English Bill Of Rights Dbq Essay

Tyranny is means ‘as harsh absolute power in the hands of one individual’; it has happened everywhere. Whatever the size or shape, tyranny is a problem because it means too much power in the hands of one person or group. In 1787, Representatives from almost all the states in the U.S, met in Philadelphia to fix the issue of tyranny. The House presents us to “The Articles of Confederation” to help guard against tyranny. The Constitution guarded against tyranny in ways such as having the federalism, separation of powers, checks and balances, and the large and small states both treated equally.

The United States would lose its name and stand divided if the Constitution did not bring the thirteen colonies into one body. Within this governing body, fears arise from the difficulty of controlling power in a central government, while still trying to keep unity between the states. Understanding that the United States was formed based on the people’s irritation with the corruption of the control of power in England, the Constitution reassured the people that their freedoms were going to be kept, but it required their trust. The founders of the United States Constitution established a just government through encompassing equal representation, with the people as the foundation, and protecting the injustices that could arise with the misuse of power.

The tyranny of England was not the sole power that led to the rights and liberty declared in the Declaration of Independence. Instead, it was Britain’s own Bill of Rights which acted as a precursor to America’s document of freedom. Although there are a vast amount of similarities between the two documents, I will argue that they are different in stated grievances, remedies, views on sources of political power, models of governance, and of rights and government.

There have been several vital products of the Age of Revolutions but most importantly was the introduction of post-colonial attitudes with the need of self-governess away from empires overseas. This was achieved through the democracy and constitutions which still are the most important legacy existing in the modern world. It this outcome that societies were able to create influential pieces of works and change how societies operated on a daily bases with the United States composing the Declaration of Independence in 1776 establishing the cornerstone of this period of paradoxically an era of stability and anarchy. This essay aims to support this claim that

1. The problems that Thomas Paine sees with the British monarchy involve its straying from ideal government, the unjust placement of one individual above all others, and its hereditary aspect. The problems that Thomas Paine sees with King George III in particular are his personal transgressions against liberty. Thomas Paine, firstly views government as “but a necessary evil” (15), and therefore it should be both as limited as possible and also tied to the more positive society. The ideal form of government, thus according to Paine, is a simple republic where the elected are forced to be accountable to their electors (16). The British monarchy fails in all accounts; not only does the prescence of a monarchy at all eliminate the accountability of a republic, but the complicatedness of the British monarchy system makes it worse in this aspect than even other monarchies. Although absolute monarchies are horrid in that they give no power to the people, they are still simpler than the British monarchy; this makes issues much more difficult to handle in the British monarchy (17). The other problems that Paine has with the British monarchy apply to monarchies at large. Paine argues that the placement of one person above all others is an unnatural divide; there is no explanation for the division of people into “KINGS and SUBJECTS” (22) such as there are in other forms of division that humans live with. If it does not make sense to place one individual above all others, then such should most certainly not be law; therefore, from this logic, monarchy, which is entirely based on the principle of placing one person (and their relatives) above all others, is an invalid and unnatural form of government. Of course, some people could, arguably, have earned the admiration and respect of their peers through important action, and thus be deserving of a leadership position. In a republic, by listening to their electors, the elected earn their right to lead. However, the hereditary monarchy removes this earning of the right to lead, and Paine takes issue with that. There is no guarantee that the descendants of a good leader will also be good leaders, and therefore the government of a country should never be left to heredity (29).

Some of the founding fathers have been firm believers in the ideas posed in John Locke’s “Second Treatise of Government”. The one idea that can be seen quite clearly is the complete dissenting stance taken by Locke on the thought of monarchy in civil government. “Absolute monarchy,

​The United States Constitution was carefully crafted by a group of deliberate and thoughtful individuals; each having their own unique and particular ideas about government, and the people it may govern. As this supreme foundation for government was molded, each founding father put forth their learned beliefs and philosophies to be integrated into this modern document. All of the crafting members were both well-read and thoroughly educated, allowing for deep and extended discussions on past governments, their efficiencies, and their deficiencies. Through their readings and philosophical discussions, it became apparent that two previously governing bodies stood, in their opinions, above the rest: The Greek and Roman empires. Their governmental practices and virtues were key in the development of the Constitution, as they were dissected, and eventually, emulated by this country’s founding members.

