The New Science of Politics

813 Words2 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: Federalism in the constitution essay

The New Science of Politics

When discussing the new science of politics laid out in the Federalist papers, it is imperative to understand that proponents of the Constitution had various reasons for writing these papers, not the least of which was convincing critics that a strong central government that would not oppress but actually protect individual freedoms as well as encouraging the state of New York to agree to ratify the Constitution.

The Federalists had a genuine belief that a strong central government was essential to the protection of what they saw as God given rights and freedoms, as well as protection from abuse from the states concerning these freedoms. The founders embodied three key concepts into the Constitution that would serve as the framework and engine for delivering the ideals of liberalism (the idea of natural rights, liberty, equality, consent of the governed, and the idea of limited government), to the American people under a union of the states: the idea of separation of powers, individual rights, and federalism.

"This inquiry will naturally divide itself into three branches- the objects to be provided for by a federal government, the quantity of power necessary to the accomplishment of those objects, the persons whom that power ought to operate," writes Alexander Hamilton in the Federalist #23 in reference to the separation of powers. The basic concept here is the idea of the federal government being divided into three separate branches that would balance excessive democracy through a system of checks on each other. The three branches, respectively known as the legislature (Article I), the executive (Article II), and the judiciary (Article III), were designed to entice the opponents of the Co...

... middle of paper ...

...e protection of individual liberties as well as the expression of self interest were of the highest importance when creating the Constitution and a new system of government. The idea of separation of powers along with checks and balances, coupled with an encouraged environment of expression eventually led to the ratification of the Constitution with a Bill of Rights in 1791 and the birth of dual federalism.

Although today in the twenty -first century we have more of a regulated federalism, the basic concepts of protection of individual rights along with free expression of ideas is still at the core of our current political philosophy. The founders intentions, primarily fueled by the Federalists, sought to create a national system under which the new area of democracy would thrive in the shadow of what they perceived to be an oppressive past with mother England.

Show More
Related

  • Dbq The Beliefs Of The Federalist And Anti-Federalists

    576 Words  | 2 Pages

    This party developed because of the ratification of the constitution process; one way the Federalists tried to persuade people that their views were right about a strong central government during the ratification process was through several articles, which became known as The Federalist Papers. The Federalists argued that the people needed a strong central government to keep order and protect the union (Doc 1). They believed that this form of government was needed because the Articles of Confederation was proof that the union needed a strong central government. They argued that the Articles of Confederation gave the central government too little power and as a result the Union, faced economic difficulties, foreign problems and state quarrels (Doc 3). They processed Checks and Balances, which was a system designed so that the central government would not get more powerful than the other would, and was intended to counter arguments being made by the Anti-federalists (Doc

    Read More

  • Separation Of Powers Dbq Essay Power

    556 Words  | 2 Pages

    To start out with, the constitution divided power so no one branch or person had complete power over the nation or others. In document B it states, ¨Liberty requires that the three departments of power are distinct and separate.¨ This means that in order to prevent and guard against tyranny we must have different and separate branches holding power if there is only one or they are too similar that could create a small group with close to complete power creating a tyranny. Power must be separated into three branches so that they may check and limit each other so that no laws are passed that will harm the nation and are unconstitutional. The three branches are very separate but can

    Read More

  • Articles of Confederation vs. Constitution

    1404 Words  | 3 Pages

    How could the government be designed to protect the unalienable individual rights? Their first attempt at solving this issue was the Articles of Confederation, which was a failure for the most part, but not completely. After the failure of the articles, the state delegates tried to revise the articles, but instead, constructed the Constitution. There were so many changes made and very little remained the same. The thirteen states formed a Confederation referred to as the “league of friendship” in order to find a solution for common problems such as foreign affairs.

    Read More

  • How the Constitution Guards Against Tyranny

    642 Words  | 2 Pages

    The separation of powers keeps any one branch from gaining too much power by creating 3 separate, distinct branches power can be shared equally among. According to Madison, “Liberty requires that the three great departments of power should be separate and distinct.”(Document B) In other words, to avoid tyranny and achieve liberty, the three branches of government (executive, legislative, and judicial) must be separate and diverse. The purpose of a separation of powers is to divide the powers of the government so there is not only one central source of power. The three branches must be as distinct as possible to avoid falling into the hands of one individual leader. There are also checks and balances between these three branches. Checks and balances are a system of each branch monitoring an...

    Read More

  • Aristotle's Legacy In The Federalist Papers

    2064 Words  | 5 Pages

    While it is always debatable as to the extent of influence the Federalist Papers had in the final success of the ratification of the new constitution, they remain a crucial element in the understanding of the Constitution of the United States and provide a stable foundation from which Constitutional interpretation and study can be

    Read More

  • Ratification of the Constitution and the Louisiana Purchase

    551 Words  | 2 Pages

    The Federalist wanted to ratify the Constitution while the Antifederalist despised the idea entirely. Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay eventually compiled 85 essays as the Federalist Papers. These supporters of the Constitution believed that the checks and balances system (a system in which the different parts of an organization (such as a government) have powers that affect and control the other parts so that no part can become too powerful )would allow a strong central government to preserve states' rights. They felt that the Articles of Confederation was too weak and that they were in need for a change. The Articles of Confederation had “errors” that needed to be corrected argued the Federalist. Ratifying the Constitution lead to an improved more advanced country.

