How do you think our rights were protected against tyranny by the Constitution? Tyranny is when one person is given all the power to control a country of a government in a dictator like manner. The Constitution guarded against tyranny in several ways, which were federalism, separation of powers, checks and balances, big states vs. small states. The first guard against tyranny was Federalism, a system of government in which power is divided between a federal government and state government. The guard of federalism is shown one way in the Constitution when they set up the compound government to make sure that the federal government doesn’t get too much power.
The challenge was to create a strong central government without letting any one person, or group of people, get too much power. How did the Constitution Guard against Tyranny? “The accumulation of all powers, legislative, executive, and judiciary, in the same hands, whether of one, a few, or many, and whether hereditary, self-appointed, or elective, may be justly pronounced the very definition of tyranny.” (James Madison, May. 1787). The Articles of Confederation wasn’t working for the fifty-five individuals at the Constitutional Convention on May of 1787 in Philadelphia.
Tyranny is a government in which a single ruler is vested with absolute power. The Constitution had guarded against tyranny in four different ways which were Federalism, Separation of powers, Checks and balances and big states vs. small states The beginning guard against tyranny was Federalism, which is a political concept in which a group of members are bound together by covenant. James Madison had stated in a “Federalist Newspaper” about Federalism and how it basically worked for the Colony. Federalism protects against tyranny because Federalism isn’t an absolute power, it’s a division of power to certain members of a covenant. The additional guard against tyranny was Separation of Powers which means the government was separated into different branches.
When the Founding Fathers met at the Philadelphia convention in 1787, and wrote the constitution of the United States, they decided they wanted it to consist of 4 main points. A representative and accountable government, the separation of powers between 3 branches of government, a federal structure and a limited government. They wanted limited government, by which the government would do only what was essential, leaving the citizens’ rights and freedoms as untouched as possible. This framework of government was put in place by the Founding Fathers because of their fear of tyranny. They were influenced by the writings of the french political philosopher Montesquieu.
The Federalist 51 was an article created in 1788 by, James Madison, John Jay, and Alexander Hamilton, stating that in order to have a more proper government structure the use of checks and balances is much needed. He starts off by saying each branch, legislative, executive, and judicial must be independent but all three should share the equal amount of power. The reason the three branch’s should have equal power is because it will only avoid the possibilities of democracy collapsing. He even states, “Ambition must be made to counteract ambition.” This means that since each government will want to seek more power they will have to compete with each other like tug of war. However the other two will check the one wanting to exceed thus, balancing out the power and securing citizens from a dictatorship type of government.
Which also allowed the federal government the opportunity for revenue. One of the main emphases for the Hamilton and the Federalist Party was that the federal government was too over power the states. They felt that leaving too much power in the hands of states would only create a weak type of government, with very little power to act. Citizen’s rights would be protected by the legislation, court systems, and of course the Bill Of Rights; distrusting the people with the vote. The federalist created the House of Reps which was directly voted by the people.
George Karam A.P. History Mr. Vieira 10/19/12 DBQ Since the dawn of American politics, there were two political factions, the Federalists led by John Adams and Alexander Hamilton, and the Anti-Federalists or Democratic Republicans led by Thomas Jefferson and James Madison. Since the American Constitution was established in 1789, each side had its own interpretations to how to govern the United States based on the Constitution and its founders. The Democratic-Republicans were usually characterized as strict constructionists, which meant they believed in interpreting the Constitution by the exact words presented by its framers, and refused to change anything about it. The Federalists were usually characterized as loose constructionists, which meant they focused more on the intent of the constitution and its framers, and believed that changes were necessary for the development of the nation.
Adams relies on juxtaposition and counter argument to develop his argument that a free government is better than a monarchy. John Adams uses juxtaposition to show that a monarchy is worse than a free government. A juxtaposition is a contrasting effect that compares two statements but makes another one stand out more. John Adams writes “...the ministers of state can never know their friends from their enemies; secret cabals undermine their influence, and blast their reputation...the ministers can have no enemies of consequence but among the members of the great or little council, where every man is obliged to take his side, and declare his opinion, upon every question.” (Adams n. pag.).
Of the Constitution, Alexander Hamilton, and the Art of the Sale The Constitution of the United States of America is often called the American Experiment by political powers outside our borders. From the time it was drafted it has been scrutinized by enemies as well as allies, each with their own political agenda on what it means to them both individually and collectively. Through the drafting of the Constitution the founding Fathers established a federal government that had more power over their sovereign states but cleverly policed itself from any one organized group within that federal body from gaining ultimate authority over all. This was accomplished by developing three branches of government to counter balance: Legislative, Executive
The president was still a very powerful figure; he could block new laws by calling a referendum and could rule without the Reichstag in times of emergency (Article 48). In the right hands, Article 48 could work to Germany’s advantage by ensuring a swift response to a crisis like a war. The president, like before, could still appoint his ministers and chancellor. The Reich cabinet and chancellor, were under Article 54 of the constitution accountable to the Reichstag and had to resign if they lost the Reichstag’s confidence. The New parliament set up was to be made up of 2 houses; The Reichsrat and the Reichstag.