster to every member and spread a glory all around. These will command the admiration of mankind. These will exhibit a bright specimen of real dignity far superior to that immense devolution of power under which the sovereignty of each state shall shrink to nothing. It requires no great degree of knowledge and history to learn what dangerous consequences generally result from large and extensive powers. Every man has a natural propensity to power, and when one degree of it is obtained, that seldom fails to excite a thirst for more. A higher point, being gained, still the soul is impelled to a further pursuit. Thus step by step in regular progression she proceeds onward until the lust of domination becomes the ruling passion and absorbs all other desires. When any man puts himself under the influence of such a passion it is natural for him to seek after every opportunity and to employ every means within reach for obtaining his purpose. There is something so exceedingly bewitching in the possession of power that hardly a man can enjoy it, and not be affected after an unusual manner. The pomp of superiority carries with it charms which operate strongly on the imagination. Nay, it is a melancholy reflection that too often the very disposition itself is transformed, and for the gratification of ambitious views the mild, the gentle, humane, the virtuous becomes cruel and violent, losing all sense of honor, probity, humanity, and gratitude. Hence should it not be a maxim never to be forgotten that a free people ought to entrust no set of men with powers that may be abused without control, or afford opportunities to designing men to carry dangerous measures into execution without being responsible for their conduct, and as no human foresight can penetrate so far into future events as to guard always against the effects of vice, as the securest governments are seldom secure enough. Is it not the greatest imprudence to adopt a system which has an apparent tendency to furnish ambitious men with the means of exerting themselves, perhaps to the destruction of American liberty? It is, next to impossible, to enslave a people immediately after a firm struggle against oppression, while the sense of past injury is recent and strong.  The ardent glow of freedom gradually evaporates. The charms of popular equality, which arose from the Republican plan, insensibly declined. The pleasures, the advantages derived from the new kind of government, grow stale through use. Such declension in all these vigorous springs of action necessarily produces a supineness. The altar of liberty is no longer watched with such attentive acidity. A new train of passion succeeds to the empire of the mind. Different objects of desire take place, and if the nation happens to enjoy a series of prosperity, voluptuousness, excessive fondness for riches, and luxury gain admission and establish themselves, these produce veniality and corruption of every kind, which open a fatal avenue to bribery, hence it follows that in the midst of this general contagion a few men, or one, more powerful than all others, industriously endeavour to obtain all authority, and by means of great wealth or embezzling the public money, perhaps totally subvert the government, and erect a system of aristocratical or monarchic tyranny in its room. What ready means for this work of evil are numerous standing armies and the disposition of the great revenue of the United States. Money can purchase soldiers, soldiers can produce money, and both together can do anything. It is this deprivation of manners, this wicked propensity, my dear countrymen, against which you ought to provide with the utmost degree of prudence and circumspection. All nations pass this parochism of vice, at some period or another, and if at that dangerous juncture your government is not secure upon a solid foundation, and well guarded against the machinations of evil men, these liberties of this country will be lost, perhaps, for ever. Let us establish a strong, foldral government which shall render our Congress a great and eminent body, says one.  Who pray, what will it avail you in the hour of distress, in the midst of calamity, though all Europe should pay attention to the Congress? What advantage will it be to the citizens of America, should they elevate Congress to the highest degree of grandeur? Should the sound of that grandeur be wafted across the Atlantic and echo through every town in Europe? What will the pomp, the splendor of that dignified body, profit you, I say, if you place yourselves in a situation which may terminate in wretchedness? Of what consequence will that state of Congressional preeminence be to you, or to your posterity, if either the one or the other should thereby be reduced to a mere herd of, O great God, avert that dreadful catastrophe? Let not the day be permitted to dawn which shall discover to the world that America remains no longer a free nation. O let not this sacred asylum of persecuted liberty cease to afford a resting place for that fair goddess.  And hovering for a while on the wings of affection, breathe into our souls true sentiments of wisdom, that in this awful, this important moment we may be conducted safely through the maze of error, that a firm basis of national happiness may be established and flourish in undiminished glory through all the succeeding ages. End of section 51. Recorded by Robert Scott. June the 23rd, 2006. This is a LibriVox recording. All LibriVox recordings are in the public domain. For more information or to volunteer, please visit LibriVox.org. Recording by Robert Scott. The Anti-Federalist Papers. Section number 52. Letter number 4. A Farmer. A Farmer. Baltimore, Maryland, Gazette. Letter 4. March 18, 1788. The opposite qualities of the First Confederation were rather caused by than the cause of two parties, which from its first existence began and have continued their operations, I believe, unknown to their country and almost unknown to themselves. Israeli but few men have the capacity or resolution to develop the secret causes which influence their daily conduct. The old Congress was a national government and a union of states. Both brought into one political body as these opposite powers. I do not