For many years, the policy has been and remains the most important source and mechanism of the joint life of the organization of people. It is a powerful tool for targeted reforms in individual countries, as well as the life of the human community as a whole. However, it is still perhaps the most mysterious and multifaceted phenomenon, many paradoxes and contradictions that man was unable to spell over many thousands of years of history.
Briefly summarize the arguments used by the revolutionary generation to justify succession from the British Empire. How did those same arguments undermine the legitimacy of any national government?
Of course, there are some laws of appearance of the revolutions, but none of them contain the inevitable. Any event may happen and may not happen. Therefore, the reasons that give the event the opportunity to actually take place are not always "objective conditions". They may come in the form of "discontent of the masses" and there will always be people who are unsatisfied with one thing or another.
The Industrial Revolution in England required the use of the colonies not only as suppliers of raw materials, but also as consumers of English manufactures. Due to the mercantilists, imports from Britain were increasingly greater than exports from the colonies. The American colonists were given to the British treasury taxes, but the means to do so could get by trading only with the Great Britain. In addition to the restrictions on trade with other countries, the colonies were not allowed to develop their own industrial production. The mercantilism policy led to the fact that the colony had a passive trade balance, which in fact was a major indirect tax in favor of the ruling classes of England. Extensive development of plantations and farms of the southern colonies under monoculture led to dependent landowners from British merchants to increase their debts to merchants. British merchants were increasingly faced with a reduction in speed in the trade with the colonies, which forced them to resort to illegal transactions with the Netherlands. Under pressure from its trading bourgeoisie, the British crown abolished a number of colonial restrictions.
What were the two "founding moments?" How do they conflict?
The two "founding moments" are Federalists and Democratic Republicans. They conflict because Federalists defended the idea of the Bill of Rights and the minimum intervention of the federal government in the affairs of state. Their goal, they saw only in international activities. In contrast to the Federalists, they had developed a plan for the organization of the new government. Among them were most farmers and small traders. During the preparation of the US Constitution in 1787, the struggle between the Federalists and the Republicans became particularly acute (Ellis, 2002). External heart of the dispute was related to the federal form. An exceptional role was played by Alexander Hamilton, who saw in the federation an opportunity to overcome the weakness of the confederation, to create a strong state, to prevent the further development of the democratic movement of the masses.
Many of the federalist’s ideas did not get recognition, but for more than two centuries, the United States is now living with their Constitution and acts of reasonable system of checks and balances.
Describe the conflicting interpretations of the American Revolution by the Federalists and the Democratic Republicans.
The interpretations of the constitutions by the Federalist and Democratic Republicans conflict on the idea of the way in which the federal government should use its powers. Hamilton and the Federalists believed that under the Constitution, the federal government must deal with national problems. If the problem is nationwide, the federal government can and should be engaged in it, or not spoken about it in the Constitution.
Jefferson and the Republicans believed that the powers of the federal government as defined in the Constitution rather vaguely, that if you stand on the positions of the Federalists, the government has the right to do whatever they want. Republicans believe that if the government has the opportunity to determine for itself the powers, it could threaten the rights and liberties of the individual. They, therefore, considered that the powers of government should be well defined.
The Duel between Alexander Hamilton and Vice-President Aaron Burr was much more than a battle of personalities. What does this event suggest about the nature of politics in the early republic?
The duel between Hamilton and Burr suggests that the politics of the early republic had a personal nature to it. People were not always able to divide personal feelings from it, which resulted in such "matter of honor" which were then far from uncommon. At first glance, such a tragedy was played out on personal, rather than political grounds. Hamilton heard accusations of unreliability and dissemination of "pathetic" slander. Hamilton was widely known for his negative comments for many years, but has always insisted on its political nature, denying personal grudge against anyone. It was then that Hamilton found Federalist support of Jefferson and not when they receive an equal number of votes in the presidential election in 1800. Then Burr, who was eliminated from the list of presidential candidates, lost the election of the governor of New York Republican nominee (Ellis, 2002). He enlisted the support of many federalists, but not of Hamilton, who had agreed to participate in the plot, which resulted in the New England and New York coming from the union and forming the Confederation of the North with Barry as President.
