No. The Founding Fathers decided the Articles of Confederation were too flawed, and decided to start fresh with a clean document, Any system resembling the British parliamentary system was anathema.
Yes , it would've been possible to amend the articles of confederation. In fact, at the Constitutional Convention of May 1787 in Philadelphia, they did exactly that; state leaders and representatives of states came together and revised the Articles of Confederation.
providing the nation with experience in self government under a written document
provide for statehood for western territories.
they weren't successful because they,the Articles of Confederation attempted to create a nation that was a bit like what Europe has become a group of essentially independent nations joined together for defense.For
Democratic government base their authority and legitimacy on the people of their country. If you have a King who rules by virtue of family ties or the will of God or a dictator who rules by fear and physical power over the people you do not have a democratic government. There are many ways the people of a country can arrange their political affairs to be considered democratic, but it always starts with the people. Democratic governments typically embrace liberty and freedom as the citizens prefer freedom to tyranny. A well educated and free population is usually a requirement of a successful democratic government as a population that is ignorant, superstitious, and fearful are frequently the target of those who would manipulate them out of their freedoms for their own gain.
Underwent is a verb, the past tense of undergo.
No, the Articles of Confederation were not successful originally. They were considered to be the first failure of the American government and were proposed in 1777.
The Articles of Confederation were not particularly successful and were shortly replaced by the current Constitution.
As successful as any other democratic institution.
ykjlk
provide for statehood for western territories.
providing the nation with experience in self government under a written document
The government was not successful.
they weren't successful because they,the Articles of Confederation attempted to create a nation that was a bit like what Europe has become a group of essentially independent nations joined together for defense.For
Democratic government base their authority and legitimacy on the people of their country. If you have a King who rules by virtue of family ties or the will of God or a dictator who rules by fear and physical power over the people you do not have a democratic government. There are many ways the people of a country can arrange their political affairs to be considered democratic, but it always starts with the people. Democratic governments typically embrace liberty and freedom as the citizens prefer freedom to tyranny. A well educated and free population is usually a requirement of a successful democratic government as a population that is ignorant, superstitious, and fearful are frequently the target of those who would manipulate them out of their freedoms for their own gain.
The United States of America has the most successful government-a republic.
Pennsylvania was successful in establishing one of the earliest forms of democratic government in America with the Pennsylvania Frame of Government. It was also successful in promoting religious tolerance by welcoming various religious groups to settle in the colony. Additionally, Pennsylvania played a key role in the American Revolution, being the site of the signing of the Declaration of Independence.
The Articles of Confederation were written to provide a form of government for the newly-united 13 colonies. They did not work because they gave the federal government little power and gave the states too much power. The states acted as separate nations, yet still expected the federal government to handle everything. For example: the federal government was expected to pay the army, but had no means to do so.