mean parties were so exactly blended and very nearly balanced, like every artificial, operative machine where action is equal to reaction. It stood perfectly still. It would not move at all. Those who were merely confederal in their views were for dividing the public debt. Those who were for national government were for increasing of it. Those who thought any national government would be destructive to the liberties of America assisted those who thought it our only safety to put everything as wrong as possible. Requisitions were made which everybody knew it was impossible to comply with. Either in 82 or 83, ten millions of hard debt dollars, if not thirteen, were called into the Continental Treasury, when there could not be half that sum in the whole tract of territory between Nova Scotia and Florida. The states neglected them in despair. The public honor was tarnished and our governments abused by their servants and best friend. In fine it became a can't word, things are not yet bad enough to mend. However, as a great part of the important objects of society were entrusted to this mongrel species of general government, the sentiment of pushing it forward became general throughout America. And the late convention met at Philadelphia under the uniform impression that such was the desire of their constituents. But even then the advantages and disadvantages of national government operated so strongly, although silently, on each individual, that the conflict was nearly equal. A third or middle opinion, which always arises in such cases, broke off and took the lead. The national party, thus assisted, pursued steadily their object. The federal party dropped off, one by one, and finally, when the middle party came to view, the offspring which they had given birth to, and in a great measure reared, several of them immediately disowned the child. Such has been hitherto the progress of party, or rather of the human mind, dispassionately contemplating our separate and relative situation, and aiming at that perfect completion of social happiness and grandeur, which perhaps can be combined only in ideas. Every description of men entertain the same wishes, except perhaps a very few bad men of each. They forever will differ about the mode of accomplishment, and some must be permitted to doubt them practically. As our citizens are now apprised of the progress of parties or political opinions on the continent, it is fit they should also be informed of the present state, force and designs of each, in order that they may form their decisions with safety to the public and themselves. This shall be given with all the precision and impartiality that the author is capable of. America is at present divided into three classes or descriptions of men, and in a few years there will be but two. First, the first class comprehends all those men of fortune and reputation who stepped forward in the late revolution from opposition to the administration rather than the government of Great Britain. All those aristocrats whose pride distains equal law. Many men of very large fortune who entertain real or imaginary fears for the security of property. Those young men who have sacrificed their time and their talents to public service without any prospects of an adequate, pecuniary or honorary reward. All your people of fashion and pleasure who are corrupted by the dissipation of the French, English and American armies, and the love of European manners and luxury, the public creditors of the continent whose interest has been here to foresacrifice by their friends in order to retain their services on this occasion. A large majority of the mercantile people, which is at present a very unformed and consequently dangerous interest. Our old native merchants have been almost universally ruined by the receipt of their debts in paper during the war, and the payment and hard money of what they owed their British correspondence since peace. Those who are not bankrupts have generally retired and given place to a set of young men who conducting themselves as ravishly as ignorantly have embarrassed their affairs and lay the blame on the government and who are really unacquainted with the true mercantile interest of the country, which is perplexed from circumstances rather temporary than permanent. The foreign merchants are generally not to be trusted with influence in our government. They are, most of them, birds of passage. Some perhaps British emissaries, increasing and rejoicing in our political mistakes, and even those who have settled among us with an intention to fix themselves and their posterity in our soil, have brought with them more foreign prejudices than wealth. Time must elapse before the mercantile interest will be so organized as to govern themselves, much less others with propriety. And lastly, to this class, I suppose we may ultimately add the Tory interest, with the exception of very many respectable characters, who reflect, with a gratification mixed with disdain, that those principles are now become fashionable for which they have been persecuted and hunted down, which, although by no means so formidable as is generally imagined, is still considerable. They are at present wavering. They are generally, though with very many exceptions, openly for the proposed, but secretly against, any American government. A burnt child dreads the fire. But should they see any fair prospect of confusion arise? These gentry will be off at any moment for these five and twenty years to come. Ultimately, should the administration promise stability to the new government, they may be counted on as the Janissaries of power ready to efface all suspicion by the violence of their zeal. In general, all these various people would prefer a government, as nearly copied after that of Great Britain, as our circumstances will permit. Some would strain these circumstances. Others still retain a deep-rooted jealousy of the executive branch and strong Republican prejudices, as they are called. Finally, this class contains more aggregate wisdom and more virtue than both the other two together. It commands nearly two-thirds of the property and almost one-half of the numbers of America, and has at present become almost irresistible from