Supporters of the constitution countered these arguments by adding some safeguards in some cases and also by thoroughly explaining the limited powers that the leader and government would have and the necessity for a strong central government. The constitution called for one executive leader, the President, who many thought would resemble a dictator, and America would be just like it was during colonial times. The framers of the Constitution knew that there needed to be a centralized government with a single executive leader to lead the country. However, some people like Patrick Henry, feared that a president would lead to “absolute despotism” and that there were actually more checks and balances in the British system of kings and lords (Doc. A).
Another contribution was the lack of participation on behalf of two big groups, Anarchists and Syndicalists, who refused to run in elections. In 1931, the left wing coalition won the general elections, though no party held an absolute majority the PSOE (Spanish Socialist Workers Party) were the most represented party of the coalition and also counted on the Trade Unions and Anarchist non abstainers. The left wing parties, especially the Socialist and Republicans, decided to unite in order to combat the unified right wing parties, these big coalitions made passing laws difficult for the ruling governments and the few that did pass were seen as oppressing and unfair by political opponents, notable examples include the limitations to the Church and the increase of privileges for the poor. The new parliament repudiated a proposed constitutional draft by a reformist Catholic lawyer and immediately rewrote it with extremely Socialist principles. These principles did not go down well with the more moderate members of the coalition and bitter debates followed for much of the following two years (Bienio).
He though people could make their own good smart decisions. Jefferson was an anti-federalist, being that he started the republicans and was against the federalist, which Hamilton was. The constitution was used by Jefferson a lot because he wanted to limit the power of the central government and he wanted the power to be based around the legislative branch. Jefferson not just wanted wealthy people to do things but everyone because he knew that people had good enough knowledge. To conclude Jefferson did not want a strong central government.
However it could be argued that Wilhelm II’s aims to crush socialism in response to Caprivi’s tolerance for Socialism in his years as chancellor disagree with this view as it suggests he is aiming for more of an autocratic state where he holds state control. Another notable factor which suggests Germany was a parliamentary democracy is Wilhelm II could ignore the views of the centre party; failed attempts to previously dismiss them such as the Kulturkampf were a failure because the party’s strong political views are extremely influential, and they have always had a substantial amount of seats in the party. This in turn meant the government was influenced by the parliament. However, there were many events which demonstrate the Kaiser
It was a competition of survival of the fittest and the diehards wanted to stay on top of their game. Furthermore many historians think that Lloyd George may have deliberately made up the People’s Budget to get back at the Lords for not giving the Liberals the real power and trying to restrict their power; that he really wanted to make a difference in society and help the people by redistributing the wealth. If it was deliberate then the Lords made amendments to the bill and passed it back to Commons who also rejected it and sent it back, but there was not that much evidence to suggest that. The bill went back and forth. Moreover, another reason to why the constitutional crisis had happened during the years of 1909 to 1911 was due to the Liberal’s landslide victory in 1906.
Many, like George Washington, were Federalists. This meant they wanted a strong federal government that would unite the states as one nation. Many Federalists were educated, wealthy men like those who had drawn up the Declaration of Independence. Others opposed the creation of a national government that would have power over the states. They were called Anti-Federalists.
In December of 1794, Jefferson writes a letter about Hamilton’s excise tax. The tax was hated “universally”, including people involved in government (Document 3). Alexander Hamilton believed in one government; a centralized government that controlled over the land. In 1792, he says in a letter that Jefferson and supporters were dangerous to America’s government. Jefferson didn’t believe in paying debts that came from foreign policies, and Hamilton believed that to be dangerous.
Often leaders of a country disagree on many aspects of the government. Although Alexander Hamilton and Thomas Jefferson were two great leaders in United States history, they both had very different views of government and the economy which led to much conflict. Alexander Hamilton and Thomas Jefferson had different opinions about the leadership of the United States, the bank of the United States, and the Constitution. Both leaders wanted a better, more powerful country but had different views on getting there. Alexander Hamilton was the first Secretary of the Treasury.
If I lived back in that time, and having just finished the war with Britain where we finally got our independence, I would remind people all the issues we had. Britain was trying to tell us what we needed to do and how we needed to do things without really knowing what our problems were here. How is this new Constitution which gives a lot of power to the national government different from having Britain tell us what we needed to do. I would think if I lived back then I would say we are going from one wrong to another and I would oppose the Constitution. The Anti-Federalists did not want to ratify the Constitution.
Slightly less dramatically, Tony Blair faced a large rebellion in September 2006 led by ministers such as Tom Watson that forced him to promise to step down after a year had passed. Therefore party pressure has been able to bring down the most able Prime Ministers of recent years, however in both cases the parties only acted because the Prime Minister was increasingly unpopular and were therefore damaging their election prospects. However this was not the case with Gordon Brown in the 2010 general election campaign when after he spoke to a voter in he was still wearing a broadcast microphone and was heard to say "that was a disaster" and when asked what she said, he replied: "Ugh everything! She's just a sort of bigoted woman." This along with his almost comically poor television persona lead to Brown becoming unpopular, yet still he