0
What else can I help you with?
What is A type of government in which the national government is weaker than the sum of its parts?
This type of government would be called a Confederation. The early United States under the Articles of Confederation and before the Ratification of the Constitution of 1787, operated this way. A perfect modern parallel would be the European Union.
This was an argument of the antifedalist?
The Anti-Federalists were of the idea a weaker federal government in favor of stronger state legislatures and did not entertain the idea of a new constitution.
What was the opposition of the US Constitution?
When the Constitution was written there were two groups of thought about running a government. There were the Federalist and the anti Federalist. Just as the names suggest the Federalist wanted a strong central government while the anti Federalist wanted a weaker central government and more power for states rights.
What did Jefferson think of Hamiltons excise tax?
Jefferson, who was democratic- republican and supported a weaker central government, says that the excise law is infernal, it's evil. It was stupid to have it in the constitution. He absolutely disagrees on the tax on whiskey. Jefferson was afraid that Hamilton would turn the government a monarchy.
What was the major issue of disagreement?
the major issue was the federalists versus the anti-federalists. Two opposing groups with differing views on how the government should be run. Kinda like the democrats and republicans today. Federalists favored a stronger national government and the anti-federalists favored a weaker federal goverment, more power for the state governments.
What is A type of government in which the national government is weaker than the sum of its parts?
This type of government would be called a Confederation. The early United States under the Articles of Confederation and before the Ratification of the Constitution of 1787, operated this way. A perfect modern parallel would be the European Union.
Did the anti-federalist wanted the states to have powers or the federalists?
Federalists favored the passage of the US Constitution. Anti-Federalists opposed passage because, among other things, they thought the Constitution gave too much power to the federal government at the expense of the state governments. So clearly the Federalists wanted stronger national government and the Anti-Federalists wanted a weaker national government (and, in a zero-sum game, stronger state governments). The ensuing discussion led to the Bill of Rights.
This was an argument of the antifedalist?
The Anti-Federalists were of the idea a weaker federal government in favor of stronger state legislatures and did not entertain the idea of a new constitution.
What was the opposition of the US Constitution?
When the Constitution was written there were two groups of thought about running a government. There were the Federalist and the anti Federalist. Just as the names suggest the Federalist wanted a strong central government while the anti Federalist wanted a weaker central government and more power for states rights.
Why did the anti federalist dislike the proposed constitution-?
The Anti-Federalists disliked the proposed Constitution because they thought it created a federal government with too much power. The inclusion of a Bill of Rights was a compromise to ease their concerns.
What did delegates for stronger state government (weaker national government) believe?
They wanted it, and don't you try for something everything you beilieve in That answer does not make any sense, and neither does the question.
In what ways are the Articles of Confederation and the Constitution similar?
The Articles of Confederation and the Constitution are similar in that they both establish a framework for government in the United States. However, the Constitution provides for a stronger central government with more specific powers and a system of checks and balances, while the Articles of Confederation created a weaker central government with more power given to the individual states.
How does the Indian constitution protect the rights of the weaker sections?
The Indian Constitution protects the rights of weaker sections by giving them more opportunities and preference. Their seats are reserved etc.
How does Indian constitution protects the right of weaker sections?
The Indian Constitution protects the rights of weaker sections by giving them more opportunities and preference. Their seats are reserved etc.
How does Indian Constitution protect the rights of weaker sections?
The Indian Constitution protects the rights of weaker sections by giving them more opportunities and preference. Their seats are reserved etc.
How does the Indian constitution protect the right of weaker sections?
The Indian Constitution protects the rights of weaker sections by giving them more opportunities and preference. Their seats are reserved etc.
How does the Indian constitution protect the rights of weaker sections?
The Indian Constitution protects the rights of weaker sections by giving them more opportunities and preference. Their seats are reserved etc.