the name of the truly great and amiable man who, it has been said, is disposed to patronize it and from the influence which it has over the second class. The first class is nearly at the height of their power. They must decline or moderate, or another revolution will ensue. For the opinion of America is becoming daily more unfavorable to those radical changes which high-toned government requires. A conflict would terminate in the destruction of this class, or the liberties of their country may the guardian angel of America prevent both. Second, the second class is composed of those descriptions of men who are certainly more numerous with us than in any other part of the globe. First, those men who are so wise as to discover that their ancestors, and indeed all the rest of mankind, were and are fools. We have a vast over-proportion of these great men who, when you tell them that from the earliest period at which mankind devoted their attention to social happinesses, it has been their uniform judgment that a government over governments cannot exist. This is two governments operating on the same individual. Assume the smile of confidence, and tell you of two people traveling the same road, of a perfect and precise division of the duties of the individual. Still, however, the political apathogen is as old as the proverb that no man can serve two masters, and whoever will run their noodles against old proverbs will be sure to break them however hard they may be. And if they broke only their own, all would be right. But it is very horrible to reflect that all our numbskills must be cracked in concert. Second, the tremors who from sympathetic indecision are always united with, and when not regularly employed, always fight under the banners of these great men. These people are forever at market, and when parties are nearly equally divided, they get very well paid for their services. Thirdly, the indolent that is almost every second man of independent fortune you meet in America. These are quite easy, and can live under any government. If men can be said to live, who scarcely breathe, and if breathing was attended with any bodily exertion, would give up their small portion of life in despair. These men do not swim with the stream as the tremors do, but are dragged like mud at the bottom. As they have no other weight than their tat flesh, they are hardly worth mentioning when we speak of the sentiments and opinions of America. As the second class never can include any of the yeomanry of the union, who never affect superior wisdom, and can have no interest but the public good, it can only be said to exist as the birth of government, and as soon as the first and third classes become more decided in their views, this will divide with each and dissipate like a mist, or sink down into what are called moderate men, and become the tools and instruments of others. These people are prevented by a cloud from having any view, and if they are not virtuous, they at least preserve the appearance, which in this world amounts to the same thing. Third, at the head of the third class appear the old rigid Republicans, who although few in number, are still formidable. Reverence will follow these men in spite of detraction, as long as wisdom and virtue are esteemed among mankind. They are joined by the true Democrats, who are in general fanatics and enthusiasts, and some few sensible, charming madmen. A decided majority of the yeomanry of America will, for length of years, be ready to support these two descriptions of men. But as this last class is forced to act as a residuary legate, and receive all the trash and filth, it is in some measure disgraced, and its influence weakened. Thirdly, the freebooters and plunderers who infest all countries, and ours perhaps, as little as any other whatever. These men have that natural antipathy to any kind or sort of government, that a rogue has to a halter. In number they are few indeed. Such characters are the offspring of dissipation and want, and there is not that country in the world where so much real property is shared so equally among so few citizens. For where property is easily acquired by fair means, very few indeed will resort to foul. Lastly, by the poor mob in Follick's Pachus, the property of whoever will feed them and take care of them. Let them be spared. Let the burden of taxation sit lightly on their shoulders. But alas, this is not their fate. It is here that government forever falls, with all its weight. It is here that the proposed government will press where it should scarcely be felt. In this third class may be counted men of the greatest mental powers, and of as sublime virtue as any in America. They at present command nearly one-third of the property, and above half the numbers of the United States. And in either event they must continue to increase in influence by great desertions from both the other classes. If the proposed government is not adopted, theirs will be the prevalent opinion. The object of this class either is or will be purely federal, a union of independent states, not a government of individuals, and should the proposed federal plan fail from the obstinacy of those who will listen to no conditional amendments, although such as they cannot disapprove, or should it ultimately, in its execution upon a fair trial, disappoint the wishes and expectations of our country. Then a union purely federal is what the reasonable and dispassionate patriots of America must bend their views to. My countrymen, preserve your jealousy, reject suspicion. It is the fiend that destroys public and private happiness. I know some weak, but very few, if any wicked men, in public confidence. And learn this most difficult and necessary lesson, that on the preservation of parties, public liberty depends. Whenever men are unanimous on great public questions, whenever there is but one party, freedom ceases, and despotism commences. The object of a free and wise people should be so to balance parties, that from the weakness of all, you may be governed by the moderation of the combined judgments of the whole, not tyrannized over by the blind passions of few individuals. The End of Letter No. 4, Section No. 52, recorded by Robert Scott, June 18, 2007.


