Should It Be Easy To Change Governments Often

We the People:The Citizen and the Constitution
Loftier School Grades
Student Book

Purpose of Lesson

This lesson introduces y'all to some basic ideas the Framers used in creating the kind of government they thought would all-time protect the natural rights of each individual and promote the good of all.
When you finish this lesson you lot should understand the divergence between limited and unlimited government, the difference between written and unwritten constitutions, and how Americans have used the term constitutional regime. You should be able to explain why a regime with a constitution is not necessarily a ramble regime, and be able to identify culling models of government that the Founders had to cull from.

Terms to Know

autocracy canton checks and balances urban center-state mutual good constitution constitutional government

consul delegated powers democracy dictatorship equal protection higher police limited authorities

private domain republic separation of powers totalitarianism tyranny unwritten constitution written constitution

Critical Thinking Do
Examining Authorities Protection of the Basic Rights of the People

Suppose yous are non satisfied with living in a state of nature. You lot and others agree to enter into a social contract and a government to protect your natural rights. Y'all must determine what kind of regime you lot want and then establish information technology. Locke, Jefferson, and others knew that this is not an easy task. Throughout history governments have deprived people of their rights more than ofttimes than they have protected them. Your problem is to design and establish the kind of government that will practice what you want it to do, that is, protect your natural rights. This also means providing equal protection  for the rights of everyone.
You and everyone else in your imaginary state of nature accept agreed to live under a regime. There are questions you must reply in deciding what kind of government to create. Your teacher will divide the class into small groups to discuss your answers. So compare your answers with those of John Locke and explicate why you agree or disagree with Locke.

1. What in your opinion is the main purpose of government?
2. How should government get the potency or right to make laws telling people what they can and cannot practice?
3. What should the people accept the right to do if their government does non serve the purposes for which it was created? Why should they take this right?

How do your answers compare with those of John Locke?

1. Locke and other natural rights philosophers said that the purpose of authorities is to protect natural rights. Thomas Jefferson agreed and in the Proclamation of Independence argued that the protection of rights is the main purpose of government.
2. Another of Locke'southward ideas that Jefferson stated in the Annunciation of Independence is that government gets its right to govern from the consent of the people. Its powers are delegated to information technology past the governed. People give their consent in several means. People tin give explicit consent past
   • agreeing to the contract that establishes the social club whose members then plant the regime and choose its officers
   • joining a society that already is established
   People give implicit consent, also called tacit consent, past accepting the laws and services of the government and nation of their nascence.
3. Locke believed that since the people give the ability to the government, they have the right to accept it away if the government is not serving the purposes for which it was established. They can then create a new government. Locke argued and the Founders agreed that if a government fails to protect the people's rights, the people have a correct of revolution.

Under what circumstances would Locke concord that people
have the right to accept up arms against an established government?
Who is to judge if a authorities has failed? Locke and the Founders said that the people have the right to make that decision. This position is in the following words from the Declaration of Independence: "Whenever any Class of Government becomes destructive of these Ends, it is the Correct of the People to alter or abolish it, and to institute new Government..."

Revolution, however, is an extreme fashion in which to deal with bad government. Government should be designed or organized to limit its powers in gild to protect private rights and thus reduce the need for such extreme measures.

How do Americans express consent to their government?

The Americans who ratified our Constitution in 1787 gave explicit consent to their new government. So did the many immigrants who came to America to seek a better life. Those who are born here accept implied their consent past remaining in this country and living under its laws.
Every native-built-in American, equally he or she grows up, has the choice of seeking the citizenship of some other country. By remaining in this country, accepting its laws, and enjoying its benefits, you imply your consent to be governed by your federal, state, and local governments. You lot besides affirm your consent every time you take the Pledge of Allegiance, participate in an election, or engage in other civic actions.

What is ramble regime?

Limited governments  have established and respected restraints on their powers, restraints such as laws and free and periodic elections. The opposite is unlimited government , in which those who govern are gratuitous to use their ability as they choose, unrestrained past laws or elections. Tyranny, autocracy, dictatorship, and totalitarianism are other words to describe unlimited government.
What form of government was best suited to forbid the abuse of ability in the newly independent states of America? From their reading of both history and the natural rights philosophers, the Founders believed that any government that served its proper ends would accept to be a limited or constitutional government. In a constitutional government , the powers of the person or group decision-making the regime are limited by a gear up of laws and customs called a constitution .