    Read More

  • Anti-Federalist vs Federalist

    2017 Words  | 5 Pages

    After winning the Revolutionary War and sovereign control of their home country from the British, Americans now had to deal with a new authoritative issue: who was to rule at home? In the wake of this massive authoritative usurpation, there were two primary views of how the new American government should function. Whereas part of the nation believed that a strong, central government would be the most beneficial for the preservation of the Union, others saw a Confederation of sovereign state governments as an option more supportive of the liberties American’s fought so hard for in the Revolution. Those in favor of a central government, the Federalists, thought this form of government was necessary to ensure national stability, unity and influence concerning foreign perception. Contrastingly, Anti-Federalists saw this stronger form of government as potentially oppressive and eerily similar to the authority’s tendencies of the British government they had just fought to remove. However, through the final ratification of the Constitution, new laws favoring state’s rights and the election at the turn of the century, one can say that the Anti-Federalist view of America prevails despite making some concessions in an effort to preserve the Union.

    Read More

  • Philosophers Of The Federalist Papers

    1120 Words  | 3 Pages

    Philosophers that shaped and influenced the Federalist include Thomas Hobbes, Jean Jacques Rousseau, Montesquieu and John Locke. These philosophers believed in natural rights and built branches of government that would protect these natural rights. They believed that all men are instinctively selfish individuals and strive for self-preservation. From their viewpoint, balancing mans selfish desires and the desire to safeguard the community would be the ideal form of government for man. These philosophers built their ideas around the theory that too much liberty is bad for society. In order to avoid creating a strong central government comparable to Great B...

    Read More

  • Power of the Branches

    1126 Words  | 3 Pages

    Our Constitution establishes three branches of government and defines their very existence. The reason for the three branches is to separate the powers. The phrase “separation of powers” isn’t in the constitution, but it best explains the intention of the Constitution. It is essential that the assignment of lawmaking, enforcing and interpreting be spread out among the separated powers to ensure that all power doesn’t fall into the lap of one group, or even a power-hungry individual. The powers of which I’m speaking that were intentionally separated by way of the Constitution are the Legislative Branch, Executive Branch and finally, the Judicial Branch.

    Read More

  • The US Constitution

    1697 Words  | 4 Pages

    The founding fathers of the American Constitution divided the government up into the following three branches to prevent the majority from ruling with an iron fist; legislative, judicial, and executive. The three braches were created by the Constitution: Article 1, Legislative branch made up of the House and the Senate, collectively known as Congress; Article 2, Executive branch, or President; Article 3, Judicial branch, made up of the federal courts and the Supreme Court. This was done in efforts to distribute power amongst the three so that one would not have more power than the other. Each branch has the ability to check the power of the other branches. This power check of the other branches is referred to as the checks and balances, better known as the Separation of Powers. This was to prevent tyriny.

    Read More

  • Democracy In The 19th Century

    1358 Words  | 3 Pages

    During the construction of the new Constitution, many of the most prominent and experienced political members of America’s society provided a framework on the future of the new country; they had in mind, because of the failures of the Articles of Confederation, a new kind of government where the national or Federal government would be the sovereign power, not the states. Because of the increased power of the national government over the individual states, many Americans feared it would hinder their ability to exercise their individual freedoms. Assuring the people, both Alexander Hamilton and James Madison insisted the new government under the constitution was “an expression of freedom, not its enemy,” declaring “the Constitution made political tyranny almost impossible.” (Foner, pg. 227) The checks and balances introduced under the new and more powerful national government would not allow the tyranny caused by a king under the Parliament system in Britain. They insisted that in order achieve a greater amount of freedom, a national government was needed to avoid the civil unrest during the system under the Articles of Confederation. Claiming that the new national government would be a “perfect balance between liberty and power,” it would avoid the disruption that liberty [civil unrest] and power [king’s abuse of power in England] caused. The “lackluster leadership” of the critics of the new constitution claimed that a large land area such as America could not work for such a diverse nation.

    Read More

  • Characteristics Of The Founding Documents

    1034 Words  | 3 Pages

    The different viewpoints of federalists and antifederalists were very important in the creation of the founding documents. Federalists believed in a strong central government with little input from the people in order to maintain a stable society.They believed that the rich should be in charge because they were more fit to rule a nation. Documents such as

    Read More

  • Competitive Federalism

    2725 Words  | 6 Pages

    Even before the Constitution was ratified, strong argument were made by Alexander Hamilton, John Jay, and James Madison in the Federalist Papers urging the inclusion of a federal form of government to replace the failed confederation. In Federalist Paper No. 9 Hamilton states, “This form of government is a convention by which several smaller states agree to become members of a large one, which they intend to form. It is s kind of assemblage of societies that constitutes a new one, capable of increasing, by means of new associations, until they arrive to such a degree of power as to be able to provide for the security of a united body” (Usinfo.state.gov). The people of the United States needed a central government that was capable of holding certain powers over the states.

    Read More

  • The Importance Of The Separation Of Powers

    500 Words  | 1 Pages

    The Separation of Powers was important to our Founders because the mistreatment of the power that the colonists gave to their leader was evident. The colonists preferred to avoid a similar occurrence in their new country, where they felt that their leaders were violating their rights. In one of James Madison’s Federalist Papers, it states that “the accumulation of all powers, legislative, judiciary, in the hands, whether of one, a few, or many, and whether hereditary, self-appointed, or elective, may be justly pronounced the very definition of tyranny…(L)iberty requires that the three great departments of power should be separate and

    Read More

  • The Responsibility of the Individual to the Community

    1162 Words  | 3 Pages

    In 1787, Thomas Jefferson, the chief architect of the Declaration of Independence, urged the drafters of the Constitution to clearly identify the rights of the people. Jefferson believed past governments had been harsh and restrictive to the populace, governed questionable areas with no just power to act no jurisdictional authority and the result had been a reduction or loss of individual rights (U.S. Department of State). Like Jefferson, many of the founding fathers' generation feared the encompassing and absolute power of a federal government and demanded a Bill of Rights to protect the people and limit the powers of a federal government (learningtogive.org).

    Read More

More about The New Science of Politics

Open Document