More handpicked essays just for you.
Jacksonian democrats dbq
7 principles of the constitutions
The principles of the united states constitution essay
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Chapter 1: (The Founding Fathers: An Age of Realism) The men who wrote the American constitution agreed with Thomas Hobbes that humans were naturally evil. Therefore, they agreed that in order to prevent a dictatorship or monarchy, the citizens should have influence in the government. The writers wanted a more ideal constitution, but they realized evil human motives would never change. One of the main goals of the constitution was to create a balanced government that would allow the citizens to prevent each other from being corrupt. The writers wanted to give citizens liberty, but they did not want to give people so much liberty that they would have an uncontrollable amount of power. The writers agreed that a citizen’s influence in government would be proportionate to that individual’s property. Humans are naturally evil. Evil humans in positions of power can make the positions corrupt. To prevent that corruptness, the positions of power should be influenced by the general public. The public is usually not all corrupt, and so by having the public has a say in government, they can prevent corruptness by voting for fairer laws and actions. This is the reason why the United States government is set up so well. The people elect representatives to speak for them, and through a chain of …show more content…
From 1812-1828, the political parties (Democrat and Republican) did not matter, because presidential elections were chosen by congress, without consulting the popular opinion. At this time, rapid expansion caused the banks to loan lots of money, and the banks hurt many people who were unable to pay their debt. People got involved in politics to fight the banks. Due to the banks hurting people, Jackson, too, wanted to fight them in politics. Striving for an end to corruption, in the famous “Jacksonian Democracy”, he became president in
You little tyrant king george off with your head.Since the Americans had a bad experience with one person having too much power they made a constitution that guarded against tyranny by, dividing power, making the branches able to check or limit each other, and dividing power between big and little states.
James Madison once said,” All men having power ought to be distrusted.” Through these words, Madison made the statement that not all government officials use their authority for good; some abuse that power and use it to gain more for themselves rather than vesting it within the people. This issue may lead to tyranny. Tyranny is when all powers belong to only one person or group. In May of 1787, the Constitutional Convention was held in Philadelphia to draft a better constitution. One of the topics that concerned many was how the constitution would guard against tyranny. Madison and the other delegates wanted a Constitution that would be strong enough to unite the states and the people together without letting there be one person or group gain too much power. They achieved this in several ways. Today, the U.S. Constitution guards against tyranny by including a separation of powers, federalism, and the fair representation of states.
At first, Andrew Jackson started off as a democrat, serving the people with his actions. For instance, in the document Indian Removal Document three, Jackson appeals to the indians and congress. He told them that the indians needed somewhere to go in an eloquent manner. To congress, it sounded like he was being morale for the indians, but in reality, he was still forcing the indians off their lands. Guarenting land for the indians is not as fair as letting them stay on their current ground and already beings to show his inner autocratic side.
The election of Andrew Jackson in 1828 brought a new wave of political ideas, especially since he created the Democratic party and their symbol. Jacksonian Democrats saw themselves as guardians of the Constitution, political democracy and individual liberty (aka social freedoms). I believe that this was not the case for the decisions made in Jackson’s presidency, and he was more of a “King Andrew” than a man of the common people.
The Constitution of the United States is one of the most iconic and important documents of all time. However, when it was first generated, its writing and ratification caused some major concerns. The purpose of the Constitution was to address the great number of issues of a new nation. To be more specific, the Constitution was meant to resolve the political, economic, and social problems of the country. Nevertheless, the document spurred much discussion and concern over people’s rights, the economy, and political corruption.
During and after the turmoil of the American Revolution, the people of America, both the rich and the poor, the powerful and the meek, strove to create a new system of government that would guide them during their unsure beginning. This first structure was called the Articles of Confederation, but it was ineffective, restricted, and weak. It was decided to create a new structure to guide the country. However, before a new constitution could be agreed upon, many aspects of life in America would have to be considered. The foremost apprehensions many Americans had concerning this new federal system included fear of the government limiting or endangering their inalienable rights, concern that the government’s power would be unbalanced, both within its branches and in comparison to the public, and trepidation that the voice of the people would not be heard within the government.
All hail King Andrew Jackson. In the election of 1824, presidential candidate Andrew Jackson had lost to John Quincy Adams, son of former president John Adams, in a brutal campaign war. Jackson sought revenge and did everything to sabotage Adams term as president, including branding his presidency the “corrupt bargain”, and giving his wife so much grief that she died. When Jackson finally became president and defeated Adams in 1828 his mantra was that the voice of the People must be heard, however many felt that he did not live up to his mantra. This raises the question: How democratic was Andrew Jackson? The term democratic can be defined as a government ruled by the people. Andrew Jackson was not democratic because of his mistreatment of the Native Americans, the decision of the bank, and his abuse of power.
