ipl-logo

Mercy Otis Warren's Rhetorical Analysis Of The Articles Of Confederation

2253 Words10 Pages

In 1776, after a long and tedious war, the 13 United States of America successfully gained independence from their tyrannical British Monarchy; however, gaining independence was not the only change the states needed to survive after those draining times. Each of the 13 states wished to remain sovereign, taking steps alone in their best individual interest, which caused disjunction within the country. In 1777, the Continental Congress came together in order to resolve these issues and create a new, more unified nation. As a result, the Articles of Confederation were born, in an attempt for these states to act together and become a true unified nation. Unfortunately, this document was heavily flawed and too weak to form a successful central …show more content…

Warren used a very effective rhetoric in her argument, depicting the suffering the country had to go through in order to gain the freedoms they had. She asked the reader, how could any american turn their back on the values and ideals our fathers worked so hard to gain for us? She contested that anyone who loves liberty and american values should be an Anti-federalist because anyone who called themselves american must want to ensure the liberties they fought so hard to achieve including the right to vote, state sovereignty, and other rights that would be outlined in the document the Anti-federalists wanted: The Bill of Rights. Not only did she use this powerful rhetoric, but Warren also made her argument very straightforward and outlined it in such a way that anyone could follow. She goes through 18 separate points outlining why the new ratification would do no justice. These points include that it would limit the press, unbalance power as the executive and legislative branches could merge, there would be no limit for judiciary powers, there would be unjust representation, the people would have less rights, and many more. Her argument is easy to understand and outlines the exact negative outcomes of the constitution, while making it known that its ratification means turning their back on the American

Show More
Related
390 Words | 2 Pages

To start off, in the first paragraph, Susan B Anthony introduces her topic. She speaks on the woman right to vote and explains she has been charged for the crime of voting. To support that voting as a woman should not be a crime, she uses the national constitution as evidence. “It shall be my work this evening to prove to you that in thus voting, I not only

Read More
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
141 Words | 1 Pages

In your discussion, there are valid points about the Article of Confederation that cripple the government and the states. The balance and supportive evidence allows an articulate flow of your paragraphs as I read along. In an agreement, the Article of Confederation left the government with minimal power and the states with more only provided the instability to those actions and affect the colonist of each state. Also, the uneasiness of the government’s control and the state’s managing within the states left other affairs in question, such as the foreign trade, debt from the previous war and treaties or taxation. However, those issues only formulated the urgency for additional balance among the government and 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
564 Words | 3 Pages

Per Henry “A year ago the minds of our citizens were in perfect repose” before ratification. Henry is concerned with the rights of the people and what would happen to them after ratification. “You ought to be extremely cautious, watchful, jealous of your liberty; for, instead of securing your rights, you may lose them forever.” Henry is objecting to ratification because “one government cannot reign over so extensive a county without absolute despotism.” The government will take over with power of their three branches and limit the people’s right to an extremely low point.

Read More
498 Words | 2 Pages

We as Americans can say that we are proud of what we have fought for and achieved. Years ago, oppression of self law and liberties constrained us from being the free men and women we are today. Though we see good in the change, there must be order to the new chaos we have witnessed. We fought as a Union to gain this freedom, yet we act as distant siblings traveling in their own direction. This is why we must formulate a new government, a government for the people, by the people.

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
176 Words | 1 Pages

The young nation, barely three years old, was dying. Ten years after the Declaration of Independence, America was struggling to hold itself together. The Articles of Confederation, designed during the Revolution, demolished even the inkling of monarchy by forcing the national government to abide by the whim of the states. During the Revolutionary War the states held together out of necessity, but after the war, the states became hostile to their neighbors. It quickly became evident that a serious crisis has settled upon the United States.

Read More
825 Words | 4 Pages

Warren was furious at the proposal of this such called Constitution. She argues how they fought for Independence but with this proposal, everything will go back to the old way with Britain and they won’t be independent anymore. Warren feels that all the people are being left out of the “secrecy” of the federal government and with the constitution, they will have more power to be secret, deciding ideas on their own. She is mad that the representatives of the government aren’t corresponding to the people and are making decisions themselves, without the approval or even say of the people. In her eyes, the people aren’t being represented, as they should be.

Read More
585 Words | 3 Pages

Following the Revolutionary War, America had just gained independance from Great Britain and needed to form a new government. The Articles of Confederation were established as an attempt to create a government that was unlike Britain’s. Unfortunately, the Articles of Confederation had several weaknesses. When in the process of repairing those weaknesses, the Federalists and the Anti-federalists formed. The Articles of Confederation were very weak as well as useless to America and because of this, the Federalists and the Anti-Federalists could not agree on a new type of government.

Read More
724 Words | 3 Pages

The Articles of Confederation was an agreement among the thirteen original states of the United States that served as the first constitution. The Articles had first been introduced by Richard Henry Lee in the Second Continental Congress. Although the Articles of Confederation has made its contributions throughout history, the Articles, however, did not last very long and had been proven inadequate from the very start. I agree with this statement based on the examples and analysis of the Constitution I will soon provide. The Articles of Confederation were written during a time when the American people feared a strong national government.

Read More
99 Words | 1 Pages

The Federalists wanted a strong central government. The Anti- Federalists claims Constitution gives the central government too much power and, and they worried about the new constitution will not give them any rights. That the new system threatened freedom; Also, threatened the sovereignty of the states and personal liberties; failed to protect individual rights. Besides, some of famous peoples such as " Patrick Henry" and artists have came out against the Constitution. Although the anti-Federalists were unsuccessful in stopping the passage of the Constitution, their efforts have been responsible for the creation and implementation of the Bill of

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
918 Words | 4 Pages

Slavery in the U.S. Constitution After the Unites States declared Independence from Great Britain in 1776, they greatly feared a strong national government that would be like a monarchy like the one Great Britain had. To prevent this tyrannical government from happening in the U.S., a convention of delegates from all thirteen states were brought together to create the U.S.’s first written constitution: the Articles of Confederation. This convention was called the Continental Congress. The Articles of Confederation focused on having a federal government, or a loose alliance of the states.

Read More
445 Words | 2 Pages

The Anti- Federalists claimed the Constitution gave the central government an excessive amount of power, and while not a Bill of Rights the folks would be in danger of oppression. Both Hamilton and Madison argued that the Constitution did not want a Bill of Rights, that it might produce a "parchment barrier" that restricted the rights of the folks, as critical protective

Read More

More about Mercy Otis Warren's Rhetorical Analysis Of The Articles Of Confederation

Open Document