Pascal Ndege
JF-Expert Member
- Nov 24, 2012
- 2,977
- 1,897
Why did Americans want a weak federal government?
Answer,
What were the positive and negative consequences of a weak national government?
First of all, the states did not originally intend to create one nation as is apparent when they called themselves a "league of friendship". By having a weak national government they could remain separate states while maintaining good relations with each other and the rest of the world.
Some form of central government was also necessary to win the war, but that did not mean it needed to be a strong one that could turn around and abuse the powers it was given.
A weak government cannot abuse powers not given, and thus there would be no repeat of the colonist's experience with British rule. Also the colonists feared that some states would dominate in a national government and majority tyranny would result through representation, expenses, and territorial claims.
The supporters of such a weak government thought that, theoretically, if most power was left to the states, classical republican society could continue to flourish throughout the nation because governmental communities would remain smaller and more personalized. Many of the founders realized that government will eventually corrupt and end ( Greece, Britain).
Perhaps by having a weak central government they would prevent great corruption and if the government did become corrupt it could only affect the states and the people to a small extent.
However this did not turn out as planned. By taking it to such an extreme they found that the national government could not perform even the simplest of tasks.
They could not tax; thus, they could not look out for national finances and debt. They also had neither money nor authority to create a national defense system. Without the money it required, it also could not pay soldiers for their time in the Revolutionary War, leading to debt for many soldiers and eventually to Shays' Rebellion.
A weak national government may be able to make agreements with foreign nations but in the case of the Article of Confederation, it could not force the states to comply, causing other nations to refuse to trade.
A weak national government practically cannot regulate anything of importance, including trade or laws made. This creates conflict throughout the states over import/export taxes, ruins the economy, and prevents important national laws from being obeyed.
This weak government also gave state governments too much power to do what they wanted. In the case of the Articles of Confederation the government was nothing more than a thin farce designed to make the states look like a legitimate government while actually doing no good to unite them in the least.
Sent from my iPhone
Answer,
What were the positive and negative consequences of a weak national government?
First of all, the states did not originally intend to create one nation as is apparent when they called themselves a "league of friendship". By having a weak national government they could remain separate states while maintaining good relations with each other and the rest of the world.
Some form of central government was also necessary to win the war, but that did not mean it needed to be a strong one that could turn around and abuse the powers it was given.
A weak government cannot abuse powers not given, and thus there would be no repeat of the colonist's experience with British rule. Also the colonists feared that some states would dominate in a national government and majority tyranny would result through representation, expenses, and territorial claims.
The supporters of such a weak government thought that, theoretically, if most power was left to the states, classical republican society could continue to flourish throughout the nation because governmental communities would remain smaller and more personalized. Many of the founders realized that government will eventually corrupt and end ( Greece, Britain).
Perhaps by having a weak central government they would prevent great corruption and if the government did become corrupt it could only affect the states and the people to a small extent.
However this did not turn out as planned. By taking it to such an extreme they found that the national government could not perform even the simplest of tasks.
They could not tax; thus, they could not look out for national finances and debt. They also had neither money nor authority to create a national defense system. Without the money it required, it also could not pay soldiers for their time in the Revolutionary War, leading to debt for many soldiers and eventually to Shays' Rebellion.
A weak national government may be able to make agreements with foreign nations but in the case of the Article of Confederation, it could not force the states to comply, causing other nations to refuse to trade.
A weak national government practically cannot regulate anything of importance, including trade or laws made. This creates conflict throughout the states over import/export taxes, ruins the economy, and prevents important national laws from being obeyed.
This weak government also gave state governments too much power to do what they wanted. In the case of the Articles of Confederation the government was nothing more than a thin farce designed to make the states look like a legitimate government while actually doing no good to unite them in the least.
Sent from my iPhone
