Consequently, a limited government was created in response to these new thoughts. Furthermore, this new type of government was extremely revolutionary because it changed the way that the citizens had thought or viewed about the government. Two Enlightenment philosophers that influenced the creation of the government were John Locke and Montesquieu. John Locke had the belief that everyone had natural rights (life, liberty, property) and that if the government failed to protect these rights, they could be overthrown and replaced. Also, Montesquieu’s idea of the separation of powers helped shape the government.
One Enlightenment thinker John Locke wrote Two Treatises on Government in 1690 which explained the right of the governed to overthrow their government if it denies them their unalienable rights. Revolutionary leaders followed this line of thought and used Locke’s theory of natural rights, life liberty and property, to justify their rebellion. During the time of Salutary Neglect colonies formed their own representative governments, which served under Parliament and applied colonial taxes. The colonists had no problem with taxes they just wanted their representative bodies to applied them, not Parliament with its virtual representation, During the dawn of the Revolution in 1776 Thomas Paine wrote Common Sense which spread republican ideals throughout the colones. This document, which sold 100,000 copies in 3 months quickly spread amongst the colonists and solidified their common political motivations.
Federalists sought to reform the government system by implementing an executive power to act as a mediator for states so that no specific state had more power than the other and so that critical deeds can be executed without problem, such as collecting taxes. Anti-Federalists wanted to stray away from an authoritative power, fearing that a powerful and distant government would not serve for the interests and needs of the citizens. They also complained that the Constitution failed to guarantee individual liberties in
Currently, the France, that people know today, is the aftermath of the French Revolution. The government of France “is a unique hybrid of presidential and parliamentary systems that reflect rich political traditions and culture” (Guardian). In the current France, there is no absolute monarchy. There is no divine ruler like King Louis XVI. France is now a democratic country with the President as the leader along with his hers subsidiaries.
Studies have shown that allowing felons to vote would “help ensure against recidivism and continued antisocial behavior” which would bloom democracy (Faceoff 6). Here, felon enfranchisement supporters argue that eliminating felons from voting leads to lower rates of participation in government. Without a large amount of voter participation, The United States defies its founding Declaration of Independence that aimed to give Americans an equal voice in politics, economy, and government. Therefore, barring felons from voting leads to the direct destruction of the democratic principles of The United States. Additionally, Brennan Center, a non-partisan law institute that focuses on issues of democracy, found that allowing felons to vote would lead to an expansion of democracy (Bernd 5).
Thomas Jefferson’s and Alexander Hamilton’s viewpoints during the 1790’s and the 1800’s were very different but sort of similar. Jefferson wanted the government to be run by the people of the U.S. while Hamilton wanted the wealthy class to run it, Jefferson wanted strong state government, Hamilton wanted strong federal government. But one thing that stood out to the people was Hamilton wanted a loose/lenient interpretation of the constitution as Jefferson wanted a strict one. During the 1700’s-1800’s, despite the fact Philadelphia was the nation’s temporary capital, U.S. Congress met difficulties and fears that tested the strength of the Constitution and the republic it built.
Liberty: The Preservation Then and Now I. Preface “If men were angels, no government would be necessary” (Madison, 1). Madison uses this example to express that men need a strong government. The previous governing document of The United States, The Articles of Confederation, emphasized the freedom from national authority but ultimately failed. People, mostly the Antifederalists, were scared for a document that put such a great amount of power back into a national government; the last thing they wanted was a tyranny.
The Federalist wanted a stable central government and an active executive branch, assuming it would maintain peace and order. The Federalist felt that central government should make all the rules and regulations for the whole country, instead of the states having individual power. The Federalists´ views are better described as those of nationalist. The Federalist wanted a stronger government but wanted to have freedom. The Anti-Federalist thought that the central government would abuse power and neglect the rights of the people.
The party was originated by Thomas Jefferson and James Madison. The party was created as a response of opposition to Hamilton’s Federalist Party who vouched for a strong national government. The Democratic-Republicans believed that a Federal government would only weaken the authority granted by the states. The party was built on the conservation of the Constitution to not be neglected but enforced in order to maintain civility. Democratic-Republicans fundamentally understood the United States as a confederation of diverse entities or states that unified under specific common interests .
The Anti Federalists didn’t want what we have now,they didn’t want the federal government to have and influence over citizens’ lives, they didn’t want the govt to in any way resemble a monarchy because they had just escaped from the corrupt monarchy. They believed that if the power in the country occupied in the people of the various states, then their vision would have a chance of success. Likewise, the Anti Federalist thought there was no bill of rights, so they disliked the constitution. Every constitution should have one for the people, and the government shouldn’t refuse to give on, as shown on Document E. The Letter to James Madison, Objections to the Constitution was written by Thomas Jefferson to explain what he disliked about the constitution to one of the writings, after the constitution was drafted and were awaiting ratification. Thomas Jefferson also asserts that he doesn’t like the fact that there is no rules and regulations in regard to office terms, and how the officers could get re-elected and serve for like, thus, will result with corruption
He mapped out what he wanted in a good government to be. What Jefferson wrote in the declaration of independence was not supported by the dreams of the new Constitution. The constitution did not support the style of government talked about by T.J. because for one, there wasn 't much room for the power of the people to change their government if they see fit. Secondly it did not give the citizens of the U.S. clear, mapped out “unalienable rights”. Lastly the Constitution did not provide guards for citizens future security in the government as laid out by T.J. in the
The Anti-Federalists that opposed the constitution believed that the constitution would give too much power to the government. The Anti-Federalists argued that a powerful government would become tyrannical like the British monarchy that they worked so hard to escape from. This led them to create The Bill of Rights. Today’s government has similar problems. Nowadays some politicians believe that The Bill of Rights is a living document that can be changed or manipulated to “better fit” the era that we live in.
Federalist and Anti-Federalist had different views on the new constitution. The Federalist supported strong central government and did not want the Bill of Rights. Anti-Federalist wanted power in the states and wanted limited federal power. The framers chose to create a strong federal government because they wanted a government that could bring together a belief within the states without reducing other states ability to control itself. They wanted small states because it would make is easier to reach an agreement.