Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Federalist party vs anti federalist
Abolitionist research paper
Usi.8d abolitionist movement
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Federalist party vs anti federalist
After American colonialists had succeeded in over throwing British rule, the thirteen states were troubled by a complicated dilemma, an economic crisis with some calling for tax relief while others demanded stringent fiscal enforcement. Some believed that the revolution had not gone far enough, while others believed it had gone too far. The Framers who created the American Constitution took on the task of appeasing these two seemingly incongruous views. Woody Holton, in Unruly Americans and the Origins of the Constitution, attempts to reveal how the Framers acted in favour of those who believed the Revolution had gone too far, while trying to appease the majority – American farmers – were in favour of more democracy. Holton exemplifies how these two conflicting beliefs played out in post-Revolutionary America by describing one of the farmers' rebellions that intimidated the American elite. In Virginia, Greenbrier farmers, lead by Adonijah Mathews, staged an uprising against high taxes. As Holton put's it, the fact that the Virginia farmers had succeeded in intimidating state government proved to the elite the extent to which the will of the majority had become to powerful (Holton, 12). Holton provides ample examples of rebellion, illustrating the fact that 'ordinary Americans', mainly farmers, did not agree with the Frames that the revolution had created a republic that was too democratic. Holton's evidence proves the contrary, that ordinary Americans thought that the thirteen state governments didn't listen to them enough. (Holton, 153). The description of these rebellions also establishes the link between rebellion and tax relief. Holton points out that “Rebellions and confrontations resulted in relief where petitions and ... ... middle of paper ... ...rgues that Madison was instead holding to political principles formed at the dawning of the Revolution (Holton 259). Madison was consistently worried about the abuse of power he attributed the the natural states of governing bodies. Thus when Madison perceived the huge amount of power held by bondholders over a federal government that also had great power, Madison was repelled. Holton argues that the Framers formulated a constitution that appeased both the bondholders and allowed for the reduction in taxes paid. Holton cites evidence on how much bondholders actually gained from the Funding Bill. For example, he states “that by 1792 four out of five dollars collected by the federal government was disbursed to bondholders” (Holton 266). Works Cited Holton, W. (2008). Unruly americans and the origins of the constitution (1 pbk ed.). New York: Hill and Wang.
Gary B. Nash argues that the American Revolution portrayed “radicalism” in the sense on how the American colonies and its protesters wanted to accommodate their own government. Generally what Gary B. Nash is trying to inform the reader is to discuss the different conditions made by the real people who were actually fighting for their freedom. In his argument he makes it clear that throughout the revolution people showed “radicalism” in the result of extreme riots against the Stamp Act merchants, but as well against the British policies that were implemented. He discusses the urgency of the Americans when it came to declaring their issues against the British on how many slaves became militants and went up against their masters in the fight for a proclamation to free themselves from slavery. But he slowly emerges into the argument on how colonists felt under the
Zinn goes into detail how proletarian unrest, namely Shays’ Rebellion and the Whiskey Rebellion, caused unease amongst the wealthy. The solution, according to James Madison in Federalist #10, was a unifying Constitution. Madison believed that it would be easier to quell uprisings and dissent if the government was much larger; instead of unruly residents solely dealing with a state’s governing body, they would have to deal with the entire country (156).
Within the pages of One United People: The Federalist Papers and the National Idea, author Ed Millican dissects not only The Federalist piece by piece, but scrutinizes numerous works of other authors in regards to the papers written by Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay. As a result, a strong conclusion asserts that the motives of The Federalist was to create a sturdy nation-state but above all, that American polity is far more complex than pluralism and a free-market economy.
