The Constitution and its critics

For section three, the question is: Were critics of the Constitution – most citizens and the Jeffersonian Republicans – correct? Was the Constitution a “betrayal of the American Revolution? Or were the Federalists right? Was the colonial model of democratic political culture unsustainable as a national model, and did America need a strong, centralized, governmental authority to survive? Did checks and balances and the Bill of Rights present enough safeguards and limitations to authority to ameliorate the criticisms of the Constitution that were prevalent in the late 1780s? Or were these “devices merely legislative wishful thinking? Notes: There are three basic questions in this essay problem. First, did the solutions presented by the Constitution “betray the principles of the Revolution, by implementing the same forms of government that the colonists rebelled against? Second, were the Federalists correct in claiming that the colonial model of democracy, as represented by the Articles of Confederation, simply couldn’t work in a unified, democratic nation? And third, did Federalist attempts to preserve individual rights and limit the authority of the new Constitutional government succeed? Or put another way: Was colonial democracy actually sustainable, now that America was an independent nation faced with serious emergencies, such as the economy? If not, was the solution a government such as the one proposed in the Constitution? If so, would the “fixes represented by “devices such as checks and balances and the Bill of Rights preserve an acceptable semblance of individual rights and local democratic culture in the new nation? These questions can serve as a basic outline or approach to the essay problem; answer each one, linking them together as they relate to each other, and you’ve got a reasonable essay format, in three or four parts, depending on what you conclude. Of course, it’s not enough to state opinions on the questions above; you’ll need to present factual material relevant to each, analyze that factual material, and give conclusions. These would involve, direct, specific use of the basic reading materials in the section, and – if you choose – your own research, online or in the library. Don’t hesitate to directly reference the Articles of Confederation, Constitution, Bill of Rights, Federalist Papers, etc. Now is your chance, without straying into “TLDR territory…. There are no “right or “wrong answers to this essay problem; it’s inviting your analysis and opinion – and credible opinions range widely. The grade won’t depend on your interpretation, but on whether you’ve done the effort and can sustain that interpretation on a credible analysis of existing facts. I’ve got nothing invested in whether you come down on the side of the Federalists, the Jef-Reps/Democratic Republicans, both, or neither; I’m looking for a good argument, with facts. There isn’t necessarily a “sequence of answers for this essay problem. You can, for example, argue that the majority of citizens and the Jeffersonian Republicans were right; the Constitution was a “betrayal of the Revolution, and then argue that the Federalists were also right; the colonial democratic model couldn’t work in a national democracy. (Both sides being right, you’d be arguing, isn’t actually a contradiction.) Or you could argue that both sides were in error, and a third way – perhaps an extensive reform of the existing Articles of Confederation – was available and would’ve worked. There are some other, credible arguments you could offer as well. The point is, at first reading, this essay problem may imply that either the Federalists were right, or the Jeffersonian Republicans and the majority of American citizens who were opposed to the Constitution were right – but you, the essay writer, don’t necessarily have to accept that implication. Both sides or neither side could be right or wrong; you decide, and then construct your case. While that does present a somewhat “unstructured approach to the essay problem, it also frees you up to try some interesting things. Finally, you’re probably already aware that there is a lot here that is relevant to partisan politics and issues in the United States today. I won’t go through the myriad issues that original, political questions of “authority, “individual rights, “local democracy and “limitations of power affects or adds context to; a few minutes of thought and an awareness of recent events and issues will get you there. If you want to bring up some of those issues in the context of this essay problem, that’s fine. If you don’t, that’s equally fine. It’s entirely up to you, and the only way it’ll influence your grade is if your comments lend credence to your analysis or heft to the obvious effort you’ve put into the essay. But you can also lend credence or add heft in other ways without referencing current affairs – so again, it’s up to you. One thing I can promise you with certainty: Whatever your point of view, you very likely won’t offend me. As always, I will be looking for essays that show obvious effort, have cogent, coherent analyses of the issues the essay problem raises, use factual material in support of the analysis, are written clearly and effectively, use citations and have a bibliography – in that order or priority. Let me know if you have any questions. JM