Have you ever wondered what the US would be like if our government was a tyranny? Well, thanks to our founding fathers for creating a strong constitution, we don’t have to worry about that. The constitution was written in 1787 in Philadelphia. The problem was that the existing government that was under the Articles Of Confederation wasn’t very successful. Therefore, the fifty-five delegates representing twelve out of the thirteen states came together to tweak our constitution to create a strong government without allowing one person, or group of people to have too much power. The framers used the Constitution to protect against Tyranny in three ways federalism, separation of powers, and checks and balances.…
The rejection of constitutionalism by Charles I’s sour relationship with the Parliament and Oliver Cromwell’s dissolving of Parliament, along with the acceptance of constitutionalism through the Glorious Revolution during the reign of William and Mary all resulted in a strong English power and newly reinforced parliamentary rights.…
Without the decisions the government made together we would've never came into an equal equality, without solving the world’s biggest problems. In the summer of 1787 , fifty five delegates representing twelve of the thirteen states met in philadelphia to fix the national gov’t. The problem was that the government under the articles of confederation, the challenge was to create a strong central government without letting anyone get too much power. How did the Constitution Guard against Tyranny? In further reading you will see how they divided the powers that were given to them to help the nation and states around the world, that fills up the world’s problems.…
1660, the British came back to England after 100 years. The British had abandoned the colonists and when they came back they would tax them and make them only trade with them. The British had the power to make the colonists do that , so technically they the British had the power to control them as well as they had the power to punish them. This is an example of tyranny because the British had absolute power to tell the colonists what to do. Their was about to be a tyranny in the constitution but, to avoid it the framers used federalism, separating federal powers, checks & balances , and small/large state compromise.…
1. Alexis De Tocqueville: a young French aristocrat who visited the United States in the 1830s, and was amazed by the informal manners and democratic attitudes of Americans. The most able men in the United States are very rarely placed at the head of affairs,” Alexis de Tocqueville concluded in Democracy in America (1835). The reason, Tocqueville suggested, lay in the character of democracy itself. Most citizens ignored important policy issues, jealously refused to elect their intellectual superiors, and listened in awe to “the clamor of a mountebank [a charismatic fraud] who knows the secret of stimulating their tastes.”…
Written by Alexis De Tocqueville, Democracy in America critiques American customs through observations. (reword) Tocqueville examines the vast differences between his own, French, culture and the new, unrefined culture that is fostering in America. He observes in mystified awe at racial relations between not only the Native Americans and the Europeans, but the Africans that were recently brought to America. The race relations which present themselves in America are inconsistent with that in Europe. Slavery in America has developed “naturally with the society to which it belongs,” it has manifested into every household and taken over the whole country, but what Tocqueville finds fascinating is the lack of economic betterment that comes from the use of slaves in everyday labor (288). To further this argument, Tocqueville employs the use of logos and effectively describes the injurious consequences…
In the year of 1787 the rights and liberties of citizens of the United States would be changed for eternity. The Constitution was signed to create a democracy by which the United States was governed to protect against tyranny (cruel or unjust powers). Before the Constitution, under the Articles of Confederation, there was no chief executive or leader, no court system, and there wasn’t even a way for the central government to force a state to pay taxes. So, how did the Constitution guard against tyranny? Federalism, separation of powers, checks and balances, and big states v. small states are all ways that protect the people of the United States and the Constitution against tyranny.…
In May, 1787, 55 men from 11 states gathered in Philadelphia for the Constitutional Convention. The object of the meeting was to frame a government that was strong enough to hold the states and people together, but also could guard against tyranny. At the time, the Articles of Confederation was in use, but it wasn’t working. So the framers were stuck with a big question. How could the new constitution guard against tyranny? Now, we know that the constitution guards against tyranny because it has federalism, checks and balances, separation of powers, and how representation is set up.…