Why was the passage of Hamilton's debt assumption plan so threatening to Jefferson and others? Why was location of the Nation's Capital on the Potomac so symbolic?
Even when discussing the draft of the Constitution and after its ratification by the states there were two currents in the American republic, which later became the first political parties. The Federalists, led by Alexander Hamilton wanted to create a strong central government with the supremacy of national interests. Their opponents, later called democratic republicans, sought restrictions on the powers of the national government, strengthening state and local authorities, as they feared that the concentration of power will lead to the replacement of the aristocracy to democracy. The leader was the anti-Federalist Thomas Jefferson.
The dispute Federalists and Republicans, in fact, was a dispute about the future development of the United States, finding a model for the new republic. Federalists argued for rights and freedoms, but not for everyone, but only for the owners, defending the British model of the state, while the supporters of Jefferson advocated for the democratic development of America. The political views of Hamilton were presented at the Constitutional Convention. Providing a first class firm and permanent role in government keeps the instability of another class, and since he had nothing to gain from the changes said that will always support good governance. Constitutional epitome of power of the rich should be the Senate. Senators are elected by the electors for life, "for a period of good conduct." Democratic Senate he added counterweight the Assembly - the lower house, elected for three years by direct elections, all the white male population of the country.
How did James Madison avoid a direct confrontation over slavery during the Constitutional Convention? Why was he and many other delegates fearful of addressing the issue?
The word "slavery" does not appear in the US Constitution, but indirectly document authorizes the existence of this institution. Delegates to the Constitutional Convention established that in determining the number of congressmen selected from each state in the House of Representatives, will be accounted for three-fifths of the actual number of slaves. Further, the Constitution requires that the runaway slaves who cross state lines (“servants or employees"), have been returned to their owners. This sets the date, in 1808, after which Congress could abolish the slave trade (“The Migration or Importation of such Persons as any of the States now existing shall think proper to admit."
For each of these items were heated debates in the Convention, and the final adoption of the options are a compromise. Even representatives of the northern communities, opponents of slavery, such as Alexander Hamilton, spoke against the continuation of the debate on the issue of slavery, saying that it would lead to unavoidable differences between the states and would be difficult to achieve the more important goal -establishing lasting government in the country. During compromise also featured such prominent representatives of the South, as George Washington and James Madison, who hated slavery but believed that it will disappear by itself after the union will be formed.
Describe the complex relationship between Adams and Jefferson. What does the volatility of their relationship suggest about the nature of the revolutionary generation?
The relationship between Adams and Jefferson was complex because of their views on the future political system. Adams supported Jefferson in the justification of the legislative and administrative independence of the colonies, proving with the new historical and legal arguments of the absurdity and injustice of submission to the Parliament, which is located at a distance of three thousand miles. In addition, corruption England, mired in debt, extravagance and corruption of the election was simply devoid of any moral right to claim the role of a steward respectable puritanical New England.
One of the first J. Adams singled question about the political system in the category of extremely important. Simple form of government - monarchy, aristocracy, democracy - by Adams looked despotic. His ideal - a mixed form of government: the executive, the upper, aristocratic, and the lower, democratic, House of Parliament. Together, they form a well-balanced form of public authority.
8. Evaluate the book. What did you learn from Ellis' presentation of the founders? How did Founding Brothers impact you? What theme struck you the most
I found this book rather interesting for me because of the detailed description of the causes that led to the revolution and resulted the creation of the USA Declaration of Independence. The book impacted my view on history. The theme of interpretations of the American Revolution by the Federalists and the Democratic Republicans struck me the most because it was rather interesting to discover what differences were between those parties and what were similar for them.
Works Cited
Ellis, Joseph. (2002). Founding Brothers: The Revolutionary Generation.. Web. 09 Mar. 2016.
