In 1781, after six years of death, detrimental losses and defeat, the previously termed “American patriots” had fought and secured their independence from the world’s greatest empire, and could now call themselves true “Americans.” This fervent nationalist and patriotic spirit that spread throughout the 13 colonies in 1781, also increased when Americans realized they could govern, and they created their own system of government—one which disregarded concepts like a mixed government, the power of the executive, or a strong central government. Such concepts, which were considered fundamental aspects of a “republic” and “free state”, were thrown out due to a massive renunciation of all things British. This new, decentralized government, illustrated
…show more content…
Subsequent historians contend that the Constitution did not live up to the principles, and that the document rejected those key principles, and adopted a doctrine more favorable to the “aristocratic” men who held the power and abandoned the true “republican” form of government the Patriots had so tirelessly fought for. This historiography is gravely inaccurate considering there is no set definition of what the principles of the American Revolution are. In a letter to Mercy Otis Warren, John Adams wrote, “the principles of the American Revolution may be said to have been as various as the thirteen states…[and] as diversified as the individuals who acted in it.” Nonetheless, the same men who in the 1770s developed the Royalist position and had opposed the British Parliament, at the result of restoring the defunct prerogatives of the Crown—which was the more successful argument in the canon of political thought—were the same men who spearheaded Royalism in Philadelphia in 1787. This paper argues that the Federalists (those who defended the Constitution) embodied the Revolutionary principles through their support of authorized representation; a strong, singular executive; and, the need for the executive to protect the people and the established government—all principles and concepts that were taken up by the Patriots who dominated the American position during the imperial
Subsequent historians contend that the Constitution did not live up to the principles, and that the document rejected those key principles, and adopted a doctrine more favorable to the “aristocratic” men who held the power and abandoned the true “republican” form of government the Patriots had so tirelessly fought for. This historiography is gravely inaccurate considering there is no set definition of what the principles of the American Revolution are. In a letter to Mercy Otis Warren, John Adams wrote, “the principles of the American Revolution may be said to have been as various as the thirteen states…[and] as diversified as the individuals who acted in it.” Nonetheless, the same men who in the 1770s developed the Royalist position and had opposed the British Parliament, at the result of restoring the defunct prerogatives of the Crown—which was the more successful argument in the canon of political thought—were the same men who spearheaded Royalism in Philadelphia in 1787. This paper argues that the Federalists (those who defended the Constitution) embodied the Revolutionary principles through their support of authorized representation; a strong, singular executive; and, the need for the executive to protect the people and the established government—all principles and concepts that were taken up by the Patriots who dominated the American position during the imperial