Hello, and welcome to this CUBE conversation here in Palo Alto, California. I'm John Furrier, host of theCUBE. We're here with a great guest, JT Gear CEO and founder of ANOPS Hot Startup. JT, welcome to this CUBE conversation. Hey, thanks John, thanks for having me. It sounds like we know each other. We used to run into each other at meetups. So yeah, good to be here. It's so, it's fun to talk to you because I know you've been scratching the DevOps itch from the beginning. Before DevOps was DevOps, before infrastructure of code was infrastructure as code. All that's played out. So it's really a great ride. I know you had a good time doing it. A lot of action though, if you look at DevOps, it's kind of like this new, I won't say DevOps 2.0 because it kind of cliche, but you start to see the maturation of companies besides the early adopters and the people who are hardcore adopting. And they realize, this is amazing. And then they replatform in the cloud and they go, great, let's do more. And next thing you know, they have an operations issue and they got to really kind of stabilize. And then also not break anything. So this is kind of the wheelhouse of what you guys are doing. NOps reminds me of no ops, no operations. No, you know, we don't want to have a lot of extra stuff. This is a big thing. Take a minute to explain the company, what you guys stand for and what you're all about. Yeah, so, you know, our main focus is more on the operation side, right?  But, you know, when you're building cloud infrastructure, you have to make trade-offs, right? You have to, in maybe some environment, maybe you have to optimize for SLA and maybe another workload, you have to optimize for, you know, maybe costs, right? So what we're on a mission to do is to make sure that companies are able to make the right trade-offs, right? We help companies to make sure all their workload, every single resource in the cloud is aligned with the business needs, you know? So we do a lot of cool things by, you know, bringing accountability, mapping, workloads to different teams. But yeah, the end goal is, can we make sure that every single resource on AWS is aligned with the business needs? Yeah, and they're also adding stuff, every reinvent, a zillion more services get announced. So a lot of stuff going on. I got to ask you while I got you here. What is the definition of cloud ops these days from your standpoint? And why is it important? A lot of folks are looking at this and they want to have stable operations. They love the cloud, really can't deny the cloud value at all. But cloud ops has become a big topic. What is cloud ops and why is it important? Right. I think first of all, like you just mentioned, like Amazon keeps on launching more services, right? It's over 200. So the environment is very complex, right? And then complexity within the services is pretty, you really need to be the main expert to, for example, know everything about Google. So, you know, operation to us is, let's say if you find a critical issue, let's say you want to, you know, enable multi-AZ on your RDS, for example. And it's critical because, you know, you're running a high availability workload on AWS. How do you follow up on that, right? To us, operation is, how do you build a cloud backlog? How do you prioritize? How do you come together as a team to actually remediate those issues? No one is tackling that job, right? Everyone's surface is like, here's a thousand things that are wrong with your environment. No one is focused on like, how do you go from these issues to prioritization, to backlog, to actually coming together as a team, you know, and fixing some of those issues? That's what operation means to us. I know, it's totally hard because sometimes you don't even know what's going on. I got to ask you, why is it harder now? Why are people, I mean, I get the impression that people like look in the other way, but the good, the problem kind of goes away. What are the challenges? What's the big blocker from getting at the root cause or trying to solve these problems? What's the big thing that's holding people back? Yeah, I mean, when I first got into, you know, IT, you know, I was working in data center and every time we needed a server, you know, we had to ask for approvals, right? And you finally got a server. But nowadays, you know, anyone could provision resources and normally you have different people within the teams provisioning resources and you can have hundreds of different teams, right? Who are provisioning resources? So the complexity and the speed that we are, you know, provisioning resources across multiple people, if it just continues to go higher and higher.  So that's where the complexity comes in, right? So a question I get a lot from people when we talk about DevOps and CloudOps or Cloud Management or whatever kind of buzzwords out there, it kind of comes down to CloudOps and Cloud Management. It seems to be the category people focus on. How is CloudOps different than say the traditional Cloud Management? And what impact does it have for customers and why should they care and what do they need in Ops? Right, so one of the things we do and we do think that CloudOperation is sort of an evolution from Cloud Management. We make sure that every single resource first, first of all belongs in a workload. So, and workload could be a group of microservices and then every single workload has owners, like defined owners who are responsible for making sure they manage budget, they're responsible for security. That normally doesn't exist, right? Cloud is this like black box, you know, where multiple people are provisioning resources, you know, everyone tries to sort of build sort of a structure to kind of see like what are these resources for? What are these resources for? As part of on-boarding to Ops, what we do, we actually, you know, analyze all your metadata, we create like five, six workloads. And then we say, here's a bucket where this is totally unassigned, right? And then we actually walk them through assigning different roles and also we walk them through to kind of look under this unallocated resources and assign resources for those as well. So once you're done, every single resource has clear definition, right? Is this a compliant, you know, HIPAA workload? What are the runbooks? What is this for, John? I don't know if you heard that before. Sometimes there are workloads running in cloud people don't even know who's the owner, right? So after you're done with AdOps and after you're managing AdOps, you know, managing your workload on AdOps, you have full visibility and clear understanding of what are the purpose of these workloads? I see it not in your head. It's funny you mentioned the workloads being kind of either not knowing the owners, but also we see people with the workloads, sometimes it's like throwing a switch and leaving the hose on the water on.  Why did I leave, what is this? So there's a lot of things that you could miss. This brings up the point you just said, and what you said earlier, aligning resources across the cloud and having accountability. And then you mentioned at the top of this interview that aligning with the business needs. I find that fascinating. So I would like to take a minute to explain that because it sounds really hard. I get how you can align the resources and do some things, identify what's going on, accountability, kind of map that, that's good tech. How does that, how do you get that to the alignment on the business side? Yeah, I mean, we start by, first of all, like I said, you know, we use machine learning to create these workloads. And then we ask basic questions about the workload, you know, what is this workload for? Do you need to meet with any kind of compliances for this workload? Yeah, what is your SLA for this workload? You know, depending on that, we make recommendations. So we kind of ask those questions and we also welcome do where they create roles. Like we ask like who's responsible for creating budgets or managing security for this workload. And guess what? Also the, you know, the bucket where resources are unallocated for, we ask for, you know, owners for that as well. Like in this bucket, who's the owner for, who's going to monitor the budget and things like that.  Talk about the complexity side of it. I love that conversation around the number of services. You said 200 services. I mean, depending on how you count, what you call services in the thousands, there's so many different things, knobs to turn on Amazon and web services. So why are people focused on the complexity and the partnering side? Because, you know, it's the clouds of the API based system. So you're dealing with a lot of different diverse resources. So you have complexity and diversity. Can you talk me through how that works? Because that's, that seems to be a tough beast to tame the difference between the complexity of services and also working with other people. Yeah, for sure. Like this is normal to have, you know, maybe thousands of Lambda functions in your application. We were working with a customer where within last month, there were nine million containers that launched and got terminated, right? They're pretty much leveraging auto-steering and things like that. So these environments are like very complex. You know, there's a lot of moving pieces, even, you know, depending on the type of services they're using. So again, what we do, you know, when we look at tags, we look at other variables like environments and we look at who's provisioning those resources and we try to group them together. And that way there's accountability. You know, if the cost goes up for one workload, we're able to show that team like, hey, your cost is going up. And also we can show an unallocated bucket that, hey, within last week, your cost is, you know, $4,000 higher in an unallocated bucket. What would you like to move these resources to? This is like an ongoing game, you know? You know, JT, I was talking with my friend, Jerry Chen, who's at Greylock Partners in the VC, he's been on theCUBE many times. A couple of years ago, we were talking about how you can build a business within the cloud in the shadows of the clouds, what he called it. But I called it more the enabling side and that's happened now. You're seeing the massive growth. I'm also talking to some CXOs, CIOs or CISOs and they're like trying to figure out which companies that are evolving and growing to buy from, to get the technology. And they always say to me, John, I'm looking for game changing kind of impact. I'm looking for obviously efficiency and, you know, enablement, you know, the classic kind of criteria. So how would you guys position yourselves to those buyers out there that might want to look at you guys as a solution and ops? What game changing aspect of what you do is out there? How would you talk to that CIO or CISO or buyer out in the enterprise and the ISPs or NSPs? What would you say to them? Yeah, I think the biggest, the advantage, and I think right now it's a necessity that you hear these stories where, you know, people, provision resources, they don't even know which project is it for, you know, it's just very hard to govern the cloud environment, right? I believe we're the only tool where you want to compromise on the speed, right? The whole reason you're in cloud because you want to innovate, you want to move faster, no one wants to throttle that, right? But I think what's important, you need to make sure everything is aligned with the business value and we allow people to do that. You know, we can go fast at the same time, you can have some sort of guardrails so they're a proper ownership, there's accountability, people are collaborating and people are also right sizing, terminating resources they're not using, it's like, you know, I think if companies are looking for a tool that's going to drive better accountability on how people build and collaborate on cloud, I think we'll find the best solution. So people are evolving with the cloud and you mentioned terminating of services, that's a huge deal in cloud native, things are being spun up and turned off all the time. So you need to have good log, you have a good visibility, observability is one of the hottest buzzwords out there, we see resilient companies saying, hey, we're observability, which is to me is just monitoring stuff, making sure you're tracking everything. So when you have all this and you start to operationalize this next gen, next level cloud scale, cost optimization and visibility is huge. What is the secret sauce that you guys offer because the change management is a big one too, teams are changing too, cost, team, accountability, all this is kind of, it's not just speeds and feeds, it's