LAD #4: The Federalist #10

1. Why are factions so difficult to eliminate?

Factions are so difficult to eliminate because in order to do so, one must either relinquish the liberty that allows the faction to be formed or to instill the same opinions into each citizen. Relinquishing the liberties of the faction would be difficult because liberty is the basis of democratic politics, and to take away that liberty would be going against the beliefs of the American Government. It would be hard to eliminate factions using the second method because everyone is prone to make different opinions of everything based on their outlook and their past. People will never see eye to eye and it would be impossible to make people do that in order to stop a faction.

2. If factions cannot be removed then how can they be controlled?

There are a few ways of controlling a faction. The first way can only occur if the faction makes up a minority of the population. In that case, one could turn to the principal of majority rules, in order to overrule the faction democratically. This allows the majority to override the faction by voting. Another way over controlling a faction can occur only when the faction contains the majority of the population. In order to do this, one must have the interests of the public good in mind. In addition, one must attempt to make the people hold different interests and opinions so they do not always agree so easily. Factions may also be controlled by introducing certain Republican ideas into the government such as choosing representatives for certain areas as well as having the different states unite like they did. The republican form of government prevents factions from spreading because one faction may influence a certain area, but it will be unable to spread to certain areas because the states have different representatives and different ideals.

Rethinking the Revolution

After read the article "Rethinking the Revolution" by John Ferling, i discovered many things about the Revolutionary and Civil War that i did not know before.

1. One of the rather interesting things that i found out about the Civil War from reading this article is that there were cameras present during the time of the civil war. This allowed battlefield pictorials to be taken and caused many to consider this war as the first modern war.

2. Another interesting fact that I came across while reading the article is that before the 1820's, Independence day celebrated the military aspect of the Revolutionary war. However, after the people who lived during the war died, the holiday turned its focus on the political aspects of the Revolution.

3. By reading this article, I learned that the American Revolution was thought of as less of a bloody and difficult war simply because it had 6 times as less casualties as the Civil War. However, the American Revolution was still a gruesome war where soldiers were forced to steal the clothes off their enemy and boil their shoes for dinner as well as march in formation into battle, leaving them with a greater chance of dying.

4. I also learned that during the Revolutionary War, a soldier had a higher chance of dying while they were captured then being killed in battle. Nearly 50% of captured soldiers died while in captivity. On the other hand, only 10% of the soldiers in combat died.

5. Another thing that I learned from reading this article is that the American civilians were heavily affected by this war. Many of the civilians died of diseases brought to their town by soldiers. In addition, civilians often took violent measures against each other if they took different sides in the war. Tories and Patriots would often clash in violence.

Overall, this article was very informative and contained information that I have never known before. It supplied me with additional information about the Revolution that I would not have known otherwise.

LAD #3: Declaration of Independence

There are many democratic principles that Thomas Jefferson included when he wrote the Declaration of Independence. One of them was the three unalienable rights - life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. the Americans believed that these unalienable rights were necessary for everyone to have. the designers of the Declaration also believed that the government should be established in order to benefit the people, not to benefit themselves. This is one of the most important of the democratic principles because democracy is based on the needs of the people.
As well as including some democratic principles, the creators of the Declaration also included a long list of grievances, or complaints against the British Government that stated and explained all of the wrongdoings. Some of these wrongdoings include King George III's refusal to pass laws benefiting the people unless they benefited him as well. In addition, George III also dissolved Representative Houses that did not agree with his opinions as well as threatening to fire judges who did not execute his will. King George III also kept troops in the colonies even when fighting was absent from the scene as well as forcing the colonists to house the soldiers in their homes. He had also started enforcing the navigation acts, which made it mandatory for the colonies to only trade with Britain. He has put heavy taxes on the colonies that their local governments did not agree on. King George II also abolished the right to trial by jury in the Colonies. One of the most influential things he did to the colonial people was to impress them to the British Navy, forcing some to fight against their own countrymen in war.
On July 4, 1776, the American colonies signed the Declaration of Independence and officially declared themselves independent of the British. Although the colonists were not officially politically independent of the British until the end of the Revolution in 1783, they were ideologically free of British control. The colonies announced that they were now their own country, able to declare war, form alliances with other countries, and manage themselves from here on in.

LAD #2: John Peter Zenger

1. Who was John Peter Zenger?

John Peter Zenger was a German immigrant who came to America and became the printer and editor of the New York Weekly Journal. Zenger criticized New York Governor William Cosby for corruption in government including the prosecution of the Interim Governor Rip Van Dam as well as the removal of the Chief Court Justice Lewis Morris. The Governor was infuriated by the negative press put out by Zenger and he had him arrested for "Seditious Libel."

2. What was the controversy over his charges? Talk about Hamilton's defense.

The controversy over Zenger's charges were that the people believed that his claims were not slanderous if they were in fact true. During the trial, Hamilton spoke directly at the jury, urging them to understand that if a statement is true, it is impossible to be libelous because it is simply stating the fact of the matter. This approach in trial ultimately led to Zenger's freedom.

3. What influence did his case have on American governmental tradition?

This case initiated a new outcome in libel suits. Lawyers could now preach that if a statement is in fact true, that it is not libelous at all. It also resulted in judges seeing libel cases in a new light and resulted in different outcomes in libel cases.

4. What is the lasting significance of his trial? Explain.

The lasting significance of the trial of the John Peter Zenger trial was the major advancement of the freedom of the press. This trial also set a new standard in how to go about libel trials. Due to the outcome of his trial, newspapers were now allowed to print articles that were allowed to criticize things as long as the article was true. In addition, newspapers no longer had to worry about going to court over their article as long as the information in the articles was true.

LAD #1: Mayflower Compact and the Fundamental orders of Connecticut

1. What concepts are included in the Mayflower Compact?

Some of the concepts that were included in the Mayflower compact were the establishment of some form of government as well as the concept of a majority rule in the new settlement.

2. How does the Mayflower Compact reflect an attachment to both the "Old" and "New" worlds?

The Mayflower Compact reflects an attachment to the old and new world because the settlers at Plymouth Rock based their governmental ideals on some of the ideals taken from the "Old World" British laws. The settlers also pledged allegiance to the king. However, the settlers also incorporated their own ideals into the compact that would be characteristic of "New World" ideals such as some democratic ideals as well as forming their own local government.

3. How did the Fundamental Orders of Connecticut differ from the Mayflower Compact?

They differed because the mayflower compact was not intended to set up a firm, permanent government. It was established to form some sort of government in order to keep the settlers from becoming reckless as well as making sure they would abide to the laws that they managed to establish. However, the Fundamental orders of Connecticut were established to form a permanent form of government, one that would be democratic and would involve the people as well as provide a strong local government. In addition, the Fundamental orders set up precedents for later constitutions because of the democratic ideals included in the Fundamental Orders.

4. What prompted the colonists of Connecticut to take this approach to government, i.e.: use of a written Constitution?

They took this approach because they needed a stronger government. The Fundamental orders combined several towns into one unified body. This required more laws and a stronger government in order to do this. The colonists also desired a permanent, unified form of government.

5. In what significant way(s) does the Fundamental Orders reflect a fear of and safeguard against the usurping of power by one person or a chosen few?

In response to a fear that one person would seize power, the Fundamental orders set up their government on a democratic basis. The officials were elected by the people in elections. In addition, the Fundamental Orders made it impossible for one person or a limited few to seize total control of the government because it partially limited the powers of government.