Examples Of Free Republics

Improved Essays
There are no examples of free republics in our history. The republics of Greece and Rome were on a much smaller scale. Both of these republics extended their rule over large territories. As a result, their governments were changed. They no longer had free governments, but now tyrannical ones. I am in strong opposition to the Constitution, specifically, Articles One and Two. In the proposed Constitution the government possesses absolute power. I believe that it gives Congress too much power, it takes power away from local governments, it gives the President (Executive Branch) too much power, and the representation needs to be changed, just to name a few. The central government under the Articles of Confederation was too weak, but the one that …show more content…
It would not be possible to find representatives who are familiar with all parts of the continent. Our state governments should guard our interests and rights. They would understand the people so they could more closely relate with them. The experience of local government in the New World is very appealing. The result of such a government would be a completely changed society where people are honest and virtuous. In the Constitution I see a government driven by ambitions, but in my mind I have small-scaled governments envisioned. In small-scaled governments, citizens would be free to live their own lives. The other kind of government as laid out in the Constitution would entail taxes, drafts, offices, and wars that would damage human dignity and thus, be fatal to self-government. Large power governments are not to be trusted. Liberty could only be protected in small republics. A large nation would be best be governed with local governments having the most control. Centralizing all of this power would not turn out well. If we approve this Constitution, the government will quickly be on its way to an aristocracy. I do believe that the national government needs greater powers to deal with other nations, but I fear that security would be gained, and individual liberty would be lost. This very reason is why I am in favor of states rights instead of one central …show more content…
It is not equal because all states have to send the same number of members to the Senate, even the smallest states. Slaves increase the proportion of members. In Article One, Section Two of the Constitution we are given the Three-fifths Clause which reads, “Representatives and direct taxes shall be apportioned among the several states which may be included within this union, according to their respective numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole number of free persons, including those bound to service for a term of years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other persons.” This basically says that representatives will be proportioned among the states according to the number of free people and slaves that they have. Salves have never counted for anything in our government, so it is not fair to count them now. If they have no say in our government then why should the number of members be increased because of them? It does not seem very logical to count slaves who are technically not even people, but not count sheep, oxen, and cows. All of these things are just property. It makes no sense to count the slaves in with the people, yet still be able to import

Related Documents

  • Improved Essays

    One of the major problems created from the fear of an overly powerful central government, was that the states had too much individual power. Article II of the Articles of Confederation stated that “each state remains its sovereignty, freedom, and independence,” causing many problems when it came to foreign affairs, defense, and commerce. With the amount of individual power each state had, it was as if it were several countries bordering each other. In addition, when it came to foreign affairs, each state had to be spoken to separately and negotiations had to be made to accommodate each state separately and the central government was not able to properly enforce existing treaties. At the same time, the United States was facing a threat from Spain due to its holding of territories in North and South America.…

    • 1083 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Great Essays

    However, even though the Articles of Confederation seemed viable at the time, the Constitution was a much superior. Even though the US Constitution took away power from the state governments, it did not give all power to one specific hours. Instead it gave power to separate branches which all had the ability to check the powers of the other branches. This made…

    • 1582 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Daniel Shays’ decision to attack the Springfield Armory could be justified by the economic inequality that was witnessed between the farmers and government officials during the post-war era. Following the Revolutionary War, former soldiers were enraged because of the unfair taxes imposed by the state and the little pay they had received for their service. This sparked conflict, specifically in Massachusetts. Daniel Shays, a war veteran, gathered an army (4,000+ men) to protest against these financial injustices. Consequently, Shays’ army attempted to seize the Springfield Armory but was driven out by William Shepard’s private militia.…

    • 1137 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Rasika Somasundaram History 111 09/17/2017 Most Americans of the 1780s wanted the kind of government provided by the Articles of Confederation, despite its weaknesses becuase Most of the orignal colonies were settlements for various religious groups escaping expulsion in Europe. Also people wanting a chance to become landowners which they would never have otherwise or sent as laborers to work plantations to pay of debts . Some colonies wanted certain religious observations such as christianity and some people wanted freedom of religious. Most Americans favored a weak central government. The states would act as small, independent countries.…

    • 437 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    The Three-Fifths Compromise was an agreement reached by the 1787 Constitutional Convention that determined how slaves would be counted in order to settle state representation and taxation for the federal government. Large-slave states, predominantly in the south, wanted black slaves to be counted as full persons along with the free whites in the population. The South craved power; however, it did not want to be taxed on the slaves which were considered property. Meanwhile, northern states opposed counting slaves because it would take away from their representation in the House.…

