I believe the Constitution did a better job of protecting liberties, specifically in the areas of the federal court system, representation of the people, and the levy of taxes. Alexander Hamilton, statesman and economist, proclaimed "Laws are a dead letter without courts to expound and define their true meaning and operation”. The Articles of Confederation which gave rise to the Confederation government that took effect in March 1781, did not give the national government any means to enforce the federal laws. The states could, and often did, choose to interpret or enforce federal laws in any manner they saw fit. This led to disputes amongst the states that could not be readily settled, as it relied on each state’s court system which invariably chose to discount the ruling of the other states.
Prelude to Civil War DBQ By the 1850's the Constitution, originally framed as an instrument of national unity, had become a source of sectional discord and tension and ultimately contributed to the failure of the union it has created. It is known that the union did not last that’s why the Civil War happened. If everyone could agree on what the constitution implied, then there probably would not have been a civil war. From many of the documents, there are arguments about what the constitution states. "To the Argument, that the word 'slaves' and 'slavery' are not to be found in The Constitution, and therefore it was never intended to give any protection or countenance to the slave system, it is sufficient to reply, that no such words are continued in the instrument, other words were used, intelligently and specifically, to meet the necessities of slavery."
Many resented the pretentiousness of the order, viewing it as a vestige of pre-Revolutionary traditions. (174) The Federalist (1788) Collection of essays written by John Jay, James Madison and Alexander Hamilton and published during the ratification debate in New York to lay out the Federalists’ arguments in favor of the new Constitution. Since their publication, these influential essays have served as an important source for constitutional interpretation. (193) three-fifths compromise (1787) Determined that each slave would be counted as three-fifths of a person for the purpose of apportioning taxes and representation. The compromise granted disproportionate political power to Southern slave states.
The Just War Theory The method of war as a means to settle disputes is an undeniable part of the history of the world. “War should be understood as an actual, intentional, and widespread armed conflict between political communities. Thus, fisticuffs between individual persons do not count as a war, nor does a gang fight, nor does a feud on the order of the Hatfields versus the McCoys” (Orend). Ancient records, writings, and even scriptures from the Bible are evidence to the fact that wars have been recurring events throughout time. The definition of justified war is not self-explanatory nor can it be understood without delving into the ideas and concepts that lie behind it.
His forces were ill disciplined, ill equipped, and inexperienced. Washington needed to enlist the services of a foreign officer to re-establish his Army. Without the help of the Prussian officer the Continental Army may have never been successful. In this essay I will focus on how General Washington’s military went from a rag-tag militia to a formidable military opponent to the British world power. In 1776 When the American colonists declared their independence from Britain, the Continental army was battered by the onslaught by the British forces.
“(pg. 53-54) Lincoln did not want the South to be afraid of his Republican Presidency either. From the start of the Civil war, Lincoln clarified that the goal of the war was not to “put down slavery, but to put the flag back”, and he refused
The Articles of Confederation was a first attempt at a constitution for the United States while it was fighting to gain independence from the British government in the Revolutionary War. First proposed in 1776 by Richard Henry Lee at the Second Continental Congress, the Articles of Confederation were able to maintain some stability for the country through the end of the war. However, it proved to be a highly inadequate form of government when it could not provide for the economic and political demands of a developing nation. The Articles of Confederation were not able support a strong centralized government, therefore resulting in a lack of an authoritative presence with regard to domestic and foreign affairs affecting the thirteen states. The national government was weak and disconnected, and the federal powers were greatly lacking.
Contrary to popular belief, the American Revolution did not bring about change, because the rights, class structure and government remained the status quo in the colonies. For the most part, the rights of the colonists did undergo a transformation because of the Revolutionary War. It is a widely held belief that the war was declared in defense of the natural rights: life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Unfortunately, the war did little in protecting these rights. After the war, there was still no liberty for blacks; in fact, the colonists disliked the idea of granting freedom to Blacks that they refused their offer to fight on the side of the patriots.
Therefore, during the 1961 British Guiana elections, Kennedy was determined to deny Jagan power. John F. Kennedy did not make a good choice by carrying out a coup in the British Guiana to overthrow Jagan. Although Cheddi Jagan was a declared communist, he posed no threat to the United States. The British Guiana was an insignificant colony for the Western Hemisphere; however, Kennedy was unwilling to let any country become communist. Besides that Cheddi Jagan was a communist, John F. Kennedy did not have a valid reason to overthrow the British Guiana government.
Britain and France showed no resistance due to the appeasement policy followed by the countries’ governments. Britain had several reasons for not opposing the remilitarization such as it believed the treaty had been harsh on Germany. It also believed that the people would not support another war and it was not prepared for an offensive. Britain worried that if its attention was diverted to another war, it would not be able to control its widespread empire and thus lose colonies. France did not support the remilitarization but could not react as, it could not predict the strength of the German army and it knew that nor Britain nor USA would go to war.