kind of the intersection of both. What's your take on that reaction to that? Yeah, I think it's the Delta, right? So change management, what you're really looking for is not like a fire hose, right? You're looking for what changed, what the root cause, who did it, what happened, right? Because it's totally normal for someone to provision maybe a thousand or even a million containers. But how many of those got shut down? What is the Delta? And if there is an anomaly, what is the root cause, right? And how we fix it. So the way we approach change management is change management is a lot different. We really get to the root cause analysis and we really help companies to really show what changed and how they can take action to immediate if there were issues. I want to put a little plug in for you guys. I noticed you guys have a really strong net promoter score and you have happy customers also get partners, a lot of enablement there. You kind of got a lot of things going on. Explain what you guys are all about. How did you get here? What's the day in the life of a customer that you're serving? Why the score so high? Take us through a use case of someone getting that value. Yeah. So I come from like a consulting background, John. So I was migrating companies through AWS when EC2 was in beta. And then I founded a consulting company over a hundred employees really successful AWS premier partner called nClouds. And so NOS was born there because it was born out of consulting company. There are a lot of other partners who are leveraging the tool to help their customers. And it goes back to our point earlier, John, like Amazon has two under services, right? We are noticing customers are open to work with partners and with different partners to really help them to make sure they're making the right decisions when they're building on cloud. So a lot of the partners, a lot of the consulting companies are leveraging NOps to deliver value to their customers. As far as how we actually operate, we pay attention to what customers are looking for, what are the next sort of challenges customers are facing in a cloud environment. We're like super obsessed. We're trying to figure out, how do we make sure every single resource is aligned with the business value without slowing companies down? So that really drives us, we're constantly working with customers to stay true to our mission. And that's the ethos of DevOps, moving fast, the old quote Mark Zuckerberg used to have, move fast, break stuff. And then he revised it to move fast and make it stable, which is essentially an operational thing, right? So you're starting to see that maturity. I noticed that you guys also have a really cool pricing model, very easy to get in and you have a high end too. So talk us through about how to engage with you guys, how do people get involved? Just click and just jump in. They're buying software, they're buying services. Take a minute to explain how people can work with you.  And once you sign up, if you do need help with remediating high-risk issues, we can bring in partners. We have a strong partner ecosystem. We could definitely help you to introduce to like partners, but it's as simple as just signing up and just taking it out for a spin, I guess. JT, great chatting with you. You've been there from early days of DevOps, born in the field, getting close to the customers. And you mentioned EC2 and Beta, they just celebrate their 15th birthday. And I remember one of my startups that didn't actually get off the blocks, they didn't even have custom domains at that time. It was still the long member of the long URL. Everything was ephemeral, right? Like when you restart server, everything will go away. That's a cool time. And I just remember saying to myself, man, every entrepreneur is going to use this service. Who would ever go out and buy and host a server? So, you were there from the beginning and it's been great to see the success. Thanks for coming on theCUBE. Oh, thanks, John. Okay, JT, thanks so much. This is a CUBE conversation here in Palo Alto. I'm John Furrier, your host. Thanks for watching.


I recently asked you what videos you'd like me to make and you specifically said you liked the idea of top phrases to calm anxious kids. Of course you should adapt these and make them work for you. So think about what words and phrases feel comfortable for you to say, adapt them, make them your own, explore them with the child, talk to them. So we're going to look at phrases around safety, phrases around physiology and phrases around acknowledgement and validation. So first of all, safety, phrases around safety. So when we're anxious and particularly if we're kind of having an anxiety or panic attack, then often the thing that is a big concern is a feeling of being unsafe, of worrying that you know things are going to go wrong, that I'm not safe here. This is particularly true of children who've experienced trauma, often they feel unsafe, unsafe. And the words that they need to hear from you, their trusted adult more than anything are often words around safety, actually using that word safe, you are safe. Phrase is like, I'm here, I've got you. And if it's appropriate for you to do so, sometimes actually physically kind of holding that child, letting them know physically knowing that you're there, I'm here, I've got you. Really simply, it's okay, you're safe, reassuring them that they are safe, particularly again, kids who experience trauma, sometimes this will revisit us in kind of flashbacks and it's like we're reliving an unsafe moment that happened in the past, and it feels like it's happening right now. And that's a really important thing to understand about conditions like post-traumatic stress disorder is that in that moment when we have that flashback, whether it's kind of we're visualising it or it's a flashback of feelings, we feel like the trauma is happening again right now. And at the time the trauma was happening, we probably weren't safe, but right now we are. So we need those trusted adults, those friends, those colleagues, those teachers, everyone who's around us to reassure us, it's okay, you're safe now, it's safe. Another one that can be helpful is to remind a child that you're going to stay with them whilst this feeling passes, so you're going to be okay, I'm going to stay with you, that kind of thing. So stuff around safety