Who wouldn't be? :) When the founders wrote the constitution, much of it was a direct reflection of abuses by the British, which showed them how damaging a strong central government could be to personal liberty. They had a different (and might I say Superior) plan on how to set up enough of a government to maintain a nation. WIth many reasons why the Founding Fathers were suspicious of a strong centralized government, the most concern was the depletion of individual freedom. Powers wouldn't be separated in a strong central government. An elite group would be formed and they would possibly use their government positions for selfish reasons. Not all were. Alexander Hamilton is probably the best-known among the Founding Fathers for wanting to establish a powerful, centralized federal government. Having not been born in the U.S., he failed to understand the allegiances people held to their home states -- his allegiance was with the union as a whole. But most of the Founders were wary of a powerful government, for the very reason that they had just fought off a powerful government in Britain and were determined not to have the same thing happen here, as they set out to establish a new, representative government of their own.
After their experience with England (after the Revolutionary War), the Founding Fathers were afraid of political power. The Articles of Confederation therefore contained many weaknesses. The Founding Fathers feared that the government might become too powerful and tyrannical. But apparently, they created it too weak and had to scrap it for a new constitution.
AnswerThe farmers were not afraid of political power, per se, just of a strong central power, like the monarchy in England. The original thought was to have each state be completely sovereign, much like the European Union or the United Nations. The central government had very limited power and could impose very few limits. Unlike the European Union and the United Nations, however, the United STATES had very little history, and were unable to establish sovereign states that cooperated well with each other. The UNITED States provided a strong central government and uniformity in interstate commerce and coined money, which obviously has been much more successful.yah!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Previous said:
"They had just fought an 8-1/2 year war to get rid of too much centralized power (the Revolutionary War). They certainly did not want to recreate that when they wrote the Constitution.
See the history section on James Madison under www.montpelier.org for more info."
Actually, that's not accurate. The reason that they were against a strong central government had very little to do with the British System of government in existence at that time and less to do with the Kings abuses of that system. Their fears were based on the studies of the whole of human history. They were strongly influenced by contemporary philosophers like john Locke, Alexis De Tocqueville, William Blackstone and also a lot by ancient thinkers like Aristotle. These philosophers contended that whenever a strong central government was present in history, despite the good intentions its leaders or those who put it in place had at one point that that government would eventually descend into deep corruption and would infringe upon the natural rights of its own citizens. An accurate description of their beliefs can be found in the quote "Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely."
This belief was not a simple minded one held by blind philosophers that does not apply to our day but an observation of what has happened every single time a strong central government comes into power throughout human history and is just as important today as it was 200 years ago or even 6000 years ago. To see this you need but look at the differences in freedom and equality and opportunity in America as compared to nations like China, or even semi socialist countries like those of Europe. Now, the mainstream media may tell you that things are better there and we are behind the curve when it comes to the overall welfare of the people and healthcare and civil rights. But having myself lived in several other countries i can tell you that the reality is that, though our system is not perfect, it is the best one because it limits big government and that the more we cease to do that, the worse our country will become. Not because those government programs are not well intentioned or because providing equality for everyone is a bad ideal, but because when you spend someone elses money in order to fix another someone elses problem you tend not to be very effective or efficient as you would be if the money was yours or if it was being spent on you. And that is why big government wastes almost every penny it takes in. (both bush AND Obama together wasted TRILLIONS of dollars on equally fruitless things. One on right wing useless policies the other on left wing useless policies) The people who spend it are neither giving nor receiving that money, just spending it.
Oh, and when you have big government its less governed by the people, which lets politicians be more self serving because they don't have to worry as much about getting fired (impeached, recalled) by the people. So naturally they tend to help themselves while screwing over the rest of society. That's true of both conservatives and liberals.
In the time preceding the Constitution the colonies were still fiercely independent. Many were very sensitive to the development of a strong central government because of how they were mistreated by the British government before the Revolutionary War. The anti-Federalists wanted to prevent the formation of a federal government in order to retain their political and religious liberty. This resulted in a compromise, otherwise known as the Bill of Rights.
Americans had a lot of trouble with the strong central government of King George III which had ruled the 13 American colonies, and they did not want to have those kinds of trouble again.
fifyidrtfk[odsawe
Any central government by definition is in power. If it were not in power it would not be a central government.
the bill of rights
Articles of Confederation
The Founders thought the power of government could be limited by making the government only make certain laws and have a new president every four years.
The Federalists supported the stronger central government created by the US Constitution. The Anti-Federalists opposed giving the central government more power than the states, or too much power over US citizens.
good governments get their power from their people!
The type of government where the central government has all the power and the people have none is called a dictatorship.
Anti-federalists and the increase the power of the central government?
false
It is called devolution. It is based on the need to give regional units the power to make legislation that is relevant it.
Central government
A government in which all power belongs to a central agency is a monarchy. It is also called a unitary government.