However, some people, such as Jefferson and small farmers opposed his ideas, because they believed in states' rights and a strict interpretation of the constitution, which led to the split of two different political parties. Before Hamilton's plan, America was having financial problems. There were war debts that were unpaid and individual states and even Congress issued worthless paper money. Hamilton created a plan that would first pay down the national debt and then assume the debt of the states. This was called the Assumption Plan.
Hamilton created his Federalist party to help promote his goals for the United States. Jefferson’s opposition party, the Republicans, “opposed Hamilton's urban, financial, industrial goals for the United States, and his promotion of extensive trade and friendly relations with Britain.” Their interpretation of the Constitution also was very different. Hamilton interpreted it very loosely and used the elastic clause to get what he wanted out of it, while Jefferson read and followed if very strictly. This is a reason Jefferson was against Hamilton’s plans. Thomas Jefferson didn’t like the idea of building a National Bank in the United States.
Clemenceau resented Wilson’s generous attitude towards Germany and Lloyd George’s desire to not treat Germany too harshly. He said “if they British are so anxious to appease Germany they should look overseas and make colonial, naval or commercial concessions”. These disagreements left the big three unsatisfied and ultimately left them with a weak mere shadow of a perhaps great treaty due to their own arrogance and. It contained many faults and weaknesses. The treaty of Versailles greatly humiliated Germany forcing it to accept soul responsibility for the war.
Both classes had disagreements with the Articles of Confederation. Federalists say that the articles were weak and ineffective because the state governments was too weak to apply laws and ordered for a national government instead. We Anti-federalists however believed that the Articles of Confederation was a good plan and that there should not be a government more powerful than the state governments. Believing that state governments should have more power compared to the national government was one of the big reasons why the anti-federalists supported the Articles of Confederation. How about the U.S constitution, what factors were held to point out?
However, many other factors played a role in the demise of the Parliament such as the fact that they were ill-organised, the lack of popular support and their inability to enforce decisions. Frederick William IV was partially responsible for the failure of the Frankfurt Parliament as he was unwilling to accept the ‘crown from the gutter’. William IV was aware that acceptance of the leadership may lead to war with Austria. Austria had no wish to see a united Germany and wanted to keep it weak and divided in order to dominate. Frederick William shared this view and was unwilling to potentially cause a war with such a powerful state.
Some of the measures that the British government brought in might have over stepped the boundaries and this will also upset the colonist. The colonies have never been happy with the fact that Britain had the right to regulate trade, but they have never really been happy with the face that the British policies will increase the internal tax. Then the stamp act was brought in the colonies together agreed that Britain had no right to tax them in this area. The stamp act was tax on documents. If you wanted to print anything such as newspapers
Americans did not want to enter the war because they thought they had enough to deal with on their own such as the Great Depression. Americans supported isolationism or staying out of the way of warring nations even though America’s Allies were at war. In World War One America had fought to make the world safe for
The fact that the new laws were passing allowing taxes to occur was frightening to Dickenson. He believes that they should do whatever it takes for America to pay the taxes. He thinks it is wrong that they are getting away with not paying. He believes sitting back and not doing anything is counter productive to the cause. Dickenson and Franklin are on opposite sides.
The most widely area of criticism that Lincoln received was his use of unconventional and sometimes illegal methods in order to achieve his goals. Lincoln justified ignoring the process of going through congress to make such decisions in that he felt the war needed immediate and direct decisions and did not have time to go through the process for congress’ approval. The criticism appears to be fair as they come from a variety of different groups from the democrats and Lincoln’s unjust ways of handling the war as well as his own party, the Republicans for his handling of the south. In assessment of Abraham Lincoln’s tenure as president and handling of the civil war tragedy, it can be determined that although heavily criticized by his peers the civil war would not have been the “civil war” without him. The inevitability of the civil war came to light when Lincoln was elected President and indirectly caused the civil war to start.
He was against the Mexican War declared by American Government, as it was unjust to colonize other nations (United States itself was separated from British colonization through revolution). For this misdeed, he was imprisoned for a night. Although the crimes and the length of imprisonment of Thoreau and King were not same, both shared the same motive. Jacobus has pointed out that both Thoreau and King were willing to suffer for their views, especially with punitive laws denying civil rights to all citizens (King, 211). Socrates, a great philosopher in human history, also had followed the same path of breaking unjust laws.