January 3, 2026
Founders or Finessers?
The Constitution Was a Coup
Commenters clap back: 'Not a coup' vs 'rigged by elites'—and the memes are fire
TLDR: A fiery essay says the Constitution was an elite power grab, but commenters argue it was negotiated, capped by the Bill of Rights, and ratified by all states—so “coup” is a stretch. Others demand missing context on colonial expansion, while memes roast 1787 like it just dropped new patch notes
An explosive essay just claimed the U.S. Constitution was basically a stealth coup by elites, not a heroic finale to the Revolution—and the comments lit up like the Fourth of July. History diehards rushed in swinging: several insisted it can’t be a coup if it was ratified by every state and hammered out with concessions like the Bill of Rights. One top reply flatly says the system was negotiated by the people and states—translation: dramatic headline, shaky definition.
But the thread didn’t stop at semantics. Another reader charged the piece with cherry-picking, pointing out it omits the ugly, ongoing fight over expansionist wars against Native nations—meaning the real story wasn’t just Wall Street vs. farmers, but empire vs. restraint. Meanwhile, a smaller crew nodded along with the revisionist angle, cheering the takedown of “state-backed capitalism,” while skeptics accused the author of remixing 1787 with 2024 buzzwords. The meme squad? Brutal. “1787 Patch Notes: Centralization Buff, Articles of Confederation Nerf,” “Bill of Rights DLC saved the game,” and “Press F to pay respects to the Articles” all made the rounds. Verdict from the crowd: the essay is spicy, but calling it a coup? That’s the fight—and the internet’s not done arguing
Key Points
- •The article challenges the “Standard Story” that the Constitution remedied a chaotic “Critical Period” under the Articles of Confederation.
- •It argues the Constitution was a counter‑revolutionary consolidation by public creditors, land speculators, and mercantile protectionists.
- •The piece applies Franz Oppenheimer and Albert Jay Nock’s distinction between economic and political means to interpret the Founding.
- •It uses Roderick Long’s “conflationism” taxonomy to critique portrayals of markets and state‑capitalist structures.
- •Kevin Carson is cited to claim hierarchical firms result from government intervention, not free markets.