Tocqueville believed that since despotism is not restricted by laws or rules and being an arbitrary power which resists the notion of popular sovereignty, a democracy based on equality would result in isolationism ultimately creating a state of despotism. Tocqueville argued that equality resulted in citizens compromising their abilities due to the government limiting the individual’s potential. That a government based on the desires of the majority under the concept of equality actually resulted in isolationism by in essence lining citizen up shoulder to shoulder with no bond to link them together. With a system of equality the common link shared by men turns away from the common good and leads to self-interest and personal greed. Citizens…
In chapter seven, Tocqueville primarily talks about the unlimited power of the omnipotence of the majority of America. The natural strengths of the majority rule are clearly elaborated by Tocqueville in two ways. First he asserts that “The very essence of democratic government consists in the absolute sovereignty of the majority” (p. 282). Meaning that the essence of democratic government has determined the inevitable fate of the superior power of majority rule in this country. On the other hand, this trend has been strengthened by the constitution of some major states in the United States. The legislature, which can be the most vulnerable governmental agency affected by the majority, is the best embodiment of the majority rule. It is due to the fact that the lawmakers are directly elected by the majority, besides, their term of service are incredibly short as compared with the great power they were…
Tocqueville compared the American system of government to other forms of European governments. In the European governments, the people had no power, or say in how they wanted their government run. He praised the system of American government for its success, and held it as a role model for what European governments would eventually conform to. Despite the praise he gave the American government, Tocqueville had reservations. With great power comes great responsibility, and if the majority rules the American people, who ruled the majority? This is where the majority exceeding its limits comes into play. This affected the United States as the minority did not get a say in how they wanted their government to be run. He feared that all the virtues he honored would be endangered by the “tyranny of the majority”. The American Government was successful, but still contained flaws. Tocqueville believed that in order to keep the country from the “tyranny of the majority”, more power would need to be given to the minority to balance the power of the people and keep the majority from abusing their power.…
There are two main types of judicial interpretation used by judges: originalist and evolutionist (also known as living Constitutionalists. The interpretation method used by each judge is critical as it shapes his or her understanding and determination of law.…
The Constitution guards against tyranny in four different ways: Federalism, the separation of powers, checks and balances, and equal representation for each state.…
One of the fundamental questions raised by De Tocqueville is, "When a man or party suffers an injustice in the United States, to whom can he turn?" (252) In the American democratic experience three separate branches of government exist, but, de Tocqueville does not feel that this mitigates the threat towards tyranny. Furthermore, he states, "in a democracy organized on the model of the United States there is only one authority, one source of strength and of success, and nothing outside it." (255) Under De Tocqueville, this "authority" is the majority and its reign absolute.…
The constitutional paradigm according to Roush is a reference point. It’s an idea that guides people in the military to operate ethically, and clarify good from bad. There are four principals that must be used sequentially. The constitutional paradigm would be used when there are two conflicting moral issues that might both either be a win win or be a lose lose situation. The paradigm is a hierarchal system that places where your first moral obligations are. This system is mostly used in the military due to the high pressure and quick commands that a commanding officer might have to make. Not using this paradigm properly could lead to serious long term effect either physically like getting jail time or emotionally by doing something that at a later time you regret. The constitutional paradigm is the idea that you put everything before yourself. It’s saying that you need to make sure that you think of you country and your mission before you worry about your own problems. If someone thinks that an order is trivial that the paradigm describes 4 principles you should go through to make your final decision on this order. The first is the priorities of loyalties; does your order interfere with the hierarchy? The 2nd is to resolve the conflicting royalties if they exist. The 3rd principle is if you cannot follow through with the order should consider if this is the job for them and consider if they need to resign or not. Although penalties of this could result is actions by UCMJ. The 4th principle is rare but if an order is legal or offensive you can withhold the loyalties given in the first principle. It seems weird that you would put yourself last but if everyone put themselves at the top of their priorities the military would have the one common goal of protecting and defending the United States.…