The Articles of Confederation was a huge failure.
To be accurate, it is a form of self-coup.
In a self-coup, the governing body (be it a group or individual) replaces itself with another governing body. This may be in the form of an individual taking upon itself more or less power, or in this case the government as a whole deciding to replace itself with another government.
Caesar taking over Rome, Napoleon declaring himself Emperor, Shah Pahlavi retaking control in Iran, even the failed Soviet Coup in 1991 are all examples of this. As well as the Constitutional Convention that dissolved the Articles of Confederation and adopted the Constitution. In each of these the individuals tried to work within the confines of the government at the time to take control.
This is different from a conventional coup, where the change is forced by an outside body or individual.
totally wrong of course!! Constitution barely passed because most thought Articles were superior because they limited liberal govt more . Further, Constitution only passed when anti-federalists insisted on Bill of Rights to further limit big liberal govt. Most importantly, 200 years later we know they were right. The Constitution failed to limits govt power as communists like Sanders Obama Warren stand poised to take over our country.
The Articles of Confederation had many problems, 1st, there was no trade agreement between the States.
I'm not saying that the Constitution is the best government ever, but it did address a lot of these problems
Probably the closest we have now to a Confederation is the European Commonwealth. And you already have one major nation leaving the organization, and others are considering leaving.
exactly!!!! they are leaving to regain their freedom!!! not doubling down and totally surrendering their freedom to a libcommie central govt. Do you get it now?
but those were trivial problems!! Most people opposed Constitution because it did not protect freedom of the states or of individual. 200 years in we know they were right with communists like Obama, Sanders Warren MSNBC poised to take over federal govt. Do you understand?
To be accurate, it is a form of self-coup.
In a self-coup, the governing body (be it a group or individual) replaces itself with another governing body. This may be in the form of an individual taking upon itself more or less power, or in this case the government as a whole deciding to replace itself with another government.
Caesar taking over Rome, Napoleon declaring himself Emperor, Shah Pahlavi retaking control in Iran, even the failed Soviet Coup in 1991 are all examples of this. As well as the Constitutional Convention that dissolved the Articles of Confederation and adopted the Constitution. In each of these the individuals tried to work within the confines of the government at the time to take control.
This is different from a conventional coup, where the change is forced by an outside body or individual.
There was a ratification process; it's not like they (the framers) all signed it, and that was the end of it.
total illiteracy the colonies were socialist?? a central govt owned all the businesses?? there was barely a central govt let lone a powerful one with any authoritytried to work together as a corm of Socialist co-operative, and failed. Instead they banded together to form a stronger single nation.
.
I guess you also believe that that England should also return to it's original 7 Kingdoms as well. And that Greece should dissolve as a nation and return to independent city-states.
The other is a hodgepodge of individual nations, some of which have existed in one form or another for thousands of years with thousands of years of warfare and dozens of languages trying to form a Commonwealth. And one that is failing.
.
There are protections for the States and the people, Article 1 section 8 of the Constitution spells out the enumerated power of the Federal Government, it is up to the States and the People to keep the Federal Government in check, the federal government does not have the Constitutional power to grant itself power. The States, realizing that they could get "goodies" from the federal government by enacting policies the federal government want has lead us down this road we are on today, granting power to the federal government in return for "goodies".
There was a ratification process; it's not like they (the framers) all signed it, and that was the end of it.
That is why it was a self-coup. It was an internal change in government, brought upon by the government (and the citizens) themselves. And the process took over 10 months, it did not come about overnight.
In the same way that the rise of Napoleon and the death of the French Republic went through a similar process. The Republic did not just in an overthrow, the people in France wanted a change and stability after The Terror. Much like the rise of Caesar, the ruling body overthrew itself and put in place a Consulate in 1799, which was ultimately responsible in the rise of Napoleon in taking control of the country.
Another similar change was Nazi Germany. Which step by step used the system in place to change the government from a Democratic Republic to a dictatorship.
total illiteracy the colonies were socialist?? a central govt owned all the businesses?? there was barely a central govt let lone a powerful one with any authority
yes a ratification process based on the lie that Constitution would keep central govt very limited. Without the lie not one colony would have voted for it.
yes a ratification process based on the lie that Constitution would keep central govt very limited. Without the lie not one colony would have voted for it.
James, have you read the Constitution? Like I said, Article 1 section 8 spells out the enumerated powers of the Federal Government, all other powers are reserved to the States and the People. The Constitution is just a piece of paper that spells out how the Federal government should operate, it is up to the States and the People to make sure it operates within these boundaries.
The problems are this: Politicians have figured out that they can bribe the public with the public's money. States have figured out that they can get more money (public money, yours and mine) if they acquiesce to the Federal Government requests, even at the sake of their citizens.
People need to hold their States responsible and in return, the States would hold the Federal Government responsible. What WE have forgot is, it was the STATES that created the Federal Government, not the other way around.
There was no lie, they said it from the start.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?