Term papers writing service


The importance of domestic and foreign affairs in shaping the politics of 1790s

  • This new act led to the Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions, which were domestic affairs that stated the nullification of such laws as the Alien and Sedition Acts was necessary and recommended because it was unconstitutional;
  • Another issue caused much tension between the two rivals, and this was the proposed Bank of the United States;
  • Whiskey, the economic lifeblood of many backcountry distillers and settlers, was very valuable; when a small scuffle between the distillers and local authorities ensued over the tax, Washington , demonstrating the awesome power of the federal government, marched 13,000 troops through the land to quell the rebellions which, in reality, barely even existed;
  • States-rightists were angered, which meant Jeffersonians were angered;
  • How to Write a Summary of an Article?

The Relative Importance of Domestic and Foreign Affairs on American Politics in 1790 Since the birth of the American democracy, indeed since the birth of political philosophy, theories regarding the importance of a cohesive and centralized government have been in direct opposition to theories concerning the preservation of individual liberty.

The question of the size and the accountability of the central government has been an intellectual undercurrent defining American politics since its beginnings. In 1789, when the Constitution was ratified, serious economic and social problems plagued the nation; problems polarizing the intellectual elite and engendering fundamentally different concepts about the future of the nation.

All throughout the 1790s, these domestic issues divided the young nation. Though political parties as specific electioneering institutions came about in the 1790s, the philosophic backbone on which they laid their ideologies preceded the ratification of the Constitution. The most important embodiment of these different beliefs on government can be found in public debate between the Federalists and the Antifederalists during the course of the ratification of the Constitution. From the fall of 1787 to the spring of 1788, eighty five essays written by Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay enumerated the federalists beliefs imbedded within the Constitution.

The philosophic opposition of the federalists and antifederalist helped develop principles which would form the basis of American politics in the 1790s. The ideas most central to their difference in political philosophy, were the scale and representation of the government. The federalists, on the other hand, believed that precisely the virtue of a strong republic is selection of representatives based on merit and ability, that, as Madison asserted in Federalist No.

Shaping American politics in the 1790s

Furthermore, federalists and antifederalists differed in their fear of tyranny. The antifederalists believed that the greatest danger facing a government the scale of the United States was the continued trend towards aristocracy, the capacity of a few to tyrannized the many. As such, they vehemently opposed the supremacy and elastic clause within the Constitution, endowing the central government with substantial power.

The Federalists, in contrast, believed that it was these very features within the Constitution that protected the government from what they believed to be a far greater danger: Soon after the Constitution was passed, with these fundamentally elitist principles in mind, federalist thinkers of the Revolutionary War began tackling the economic woes that plagued the nation under the Articles of Confederation.

Though some contend that different world views about the perpetuation of democracy were important issues of distinction between thinker in late 18th century America ; instead, it was these economic concerns that played the most important role in shaping 1790s political structure. From this elitist political belief, he designed an economic system around affluent land owners, believing that tying capital to the wellbeing of the government would causes prosperity to trickle down to the masses.

Within this economic system, he believed that by paying off the incurred 54 million dollars national debt at face value, the government would tie wealth to the success of the nation. To Hamiltonthe national debt was in fact a cohesive force for colonial unity and prosperity, not a burden on the wellbeing of the young nation.

  • The Alien laws attacked immigrants, who tended to join the Democratic-Republics, the party of the common man;
  • Within the very concept of republicanism, contradiction is imbedded;
  • Foreign affairs such as policies coming about due to the French Revolution and a strained relationship with Spain affected the shaping of American politics, but domestic affairs seem to have affected them more;
  • The United States domestic affairs escalated as more threatening foreign affairs were on the horizon.

Additionally, Hamilton believed that the national government should assume the 21. This, he believed, was necessary in order to strengthen the union between the states, and to distribute the economic costs of a war which, he argued, was fought for the common good of the whole, not the good of the states which incurred the greatest debt.