and have a think about what phrases around safety might work for you and the child or young person that you've got in mind. Secondly, is thinking around phrases that acknowledge the kind of physiology of anxiety. So here you need to do a little bit of background work with the child and help them to understand why they feel the way that they do when they have a panic attack or an onset of kind of big anxious feelings. And we can think then about, you know, depending on the age and stage of the child, helping them to understand that the way that our body responds, it's getting ready for that kind of fight or flight and so we're getting ready to kind of battle with a tiger or a bear or something. But sometimes that feeling isn't helpful to us because actually we don't physically kind of need to run or to fight, but rather we're dealing with battles in our head rather than kind of physical ones. So if you were in a kind of dangerous situation from which you needed to run or fight or whatever, this stuff would be really helpful, it would make you faster and stronger, you know, this is why people can do incredible things in those kind of moments. But day to day, if the thing that's making you anxious is kind of more internal or the threat is kind of perceived or imagined or remembered, that's not helpful. But the physiology is the same, so we can talk about how that feels, how does it feel in your tummy, how does it feel in your heart, your hands, we can explore that and normalise it a bit and then we can help explain to a child that when your body does this, it can only kind of maintain this heightened level of kind of overwhelm and anxious anxiety and that physiological response for a certain period of time and that as time goes by this will begin to dissipate. So we know that this feeling is going to pass, we can talk with them about this at a time of calm and then at times of heightened anxiety remind them. So phrases like, you know, this is, you know, your body is responding in an anxious way but this will pass or your body can't feel like this forever, let's give it a minute and see if you feel just slightly better then and then we'll think about the next minute. So thinking about the feeling that that will pass, you can also acknowledge that you've got through this before, you can get through it again and I think here an important thing to understand is if you haven't experienced things like panic attacks, every time you have one, even if you've had hundreds and I've had hundreds, every time you have one for maybe just a brief time it feels like you're going to die, it's horrible, you feel like you're having a heart attack or something and that you're going to die, it feels completely impossible that you could get through even the next minute and having someone that you trust telling you in a reassuring way you've got through this before, you will get through it again, this is just your body responding, it will calm down, this threat is perceived not real or you know those kinds of things explaining that in whatever way you've explored it with that person before can be super, super helpful and of course you might combine this with the you're safe, I've got you or you know I'm going to stay, that kind of thing too. Finally the third thing is about acknowledging and validating, so phrases and words that acknowledge and validate that the person feels anxious. What can happen sometimes depending on the thing, the trigger, the cause if there is one for this anxiety for the child or young person sometimes what can happen is that people around will kind of dismiss or minimize that concern and what you have to remember is that if a child is presenting in a really anxious and panicked way regardless of whether you agree that they should be worried or anxious or panicking and regardless of whether you can understand that their fear, their anxiety, their panic is real and right now they don't need this to be dismissed or judged, they need it to be acknowledged that you feel this way, you don't have to say whether it's right or wrong you just say I acknowledge that you feel scared right now or you know it looks like you're really worried right now or I can see you're very anxious or you're you know you're panicking so kind of using our emotion coaching acknowledging how they're feeling rather than dismissing that they shouldn't feel that way so acknowledging how they feel and then sometimes just as simply as going that must be really hard or I'm sorry that X is making you feel very anxious so acknowledging the feeling naming it and again always naming stuff if we can is really helpful because it gives a context, it gives the child the words they need next time but also it makes it less scary kind of stuff that's in our head and doesn't have a name is much harder to deal with than things that have got a name and a label that always makes it much more tangible and manageable particularly for small children who might not know these words at the beginning so we name it we acknowledge it and then we don't necessarily have to fix it but again we might be using those kind of safety phrases I'm going to stay with you you're here I'm safe but we might also invite the child to begin to talk about that and explore it so instead of dismissing this worry we validate it and say I can see that X is really worrying you do you want to talk about that or do you want to draw that or would you like to show me in play depending on where they are and quite how anxious they are right now it might be that they want to begin to explore this through different means it might be that they're in a moment right now where this isn't going to work and you're going to say I can see this is really worrying you I'm going to sit with you until you feel calmer and later if you want to we can begin to unpick that together okay so you're going to pick your moment you might say to a child for example that sounds really hard do you want to talk about it so again we're not saying your worry is you know this is how to fix it or I'm going to dismiss it or anything like that we're saying that sounds really hard if it feels hard to them we acknowledge that sounds really hard would you like to talk about it or how can I help you and opening up that conversation rather than layering on our thoughts our feelings our advice not always helpful in that first instance so knowledge