What is a constitution?

A constitution is a set of customs, traditions, rules, and laws that sets forth the basic way a government is organized and operated. Most constitutions are in writing, some are partly written and partly unwritten, and some are not written at all.
Observe that co-ordinate to this definition of the give-and-take, every nation has a constitution. Practiced governments and bad governments may have constitutions. Some of the worst governments have constitutions that include lists of the bones rights of their citizens. The former Soviet Union had 1 of the longest and most elaborate constitutions in history, but in reality its citizens enjoyed few of the rights guaranteed by it.

If you written report the constitution of a government, y'all will be able to respond the following questions about the relationship between the government and its citizens:

• What are the purposes of government?
• How is the government organized?
• How is the government supposed to get about doing its business?
• Who is considered to exist a citizen?
• Are the citizens supposed to have whatsoever ability or control over their regime? If and so, how is it to be exercised?
• What rights and responsibilities, if whatever, are the citizens supposed to have?

It is very important to understand that having a constitution does not mean that a nation has a ramble government. If a constitution provides for the unlimited practice of political power-past one, few, or even many-such a constitution would not be the footing of a constitutional government. If a constitution provides that the regime's power is to be limited, but it does not include means to enforce those limitations, it is not the basis of a ramble government. In a constitutional government the constitution is a form of higher or central constabulary that must exist obeyed by everyone, including those in power.

How did the Founders characterize higher law?

According to the Founders, a constitution or college law should have the following characteristics:

• It sets forth the basic rights of citizens to life, liberty, and belongings.
• It establishes the responsibility of the government to protect those rights.
• It establishes limitations on how those in government may apply their powers with regard to
  • citizens' rights and responsibilities
  • the distribution of resources
  • the command of conflict
• It establishes the principle of a private domainwhich means that there are areas of citizens' lives that are no business of the government and in which the government cannot interfere.
• Information technology can only be inverse with the widespread consent of the citizens, and according to established and well-known procedures. This distinguishes the higher constabulary from the ordinary law that governments regularly create and enforce.

How does the principle of private domain protect you from government interference?

What practice you think?

1. One of the purposes of the limitations imposed by ramble government is to check the power of the majority. How tin this exist justified in a political system that is supposed to exist democratic?
2. What are the major advantages, in your judgment, of express government? What are the most serious disadvantages?
3. Are there advantages to unlimited authorities? If so, what are they?

How does a constitutional government protect natural rights?

Constitutional government assures the rights of its citizens in two means:

• Information technology establishes limits on the ability of the government to prevent it from violating natural rights.
• It states that the government should be organized and its power distributed in such a way every bit to increase the possibility that those limitations will exist effective.

The beginning is a purely legal protection  of a citizen's freedom. The next is an organizational protection , having to do with the way in which government operates.

How can constitutional governments be organized to forestall the abuse of power?

In ramble governments powers are ordinarily distributed and shared among several branches of authorities. This distribution and sharing of power makes it less likely that whatever one branch can corruption or misuse its powers. It is also less probable that any group volition gain so much power that it can ignore the limitations placed on it by the constitution.
To prevent our government from abusing its powers, the Framers provided for distribution and sharing of powers amidst three branches of the national government. Each branch has primary responsibility for certain functions, but each branch as well shares these functions and powers with the other branches. For example,

• The Congress may laissez passer laws, but the president may veto them.
• The president nominates certain government officials, but the Senate must corroborate them.
• The Congress may pass laws, merely the Supreme Courtroom may declare them unconstitutional.

Information technology is this system of distributed and shared powers that provides the basis for checks and balances . Although each co-operative of the government has its own special powers, many of these powers are "checked" because they are shared with the other groups.
The complicated ways in which constitutional governments are organized often mean that it takes them a long time to get things done. It may seem strange, just this "inefficiency" was seen by the Framers every bit an advantage. They thought that these difficulties would aid to forbid the corruption of ability and make it more likely that when a decision was finally fabricated, information technology would be a good one.

Critical Thinking Exercise
Examining Why the Founders Feared the Abuse of Power past Authorities

Given their knowledge of history and their experiences with the British authorities, information technology is not surprising that the Founders greatly feared the possible abuse of the powers of government. For example, read the following selections from some of their writings. Then discuss with the class your answers to the questions that follow.

