ipl-logo

Apush Dahl Summary

1522 Words7 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: The democratic party history essay

When Dahl first begins the book, on the very first page, he talks about a key point everyone should know. The democratic form of government would not have worked, so a republic form of government was much needed. The whole ideal of the the Democratic Party is that that do care about how much money someone has, religion they follow, and arms. The often tend to help minorities, as well as groups that that are unpopular. Republicans on the other hand focus more on helping defensive issues, gaining profit, bringing more money for military, and fully support the police force. Things such as high government workforce, unions, gays/lesbians, illegal alliances, as well as poor people are all seen as negative impacts on the wellbeing of our society in the eyes of republicans. Now looking back at the original 13 colonies that first settled the US, in my opinion, Dahl was correct when he made the claim that a democratic form of government would not work at all. When attempting to start their own country, starting it off as a republican country was absolutely needed …show more content…

Here enters the idea of amendments. These flaws threatened but also aided the readiness for democracy in the United States. The constitution still allowed slavery, it founded what we now know as the electoral college, protects the president from popular majority, gave state legislatures more power, gave congress more power than any other democratic colony, and didn’t limit the judicial branch. Now when they created this constitution, they didn’t realize at the time that some problems would come with it, but in realty, these flaws help make the constitution stronger. As problems arise within certain aspects of the constitution, the farmers made it so that amendments could be made in order to fix whatever needed fixing. When the farmers thought about allowing amendments to the constitution, I don’t think that they created this

Show More
Related
364 Words | 2 Pages

From the Constitution’s ratification in 1787 through the 1850s, many American historians shared the consensus that the founding fathers had designed the Constitution the way they did because they were trying to protect the citizens and their rights. James Kent was one very prominent historian among this group. In his book, Commentaries on American Law (1826), he stated “THE government of the United States was erected by the free voice and joint will of the people of America, for their common defence [defense] and general welfare...and it is justly deemed the guardian of our best rights, the source of our highest civil and political duties, and the sure means of national greatness.” (Kent) Essentially, James Kent was trying to convey the point

Read More
158 Words | 1 Pages

The Democratic-Republicans followed a strict interpretation of the constitution, where Federalists believed that the document was up for interpretation, and followed a loose construction. The Federalists believed that there should be a strong central government and that elected officials should not be directly influenced by the people. Essentially, they believed that the people would make poor decisions, if left to their own devices. They represented the elite and well off of society. The Democratic-Republicans thought that there should be a small central government, meaning that the power stayed with the states.

Read More
1159 Words | 5 Pages

DBQ Essay The United States Constitution is a document that or founding fathers made in order to replace the failing Articles of Confederation (A of C). Under the Constitution, the current government and states don’t have the problems they faced when the A of C was in action. The Constitution was created in 1788, and held an idea that the whole nation was nervous about. This idea was a strong national government, and the Federalist assured the people that this new government would work. The framers of the Constitution decided to give more power to the Federal government rather than the state governments because the A of C had many problems, there was a need for the layout of new government, rights, and laws, and there was a need for the Federal

Read More
818 Words | 4 Pages

Jefferson took office and acted as if he was the epitome of Republican values. Republicans believed that the role of government needed to decrease. Jefferson tried to minimize federal control through reducing its reach and scope. He pursued a laissez- faire approach to governance in his time as President, which meant that

Read More
827 Words | 4 Pages

Hence Federalists came up with the Bill of Rights as a way to get the Constitution ratified and for people to really see a needed change. The Bill Of Rights which lists specific prohibitions on governmental power, lead the Anti-Federalists to be less fearful of the new Constitution . This guaranteed that the people would still remain to have rights, but the strong central government that the country needed would have to be approved. The 1804 Map of the nation shows that even after the ratification of the United States Constitution there still continued to be “commotion” and dispute in the country.(Document 8) George Washington stated that the people should have a say in the nation and government and everything should not be left to the government to decide.(Document 3) Although George Washington was a Federalist many believed he showed a point of view that seemed to be Anti-Federalists. Many believed that The Bill of Rights needed to be changed and modified and a new document’s time to come into place.

Read More
233 Words | 1 Pages

Consider the lobster is full of catching imagery and description, however these two instances of imagery are the ones that especially caught my eye. “ Camden, with its old money and yatchy harbor and five star restaurants and phenomenal B&B’s, and Rockland, a serious old fishing town that hosts the festival every summer in historic Harbor Park, right along the water.” This completely describes the atmosphere of Camden along with the towns character. Old, quaint, luxurious, these are words that pop into my mind as the author describes Camden.