and validate finally here sometimes we will find that someone will kind of minimize their own anxiety and say I know it's really stupid that I'm worrying about X but and actually here we need to say it's not really stupid it's not really silly I can tell it's worrying you therefore it matters to me or therefore it matters and so saying this is okay and that doesn't mean to say that we're not going to work with them to try and overcome that worry find different ways around it or look for some evidence of different ways of thinking or whatever but we need to let them know it's not silly if it worries you I want to hear about it yeah so it doesn't matter how strange or small a worry is if it is making someone feel anxious concerned worried then as the trusted adult in their life we want to hear that we want to help them to feel safe we want to help them to find different ways of managing it so there you go different ways of talking into and supporting a young person who's anxious thinking around phrases around safety you're thinking around phrases around physiology and the fact that this is going to pass and you're thinking about phrases around acknowledgement and validation and you're going to take those ideas you're going to make them your own and ideally explore them with the child or young person that you're looking to explore them at a time of calm and talk to them about what is a helpful way for me to talk to you I can't tell you all the answers here but they most likely can be flexible in your approach and keep trying different things if the first thing doesn't work good luck leave a comment down below letting me know how you get on with this if there are particular phrases that you found helpful because other people might read them and pick them up for themselves too and yeah just let me know how you get on good luck if you haven't please subscribe and tune in for new videos on Tuesdays and Fridays take care stay safe and be kind to yourselves bye


TfNN, headline, news update. Good morning everybody. I'm Tommy O'Brien, coming to you live from TfNN headquarters in St. Petersburg, Florida, 9 a.m. Eastern time on Thursday, 30 minutes to go until that opening bell, and we got markets in the futures starting off in positive territory. Dow futures right now, up 81 points, trading $26,941. We got the S&P futures up four at $3,001. NASDAQ futures up 8.79, 37. Oil positive yet again, up eight pennies right now at $60.51, and we got the 10-year trading at 2.084 percent. As we start things off this morning, we'll jump over, and we're going to start it off with a couple of news items coming out this morning. CPI, we've been waiting for this number, biggest gain in nearly one and a half years. So the number here, overall CPI, edged up 0.1 percent last month, held back by cheaper gasoline and food prices. We'll get into the core number here. Core number, excluding food and energy rising 0.3 percent last month. I want to scroll down to the end of this article because to see the prices of oil, where are we? Oil has risen a lot. They had it in this article, too bad I can't find it real quick. Jobless claims also coming out at 8.30, fall to three-month low, 209,000 unemployment for the month. That number as this economy marches on. With those two news items, we'll jump back to the charts, give you a little context of where we are this morning. There's your 8.30 a.m. volatility on that news. Currently the Dow 26,948 had been about 30 to 40 points higher. NASDAQ 100, pretty similar story. We were up at higher territory for most of the overnight session. NASDAQ 100 trading 79,41 got a little bit of a negative reaction on that news. S&Ps trading at 3,002 had been up at 3,006 for most of that overnight trading. Crude oil almost made it to $61. Crude trading at $60.65. Gold contract, quite a run it had on the run yesterday, starting when Chairman Powell's remarks were made public at 8.30 a.m. yesterday morning and we run all the way up to almost 14.30. You got gold trading at 14.18 and the Euro-US dollar trading 1.12.71. Stay tuned folks, you got to treat Larry Pezzavento coming up right now. I'll be back at 10 o'clock, Basil Chapman filling in for Tom. We've got live programming all day at TFNN.  He begins speaking at 10 a.m. Eastern time, I believe. Going to take some questions over there. Might be some headlines as they hit the market. We'll see what happens. Stay tuned folks, Larry Pezzavento coming up right now.


Hello! My name is Olexi and today I will be talking about transportation. Netherlands is perhaps the best place for cyclists. This is why bicycles are so popular here. You can find cheap and secondhand ones on places like Markplatz on Facebook Marketplace. The average price would be from 50 to 100 euros. Oh, but you should keep in mind that bike theft is a very common thing here. That's why you should invest in a decent bike lock. Or just don't leave it in places like train station. When buying a suspiciously cheap bike, you can always check if it is marked as stolen at bike theft register. Links below the video. It is very useful to know how to repair a flat bike tire. It will happen to you at least once. They sell cheap repair kits in action and there is also a tutorial in the description. It's really easy.  You can also buy them for cheap in action. If you don't want to deal with all of this, you can use local services such as swap feeds. They offer a monthly bike subscription for around 12 euros. If something breaks, they fix it. Now let's talk about trains. The main train company in the Netherlands is called NS.  Also try to google around and look for day tickets. They are way cheaper than regular tickets. If you're sick and tired of paper tickets and receipts in your pockets, you can go digital and get yourself an oV-cheap card. A very useful application I could share with you is 9292. There you can put your location and your final destination and I will show you all the transfers you have to make. Looking for an escape from Dutch weather, Flixbus is one of the companies that offer international bus travels. Don't like buses? No problem. Whizzer and Reiner offer budget flights over Europe. The nearby airports they work with are in Dortmund, Dusseldorf and Eindhoven. Psst, don't travel when everybody's traveling, it's way cheaper. If you found this video to be useful, make sure to check our next video. Bye!