The Shays Rebellion were series of protests in 1786 and 1787 by American farmers. However, protests began before Shays Rebellion, the Massachusetts protest convention, circa of 1780 is a prime example of this, “...The great men are going to get all we have and I think it is time for us to rise and put a stop to it, and have no more courts, nor sheriffs, nor collectors nor lawyers....”.(B) Many farmers in this area suffered from high debt as they tried to start new farms. Unlike many other state legislatures in the 1780s, the Massachusetts government didn't respond to the economic crisis . As a result local sheriffs seized many farms and some farmers who couldn't pay their debts were put in prison.These conditions led to the first major armed rebellion in the post-Revolutionary United States called Shays Rebellion. Anti-Federalist were primality poor uneducated farmers. An exception of a the poor Anti Federalist stereotype is George Mason, whom is a huge political influence of the Bill of Rights, exploits his ideology in his Virginia Bill of Rights “That
One’s ability to analyze the motives of the Framers necessitates some understanding of the sense of national instability instilled in the US its first form of government, the Articles of Confederation in granting little power to the central government; in particular, focusing on the economic turmoil and it’s effects on the Framers. In his analysis of America in the Articles, Beard comprehensively summarizes the failures of the Articles as compromising to the “national defense, protection of private property, and advancement of commerce,” (Beard, 36) in the US. Additionally, Beard utilizes these indisputable truths to establish a case for what he believes to be the self-interested influences that urged the Framers to craft an undemocratic Constitution. As Beard puts it, the state centered control of the US under the Articles caused the economic
At the time of the convention, farmers were the debtor class and were prone to revolt. Farmers, who lived all across the United States, sought debt relief and tax relief (Beard, 28). The weight of the debt at the time was crushing small American farmers who were being forced to pay their debts by selling their property for less than its value (Holton, 90). These debtors sought relief in many legal forms. For example, they asked for the “abolition of imprisonment, paper money, laws delaying the collection of debts, propositions requiring debtors to accept land in lieu of specie at a valuation fixed by a board of arbitration” (Beard, 28). However, they also sought relief through revolt (ex. Shays’ Rebellion) (Beard 28). Their desires contrast those of the creditors, stockholders, manufacturers, and shippers of their time (Beard, 29).
During the American Revolution, the Americans aspired to keep their government as far away from the resemblance of the British government as possible. Politics were changing in a time where the monarchs ruled the American people, that had to be put to a stop. States’ rights were being advocated into the new United States government as much as humanly possible. James Madison was a helper in writing the Federalist papers along with John Jay and Alexander Hamilton. Madison writes “you must first enable the government to control the governed” (Doc I), which demonstrates the authority that the Federalists initially wanted
Brinkley, Alan. The Unfinished Nation: A Concise History of the American People. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2010. Print.
In 1789, the Confederation of the United States, faced with the very real threat of dissolution, found a renewed future with the ratification of the Constitution of the United States. This document created a structure upon which the citizens could build a future free of the unwanted pitfalls and hazards of tyrannies, dictatorship, or monarchies, while securing the best possible prospects for a good life. However, before the establishment of the new United States government, there was a period of dissent over the need for a strong centralized government. Furthermore, there was some belief that the new constitution failed to provide adequate protection for small businessmen and farmers and even less clear protection for fundamental human rights.
The start of the American Revolution, described by Edmund Morgan as, “the shot heard around the world,” was the “Americans’ search for principles” (Bender 63). Although the world’s colonies did not necessarily seek independence much like the Americans, the world’s colonies were nonetheless tired of the “administrative tyranny” being carried out by their colonizers (Bender 75). The American Revolution set a new standard in the colonies, proclaiming that the “rights of Englishmen” should and must be the “rights of man,” which established a new set foundation for the universal rights of man (Bender 63). This revolution spread new ideas of democracy for the colonized world, reshaping people’s expectations on how they should be governed. Bender emphasizes America as challenging “the old, imperial social forms and cultural values” and embracing modern individualism” (Bender 74). Bender shapes the American Revolution as a turning point for national governments. The American Revolution commenced a new trend of pushing out the old and introducing new self-reliant systems of government for the former
...he other hand, Madison discusses the topic of liberty in that it is what fuels factions. He says that removing liberty is one of the only ways to destroy a faction. He proceeds to state that this is not probable, and that factions can not be destroyed, but we must control their consequences in order to have a stable government. Madison believes that the Constitution preserves man's liberty by fairly representing them in a central government.
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.
In creating the Constitution, the states had several different reactions, including a rather defensive reaction, but also an understanding reaction. As a document that provided the laws of the land and the rights of its people. It directs its attention to the many problems in this country; it offered quite a challenge because the document lent itself to several views and interpretations, depending upon the individual reading it. It is clear that the founders’ perspectives as white, wealthy or elite class, American citizens would play a role in the creation and implementation of The Constitution.
Newman, Roger K., ed. The Constitution and Its Amendments. Vol. 3. New York: Macmillan Reference, 1999. Print.
Foner, Eric and John A. Garraty. The Reader’s Companion to American History. (New York: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1991).