    • 137 Words
    • 1 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Carmelo Figueroa Per. 4 November 2, 2017 How Did the Constitution Guard Against Tyranny? Tyranny is one of the reasons that governments have gone to anarchy; People have rebelled and started riots or even wars due to the oppression of tyranny. The founding fathers of America wanted a government that was strong, but not too strong.…

    • 729 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Small states and large states each achieved some of what they wanted in the Great Compromise. It was only one compromise of many at the convention. The delegates also debated how to address slavery in the Constitution, though it never directly names it. Southern states, with large numbers of enslaved people, wanted to count slaves into their population for determining representation to Congress but not for taxation purposes.…

    • 272 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    With smaller states, the idea of people governing themselves works. However, they wanted all the benefits of a larger government protection. As it stood before the Constitutional Convention, trade, money system, and property protection were not universally regulated and caused conflict for…

    • 1282 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Under the Articles of Confederation, written in 1777, the United States of America was in dire need of a strong centralized power and a more structured government. 55 delegates rallied to this need and started the Philadelphia Convention, where the motive was to form a better government that would meet the needs of its people. With this motive in mind, the Constitution of the United States was drafted, but there was still a long road till it was signed into law in 1788. In order to make the Constitution legitimate, it would need to be ratified by all 13 states. Combining all the needs of each colony was an intricate compromise, but it was these compromises that made it acceptable by so many.…

    • 841 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    From their conception and drafting in 1776, the Articles of Confederation were nothing but a reaction to the English government. When possible, the colonists continually strived to do the exact opposite of what the English government would. This effort to avoid tyranny resulted in a decentralized, weak, inefficient, and financially poor government, one that was also nigh impossible to change and amend. Not only did this later spur reform, but it also gave impetus to “those who favored a strong central government” (persons such as Alexander Hamilton).…

    • 1193 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    There is no need to have an established fear in the central government, our separation from Great Britain proves otherwise. Our independence should be enough proof that we are not trying to become another monarch where people don’t get a voice. Establishing a strong central government requires a lot of support from the people, which is why The Articles of Confederation wouldn’t suffice to the needs we demand. Having a stronger central government will unite us together and fuse us as one voice as opposed to allowing the states to have sovereign power.…

    • 271 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Decent Essays

    “I had rather be a free citizen of a small republic of Massachussetts, than an oppressed subject to the American empire.” said by Antifederalist "Anti-Federalist Papers: "A Federalist"" Anti-Federalist Papers: "A Federalist", 1787.. Driven by fear of tyranny, the Antifederalist created an appealing counterargument that opposed the entity of the Constitution. After the antifederalist enforced modifications and the ratification of the Bill of Rights to the document, subsequently formed rightful impacts to today’s Constitution. Antifederalist main objection was the fear of a centralized government, and were rightfully so judging today’s federal government's interference and abundant power.…

    • 315 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Superior Essays

    That is what the Articles of Confederation is t If one was to look at the country Germany, we would see that they had at one time had seven states within one country, with not at all a leader. If our country were to follow the footsteps in which Germany has made, we as a nation would have many disagreements and ambitions. Which may lead the states to leave the union and could begin wars among the neighboring states. To avoid such a possibility, we as a union must vote for a representative of the country who would lead the peoples will bring to the success. If one was elected to the seat of the leadership he or she will not have any further advantages than those who are not in his position, it will not be a position of self but a position to represent the people and central government.…

    • 1172 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    The American Revolution was inevitable because it was caused by various events that Great Britain forced upon the new thirteen colonies. The Civil war was also inevitable because the north and south wanted the nation run under different government and state rules. The difference between a Civil war and a revolution is that a Civil war is a war between states with in a country. A revolution is a profound change in society and the social structure, especially when made suddenly and is followed by violence. Something that both the Civil War and The American Revolution have in common is a need for personal desire, control, and improvement.…

    • 2081 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Many years ago our founding fathers made a government without tyranny, they were smart to do this because they didn't want to have all the power in the hands of one person or group. Delegates (55) gathered in Philadelphia at the Constitutional Convention to frame a government without too much power in the hands of one person or a group. The Constitution was signed September 17, 1787. How did these framers protect us from tyranny ? They wanted to create a government without tyranny and they did by creating federalism, separation of powers, checks and balances, and the small state big state compromise.…

    • 717 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays