Zinn also uses an excerpt from historian Charles Beard to explain his reasoning. Beard basically said that the rich controls the government or the laws the government operates by. Zinn points out that the First Amendment of the Bill of Rights shows that quality of interest hides behind innocence. Meaning that Congress completely ignores the freedom of speech. Professor of history Gordon S. Wood views the struggle for a new constitution in 1787-1788 as a social conflict between upper-class Federalists who desired a stronger central government and the “humbler” Anti-Federalists who controlled the state assemblies.
They were influenced by the writings of the french political philosopher Montesquieu. In his book ‘The Spirit Of The Laws’ Montesquieu argued for a separation of powers into legislative, executive and judicial branches of government in order to avoid tyranny. ‘When the legislative and executive powers are united in the same person…there can be no liberty’ wrote Montesquieu. The Founding Fathers implemented this, through the president, Congress and the US Court System with a Supreme Court which holds ultimate judicial power. The separation of powers was designed to limit government, as each branch would carry out different functions of government this meant no single branch has total control in order to form a dictatorship.
Imagine you are fighting in a war. Fighting for your country against a country that has a monarchy. American history is based on all of the events that happened and how America became what it is today. Revolutionary writers Thomas Paine, Benjamin Franklin, Patrick Henry, and Thomas Jefferson all wrote pieces to defend America, however In John Adams piece “Defense of the Constitutions of Government in Massachusetts During the Revolution”, Adams argues that free government has a great advantage over a simple monarchy. Adams relies on juxtaposition and counter argument to develop his argument that a free government is better than a monarchy.
One of the factors that possibly made Germany seem very much like an autocracy is the power the Kaiser had to dissolve the Reichstag ant to appoint a Chancellor of his choice. In all of these situations the Kaiser held supreme power and he needed no democratic authorisation – what he said was the final decision. It appeared the Kaiser used his power in order to shape the German government, an example of this is in 1900 when he appointed von Bulow as Chancellor in the hope that he could exercise power of the decisions he made. However, when von Bulow tried to assert how own authority following the, what could be considered, disastrous Daily Telegraph he was forced to hand in his resignation because he had lost the support, he initially had, of the Kaiser. This is an example of a strong autocratic element within the constitution.
Because the British government was not fulfilling Jefferson’s previously mentioned definition of a government’s duties; they were forced to take the very necessary step of removing themselves from the King’s rule and ruling themselves. In what has become one of the most identifiable phrases in political theory, Jefferson declares certain truths to be “self-evident”. These truths that all men are created equal and that men are endowed with certain unalienable rights became increasingly integral to the cause championed by Jefferson and the other creators of the
The Sedition Act prohibited anyone from insulting the federal government verbally or in writing. This act violated two components of the Bill of Rights: freedom of speech, and freedom of the press. This act ironically simulated what would most likely happen in a monarchial society. The federalists were often accused of being “Monocrats” and wanting a monarchial society. (Document F) One Republican, James Madison, perceived the beginnings of a monarchy as he wrote, “The abolition of Royalty was it seems not one of his Revolutionary principles.” (Document N) These views are exemplified in the picture depicting the XYZ Affair.
John Locke 1.) Seventeenth century philosopher whose writings on political theory had a profound influence on the American Constitution and the Declaration of Independence 2.) Two Treatise: Essay writing by Locke; People are sovereign; people have the ability to revoke the social contract; and to restrain the power of the executive or the legislature. 3.) His essay “Concerning Human Understanding” claims that people are born without ideas and all human knowledge is learned through experience.
History confirms the break between Britain and the United States was a war of independence, known as the American Revolution. This war physically and mentally broke the bond between Britain and one of her largest colonies, who decided that since they were in a new territory, they would be responsible for themselves. In his document entitled Common Sense, Thomas Paine reasons with the reader that the American population should revolt against the actions of the British monarchy, demonstrating that the voice (and rioting) of the people are potentially stronger than the government itself. This essay will demonstrate that Thomas Paine’s arguments parallel those of another group that defied the government and essentially set the revolt in motion: the sailors. This paper will first explore Paine’s arguments, and then the
According to the text, the first stage of the French Revolution was based totally on the liberty to succeed, own, and compete. Next, the second stage of the revolution took on equality to rally their troops, which was also the revolution of the working people in the French cities. In fact the French adapted a national motto for brotherhood which was Liberte’, elgalite, fraternite…which is French for Liberty, equality, and fraternity. The debates on the compatibility of the three terms as well as their order began at the same time of the French Revolution. France was known as what is called an absolute monarchy in which King Louis XVI had complete control over the nation.
The controversy of the argument was on the basis that, “there was an inherent connection between the states and the preservation of individual liberty, which is the end of any legitimate government.” Their own argument have invariably created a national government instead of a federal government. This is because “the federal form, which regards the Union as a confederacy of sovereign states, instead of which, they have framed a national government, which regards the Union as a consolidation of the states.” Anti-federalists were against constructing a new constitution and they agreed that without valid amendments the constitution would give the government too much power. This power would then lead to confusion according to the (Centinel 1787) “ The new constitution instead of being panacea or cure of every grievance so delusively represented by its advocated will be found upon examination like Pandora’s box replete with every