Read More
586 Words | 3 Pages

Jefferson's democratic-republican party views are always contradictory to the Federalist party founded by Alexander Hamilton. Jefferson believes in small federal government and more powers to individual states, his policies are around people and they should rule the government. Jefferson always follows strict constitutional rules. Jefferson always believed the country economy will improve through the agriculture. Hamilton views are very contrasted to Jefferson's view.

Read More
669 Words | 3 Pages

However this idea was eventually scrapped and they wrote a whole new constitution. This constitution would protect America from tyranny, so they could keep a civilized and united country. The Constitution that was made helped defend America from almost all types of tyranny and is still helping us hundreds of years later. One way the Constitution prevented tyranny is by supporting Federalism.

Read More
115 Words | 1 Pages

There are a lot of things that Federalists and Democratic Republicans have in common so out of all of them these are some that I found on page 292, according to page 292 on the bottom it states that the Alexander Hamilton was the leader of the Federalist. The Federalists where ruled by the wealthy class. They had a strong federal government, they were allies with Britain, they protected tariffs. On the other hand there is the Democratic Republicans. The Democratic Republicans were ruled by the people not just high class or low class like the Federalist but anyone.

Read More
566 Words | 3 Pages

By writing a new constitution, the farmers were able to address the problems which the nation faced under the Articles of Confederation. The most important issues were addressed by the establishment of a stronger national government that was selected by the citizens. Unlike the Articles of Confederation, were each state maintain its own sovereign rule, each state was represented equally in Congress through the representatives elected by its citizen. Therefore, power was no longer placed in a single institution such as the states or one overall governing body, but rather in the hands of the people. This government had the power to tax, regulate trade and commerce, and coin a national currency with a majority vote versus a unanimous vote.

Read More
1268 Words | 6 Pages

A huge part of our nation’s rights and power are mostly expressed in the constitution created by our Founding Fathers. The constitution is a core aspect of the government because it has built foundations for our citizens and nation’s leaders to follow. The constitutions consist of amendments such as the bill of rights which includes the first ten amendments. Since the constitution is such an important factor of our government today, it is important to have a secure and difficult amendment process to be sure that each amendment has a purpose and help establish a stable government. The amendment process involves having both the houses of Congress and the states vote.

Read More
1106 Words | 5 Pages

The Constitution—the foundation of the American government—has been quintessential for the lives of the American people for over 200 years. Without this document America today would not have basic human rights, such as those stated in the Bill of Rights, which includes freedom of speech and religion. To some, the Constitution was an embodiment of the American Revolution, yet others believe that it was a betrayal of the Revolution. I personally believe that the Constitution did betray the Revolution because it did not live up to the ideals of the Revolution, and the views of the Anti-Federalists most closely embodied the “Spirit of ‘76.” During the midst of the American Revolution, authors and politicians of important documents, pamphlets, and slogans spread the basis for Revolutionary ideals and defined what is known as the “Spirit of ‘76”.

Read More
1324 Words | 6 Pages

Justice Thurgood Marshall Response Justice Thurgood Marshall said in his “Reflections on the Bicentennial of the United States Constitution”, “I do not believe the meaning of the Constitution was forever ‘fixed’ at the Philadelphia Convention. Nor do I find the wisdom, foresight, and sense of justice exhibited by the framers particularly profound. To the contrary, the government they devised was defective from the start, requiring several amendments, a civil war, and momentous social transformation to attain the system of constitutional government and its respect for the individual freedoms and human rights, that we hold as fundamental as today” (Marshall). In this passage of his essay, Judge Marshall is critical of the government that is

Read More
494 Words | 2 Pages

The new constitution, a document granting the framework for a new democratic government, replacing the Articles of the Confederation. This new document gained approval from some of the citizens, but also raised questions and concerns from others. There was a constant back and forth between the two groups on whether or not the constitution should be ratified. This editorial provides historical background on the issue and expresses my opinion on which side I would’ve chosen.

Read More
544 Words | 3 Pages

Problems in America only grew worse when democracy was being added to the mixture of already complicated politics. In Woody Holton’s book, Unruly American and the Origins of the Constitution, he stated that, “many Americans. . . were growing ‘tired of an excess of democracy,’ a ‘prevailing rage of excessive democracy. . .’ [or] ‘democratical tyranny.’” Democracy was an attempt at home rule among the colonies, but not everyone was happy with this extreme excess of colonial citizens contribution to the government.

Read More

More about Apush Dahl Summary

Related Topics

Open Document