Us Fedalism Essay, Research Paper

INTRODUCTION

The political affairs of the world in eighteenth century left much to be desired by today s modern democratic standards. Most dramatic regime changes following a revolution or war are quite easy to explain. France in 1789 was seething with discontent at a corrupt and insensitive monarchy. Russia in 1917 was long overdue for a revolution to sweep away on archaic, semi-feudal order. And the numerous colonial wars of independence in the post-1945 period were predictable, given the rapid political and economic changes which World War II and its aftermath had precipitated. The American fails to fit any of these neat stereotypes, however.

The principal aims that the Founding Fathers of the Constitution had been to guarantee the sovereignty of the people, to maintain a maximum of liberty for the citizens. To have popular representation without an unbridled majority rule. The sources of inspiration of the Founding Fathers were to a high extent John Locke, Thomas Paine and Montesqieu. To achieve the four main aims: The social contract, democracy and separation of power, federalism. In order to judge the success of the constitution to fulfil the aims of the Founding Fathers, one should look at the changes that have occurred and how the American system looks today.

THE SOCIAL CONTRACT

During the eighteenth century the idea that men possessed certain inalienable rights spread rapidly under the influence of the social contract theorists (Locke, Rousseau) and pamphleteers (Thomas Paine), and became particularly popular in a colonial America infused with a spirit of liberty and independence. The men of the American Constitution of 1787 were as much inspired by English philosopher John Locke.

Locke had agreed that between the citizens and the government power an agreement had been made. This agreement meant that in exchange for less freedom, a government had appeared to promote life, liberty and property.

Life, liberty and property were rights that governments were obliged to protect through the representation of the people in parliaments and assemblies.

And should hose assemblies fail to fulfil their contractual obligations to the people, then elections would ensure the incumbency of new representative charged with carrying out the people s wishes. A monarch exercising executive power outside any representative mechanism was clearly not legitimate. Since it was an agreement, the people had the right to overthrow the government power if they felt it did not promote these aims. This idea of a social contract, as it was called, was very popular with the Founding Fathers. What the Founding Fathers feared the most was despotism or the seizure of power of a minority or a majority. In order to prevent this despotism or unbridled majority rule the principle of the separation of power was built into the constitution. It meant that the government was divided into three different institutions, the legislative, the executive and the judiciary. The underlying meaning was that they should compete with each other over the power. This system would therefore mean that no institutions should let another become too strong by comparison. The Founding Fathers also let the powers have a certain amount of collision between their interests, as well as scrutinizing and checking of each other, there came also the link between the powers that were necessary to make the system of separation of powers work. The separation of powers had another important function: the often different interests of these three powers would regularly clash together and deadlock would come up. This would slow down the process of law-making and give the politicians in the different institutions ample time to scrutinize and debate before eventually consenting to them.

SEPARATION OF POWERS

The power of the presidency and executive has been increased in many ways: during the twentieth century the wars and economic crises have strengthened the executive s powers over the parliament. This is not just the case in America, its all of the world.

They were also aware of the dangers of concentrating too much power in any one institution. A powerful executive suggested monarchal or despotic leadership.

A powerful legislative carried with it the possibility of rule by an insensitive majority, the separation of powers. Congress was accordingly given a separate power base from the presidency, and although the judiciary was not given the quite awesome power of judicial review it was later to assume, Supreme Court and other federal judges were to be appointed by the president. The precise jurisdiction of the courts, however, as well as the final say on the appointment of judges, were accorded to congress.

However, The presidency during the twentieth century, as a result of the growing importance of foreign policy and America s breaking out of its previous isolation, gained powers since he, leads both policy making and the execution of policies in this field. The emergence of nuclear weapons also gave the president increased his powers and responsibilities since he is in fact the commander-in-chief of the military. This means that in the political power balance within the separation of powers construction, the president and the executive have lost a bit of the liberty of action it had during in the 1960 s.

Therefore more in line with the original intent of the constitution. The separation of powers has created a slow and stable legislative process.

DEMOCRACY

If democracy is defined in terms of a simple devotion to majoritarianism then there is no doubting that Americans believe in it. Majority opinion carries a weight and independent value in the US, which is unusual elsewhere. This translates not only into a broad acceptance of the legitimacy of elections and, at the state and local levels, referendums, it also means that, on occasion, ill-judged policies and programs have been adopted following a surge of (often populist) moral fervour. Such was the case with prohibition and, arguably, some of the tax-cutting measures of the 1978-81 period when citizens in a number of states voted to reduce property taxes to levels insufficient to provide for local survices. As far as general political arrangements are concerned, American attitudes present us with something of paradox, for they combine strong support for the Constitution and the system as such with considerable disillusionment with particular processes and institutions.

FEDERALISM

In order to preserve the liberty of the American citizens and to promote their interests, the idea federalism became an important part of the constitution.

Federalism is the main area where the aims of the Founding Father have not been carried out. Originally few powers were given to the federal government by the constitution. Only defense, foreign policies, national welfare, coining and a few other powers. All other powers were given either to the states or to the American citizens directly. However, during the twentieth century, the American tradition of federalism has started to lose ground. The states have lost considerable power. The proportion of public spending by the Federal Court is 70%. It was about 10% at the beginning of the century. In 1913 when the federal government was given the right to raise a graduated tax on individual incomes. This fundamentally strengthened the power of the Federal government. Secondly, with the Great Depression in 1929-39, the view of the economy as something that would work best without public interference changed. Instead people demanded that the federal government should intervene in order to prevent further economic crises of this kind. This it also did by setting up agencies like the Securities and Exchange Commission, which made the federal government an important factor of the economic market, setting standards of trade, setting rates and licensing business for operation. Another important product of the Great Depression was New Deal program introduced by Franklin D Roosevelt. The new deal immensely increased the federal government involvement and responsibilities in the area of social welfare.

CONCLUSION

The American Constitution of 1787 was the idea of early English Liberal, John Locke.

The idea of government legitimacy based upon the consent of the citizens also implies that the power invested in government should not be larger than assent by its citizens. To achieve the aim of the Founding Fathers since the sanctity of property has always been preserved, there has always been democratic representation of the people in the political institutions. However, US president has increased powers but the congress remains important, compare the UK parliament.

Early British Liberalism is the thought built into the constitution that government shall govern by promulgated and established laws and that they should be designed for the good of the people.

31e