  1. During the run of President Washington, Thomas Jefferson and Alexander Hamilton faced off because of their opposing views of what the government should be like.
  2. The goal was to construct a new nation from scratch, pioneering representative democracy as a new form of government, while at the same time pioneering the uncharted American continent. The bank would be used by the federal government to conveniently deposit surplus monies, allowing federal funds to remain in circulation.
  3. The Revolution of American Conservatism.
  4. The positive of his plans were that they repaid the debt the United States had collected, but they caused great tension between the North and South. These affected people were largely Jefferson-supporters, which brought Jeffersonians and Hamiltonians further at-odds.
  5. It was this difference between the two that eventually led to the formation of the two-party system around 1792. From this elitist political belief, he designed an economic system around affluent land owners, believing that tying capital to the wellbeing of the government would causes prosperity to trickle down to the masses.

To pay this debt, Hamilton urged that tariffs, rendered important through vigorous manufacturing and trade efforts, be instilled and that internal revenue be collected through the imposition of excise taxes on domestic products such as most notably whiskey.

Whiskey, the economic lifeblood of many backcountry distillers and settlers, was very valuable; when a small scuffle between the distillers and local authorities ensued over the tax, Washingtondemonstrating the awesome power of the federal government, marched 13,000 troops through the land to quell the rebellions which, in reality, barely even existed.

The national government, clearly, had grown tremendously by the hands of Alexander Hamilton. A bank of this sort would be a private institution in which the federal government would be the major shareholder; a place to deposit surplus money, an institution to help the circulation of wealth remain within the United States, and a means in which to stabilize the economy.

Categories

Despite the intentions of Hamiltonit was the proposal for a national bank which initiated large-scale resistance to the expanding power of the central government, and the diminishing rights of the states. The Jeffersonians opposed the expanding power of the national government as unconstitutional and as a threat to the limited sovereignty of the states.

Jefferson pioneered a strict constructionist view of the constitution: In effect, Jefferson placed much faith in the intimacy of specialized state politics, and the ultimate accountability of the central government to those partially sovereign mini-governments.

As such, universal education and freedom of speech were two hallmarks of the Jeffersonian epochal cry for populist politics. Elections themselves, because of Jeffersonians, for the first time, were brought directly to the people.

When the Federalists in 1798 passed the Alien and Sedition Act through congress, stripping the nation of its cherished freedom of dissent, it was not the courts or the Constitution which defended the rights of the individual—it was the presence of a coherent and well defined party of opposition, it was the Democratic-Republicans.

The principles concerning fundamental Constitutional law that arose from the debate between the federalists and antifederalists, essentially, were crystallized into political parties during the 1790s—the Federalists and the Democratic-Republicans—due to the domestic issue of national economy; however, the divisions between these parties were only truly illuminated as they reaction to the French Revolution.

Though in 1789 both parties supported the French in their early efforts to shackle the power of the king through constitutional democracy, by 1792, when the Robespierre was using the guillotine to perpetuate the Revolution, to behead the Louis XVI, and to abolish Christianity, the political parties divided.

Within the very concept of republicanism, contradiction is imbedded: Our problem, in a nation of power divided within the central government, is particularly acute and our electorate particularly detached. In the 1790s, domestic concerns over the national economy, coupled with the philosophic concerns of the accountability of the government and the question of foreign perpetuation of liberty, gave rise to distinct political parties which have functioned as partial antidotes to the fundamental republican contradiction.

New York Fischer, David.

  1. He was soon an influence in most to all domestic affairs, and he used his role as Secretary of Treasury to put in place any plan that he felt was necessary, even if it was controversial. This event seems to be the defining moment that began a split-party government.
  2. This, he believed, was necessary in order to strengthen the union between the states, and to distribute the economic costs of a war which, he argued, was fought for the common good of the whole, not the good of the states which incurred the greatest debt. The economic changes that were put into place by Hamilton caused many rebellions by the American citizens, and made the government learn the most effective ways to enforce their power of them.
  3. To establish national credit, Hamilton felt it was direly necessary for the federal government to acknowledge and pay for all national debts at face value, plus interest, and to assume the debt of all of the states.
  4. He was soon an influence in most to all domestic affairs, and he used his role as Secretary of Treasury to put in place any plan that he felt was necessary, even if it was controversial. That division put aside, the suppression of the revolt raised the respect for the new federal government substantially.

The Revolution of American Conservatism. New York Ford, Paul.

A Commentary on the Constitution of the United States.