Andrew Jackson began a whole new era in American history. Amongst his greatest accomplishments were evoking the "common man" to be interested in government and tailoring democracy to satisfy the same "common man's" needs. Of course, Jackson could not go about making such radical changes without supporters, but that never surfaced as a problem. Jacksonian Democrats, as they came to be called, were great in number during the 1820's and 1830's. They advocated all of the issues that President Jackson did, and did so with great vigor. They thought of themselves very highly because they recognized their responsibilities as American citizens. They realized that as political leaders they had a true purpose- to protect and serve the American people. The Jacksonians justified their view of themselves in their sincere attempts to guard the United States Constitution by both promoting equality of economic opportunity and increasing political democracy, but they had their downfalls with issues of individual liberties.
During the construction of the new Constitution, many of the most prominent and experienced political members of America’s society provided a framework on the future of the new country; they had in mind, because of the failures of the Articles of Confederation, a new kind of government where the national or Federal government would be the sovereign power, not the states. Because of the increased power of the national government over the individual states, many Americans feared it would hinder their ability to exercise their individual freedoms. Assuring the people, both Alexander Hamilton and James Madison insisted the new government under the constitution was “an expression of freedom, not its enemy,” declaring “the Constitution made political tyranny almost impossible.” (Foner, pg. 227) The checks and balances introduced under the new and more powerful national government would not allow the tyranny caused by a king under the Parliament system in Britain. They insisted that in order achieve a greater amount of freedom, a national government was needed to avoid the civil unrest during the system under the Articles of Confederation. Claiming that the new national government would be a “perfect balance between liberty and power,” it would avoid the disruption that liberty [civil unrest] and power [king’s abuse of power in England] caused. The “lackluster leadership” of the critics of the new constitution claimed that a large land area such as America could not work for such a diverse nation.
The Founders built certain protections for individual rights into this country's founding documents. The United States Constitution was one such document. In particular, such protections guard Americans who hold minority viewpoints from those who side with the majority. For example, the First Amendment protects the right of free speech to ensure that people who hold unpopular views have just as much freedom to express those views as do people who tend to agree with the majority. The United States Constitution, therefore, was intended to protect the individual rights of Americans from a tyrannical government and majority. However, today, the Electoral College does not represent the vibrant democracy into which the United States has grown.
Between 1787 and 1791 the Framers of the US Constitution established a system of government upon principles that had been discussed and partially implemented in many countries over the course of several centuries, but never before in such a pure and complete design, which we call a constitutional republic. Since then, the design has often been imitated, but important principles have often been ignored in those imitations, with the result that their governments fall short of being true republics or truly constitutional. The Framers of the Constitution tried very hard to design a system that would not allow any one person or group within the government to gain too much power. Personally, I think they succeeded. In order to guard against what one of the Founding Fathers called an "excess of democracy," the Constitution was built with many ways to limit the government's power. Among these methods were separating the three branches, splitting the legislature so laws are carefully considered, and requiring members of Congress to meet certain criteria to qualify for office. The Founders did leave a few problems along with their system.
The question at hand can be summarized in one of Madison’s statements in Federalist 51; “A dependence on the people is, no doubt, the primary control on the government; but experience has taught mankind the necessity of auxiliary precautions” (145). Since one of the principles the defend constitution is founded upon is the liberty and the protection of the natural rights of the individual, people will have a chance to influence the government to promote the common good. However, the problem of the people’s potential desire for injustice could threaten the values and system the Constitution tries to protect. The Federalist papers argue for parameters that will try to secure both justice and the general good in a republican government.
A constitution is the system of fundamental principles according to which a nation is governed. Our founding fathers created the US Constitution to set specific standards for our country. We must ask ourselves why our founding fathers created the Constitution in the first place. America revolted against the British due to their monarchy form of government. After the American Revolution, each of the original 13 colonies operated under its own rules of government. Most states were against any form of centralized rule from the government. They feared that what happened in England would happen again. They decided to write the Articles of Confederation, which was ratified in 1781. It was not effective and it led to many problems. The central government could not regulate commerce between states, deal with foreign governments or settle disputes. The country was falling apart at its seams. The central government could not provide assistance to the state because there wasn’t a central army. When they realized that the Articles of Confederation was not up to par, they held a convention, known as the Constitutional Convention of 1787. As a result of t...
The beginning of the Constitution provides a basis for one to question the righteousness of the Framers intentions. The Constitution starts by saying, “ We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by the Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.” This was not a true statement. That phrase excluded black people, women, and men who lacked wealth. Government under the British did the same thing; all the power was made accessible to only the rich. The American Revolution was aimed at acquiring equal and fair representation in government for everyone. Next, the Constitution established a Supreme Court. The Supreme Court was a group of selected people who would make major legal decisions for the country. These people were not elected or chosen by the people, they were chosen by the government. This placed a form of power over the people of the United States that had been held by King George. The Supreme Court had the power to ma...
The Founding Fathers were a revolutionary group, diverse in personalities and ideologies but shared the common goal of American liberty. They understood that the citizens should have a say in their government, and the government only obtains its power from the citizen’s consent. In order to avoid endless debates on issues that needed to be solved immediately, the revolutionary leaders compromised their beliefs. Joseph J. Ellis writes of the compromises that changed the constitutional debate into the creation of political parties in, The Founding Brothers. The 3 main chapters that show cased The Founding Brothers’ compromises are The Dinner, The Silence, and The Collaborators.