When America’s founding fathers broke away from England, they weren’t the first colonial Englishmen on the American continent, there were plenty of French, Spanish, Dutch and even Russian colonial outposts established before them. What makes the English colonies along the Eastern seaboard story so important, was the fact that 13 colonies joined together to form what is now known as the United States. Furthermore, this 13 colonies New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Rhode Island, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina and Georgia risk their lives, fortunes, and sacred honors to start a new nation free from Great Britain’s rule. In the mist of declaring independence from the most powerful nation on earth, America’s founding fathers created a governmental system that was unfamiliar during their era. America’s founding fathers created a government designed to protect civil liberties and encourage independence, a complex yet young and evolving system.

In the first chapter of “How Congress Works”, Lee H. Hamilton discusses the idea of the American people being sovereign, or the supreme power. In our representative democracy, “neither Congress nor the president is supreme, because the ultimate authority lies with the people” (Hamilton 4). In “Why Does Sovereignty Matter to America”, Steven Groves shares the same sentiment as Hamilton saying, "Sovereignty is a simple idea: the United States is an independent nation, governed by the American people, that controls its own affairs” (Groves). Both Hamilton and Groves see sovereignty as a pivotal part of how our nation works. It’s obvious that the Founders intended for it to be this way. After being held under the tyranny of the King, they wanted

England’s lengthy history of hereditary monarchs and abusive absolutists has led to the system of constitutionalism in 17th century English government. The encouragement of these absolutism practices triggered the need to search for a new way to govern. The reigns of the Stuart monarchy led to the shift from absolutism to constitutionalism during 17th century England. After witnessing the success of Louis XIV's of France establishment of absolutism, England would soon see that James I, and his son Charles I, will fail at establishing absolutism in England and see a constitutional government established.

Although our Declaration of Independence did not occur until the late 18th century, the founding fathers had already learned the lessons of congruity between government and religion. Their predecessors to the new world, the pilgrims, had famously sought religious refuge in the Americas in the early 17th century, roughly 150 years earlier. As the American Colonies were British domain, the founding fathers knew all too well about the Divine Right of Kings and the doctrine that monarchs derive their authority directly from God himself. As the worldly embodiment of the divine, monarchs could create and mandate doctrine, as Henry VIII had so boldly done in the early 16th century, well before America was colonized by the British (Rockett, 2004).

When our country was in its infancy and the freedom hard-earned in the American Revolution was in jeopardy of crumbling, representatives of the people met with the purpose of creating a “more perfect union” – a government that could stand the test of time. The story goes that as Benjamin Franklin exited the Constitutional Convention, a woman asked him, “Well, Doctor, what have you given us, a monarchy?” To which Franklin quickly replied, “No Ma’am, we’ve given you a Republic, if you can keep it!”

The American population has been ruled by different documents over time. When a document did not work, the Americans moved on to a different one, such as the Articles of Confederation to the United States Constitution. The Bill of Rights was added for the benefit of Americans, it was a good compromise between the Federalists and Anti-Federalists, and that it is still relevant today.

In this paper I will address the question of where the American system of democracy originates from, and what aspects are and are not based on the Haudenosaunee system. One of the most important aspects seems to be the union of states– it’s more closely comparable to the Five Nations than to anything in the history of Europe or the West. Ben Franklin notably said: “It would be a strange thing if Six Nations of ignorant savages should be capable of forming a scheme for such an union, and be able to execute it in such a manner as that it has subsisted ages and appears indissoluble; and yet that a like union should be impracticable for ten or a dozen English colonies, to whom it is more necessary and must be more advantageous, and who cannot be

The Articles of Confederation, a written agreement that ensured each state’s sovereignty, freedom and independence, led America to victory over the British centralized government. During the late eighteenth century, the empowered government terrified the Americans, hence the thirteen colonies decided to spread governance powers equally to all functional states. The states had absolute dominance over the Congress due to the Articles of Confederation. While the localized power of states seemed to be promising, the system posed great threat to the major components of a democratic government, which are coercion, revenue, and legitimacy (Lecture 1 - The Roots of Government). The system of localized power did not ensure legitimacy, which referred to people’s recognition of national government. Congress’s lack of power to control each state’s actions caused great chaos. Eventually, national government’s lack of power and inability to unify the states exposed multiple flaws in the Articles of Confederation; consequently, a new supreme law, the Constitution was established by the founding fathers. The new supreme law successfully altered the imbalanced system into a novel democratic government.