"Requite all ability to the many, they volition oppress the few. Requite all ability to the few, they volition oppress the many." Alexander Hamilton, 1787 "There are two passions which take a powerful influence on the diplomacy of men. These are ambition and avarice; the honey of power and the beloved of money." Benjamin Franklin, 1787

"From the nature of man, nosotros may be sure that those who have power in their hands...will always, when they can...increase it." George Mason, 1787

1. Explain the view of homo nature expressed in each of these quotations.
2. If you lot agreed with the views of man nature expressed in the quotations, what kind of safeguards to forbid the abuse of power would yous include in your government?
3. Practice yous think the Founders' fear of government is as valid today as information technology was in the 1700s? Explain your answer.

What kinds of governments may exist constitutional governments?

The Founders knew that constitutional government tin can accept many forms. It is possible to have a constitutional government with one ruler, a group of rulers, or rule by the people as a whole, and so long equally those in power obey the limitations placed on them by the "college law" of the constitution. Historically, constitutional governments have included monarchies, republics, democracies, and various combinations of these forms of government.
History has shown, yet, that problems inevitably arise when a constitutional regime is ruled by i person or a small group of people. If all power is given to a select few, it is difficult to ensure that they will obey the limitations placed on them past a constitution. The rulers in such nations would control the armed forces and law enforcement agencies. How could citizens force the rulers to obey their constitution?

Monarchy-rule by a rex or queen-was by far the nearly common form of authorities in the eighteenth century. The Founders preferred a course of government more broadly representative of the interests of the whole nation.

What alternative models of government could the Founders choose from?

The most obvious alternative to monarchy was a democracy , a model of government with which the Founders were familiar through their knowledge of aboriginal history. The Founders admired the republics of ancient Greece and Rome. They likewise had studied more than contempo examples of republican governments , such as the Italian city-states of the Renaissance and the cantons of Switzerland.
The Founders differed among themselves about exactly what a republican government was. In general information technology meant a form of government

• devoted to promoting the public expert, the res publicae, which is Latin for "affair of the people"
• in which political authority was shared by all or near of the citizens rather than held by a hereditary monarch
• whose political authority was exercised through the community's chosen representatives in government

Today we view republican and autonomous regime as well-nigh the same thing. The Usa, nosotros believe, is both a republic and a commonwealth. The Founders, however, drew a sharp distinction betwixt the two forms of government.
Democracy had traditionally meant a grade of government in which ultimate authorization was based on the will of the majority.

This bulk commonly consisted of those classes in the community that had the greatest number of people-it came from the Greek demos , meaning people. These classes tended to exist the poorer people. In its purest course, democracy likewise meant a government in which members participated straight in their own governance instead of through representatives.

The Founders were familiar with democratic institutions. For generations, local government in many of the colonies tended to be autonomous in nature. The New England "town coming together" is one example. Based on their reading of history and their ain experience, however, the Founders were concerned about democracy as a model for land or national regime. Their preference for the republican as opposed to the democratic model of regime influenced the framing of the Constitution.

What exercise you think?

1. How would you organize a regime so it would be fairly like shooting fish in a barrel to remove and replace officials who were not doing a good job?
2. What might happen in a government where there was no agreed-on or peaceful means for removing officials? Give a contempo case to back up your answer.
3. How did the Founders describe the deviation betwixt republican and autonomous forms of regime? Why do you call back the Framers of the Constitution favored the former rather than the latter?

Reviewing and Using the Lesson

1. How would you explain the difference betwixt a limited government and an unlimited government? Do you think the difference is important? Why or why non?
2. In theory, the government of the United States gets its authorization from the consent of the people. What bear witness tin can you identify to show that people actually exercise consent to be governed by the The states government?
3. What is meant by the claim that the people have a "right of revolution"? What arguments can you make to back up the claim that such a right does or does not exist?
4. What is a constitution? What is the difference between a constitution that establishes a constitutional government, and a constitution that does not?
5. Why did the Framers organize the government into separate branches with shared and divided powers? What are some examples of the ways in which governmental power is divided and shared? Why is this sometimes called a organization of "checks and balances"?
6. Do research to find out about a state whose written constitution failed to protect the rights of the people. Why did the written constitution fail to establish a constitutional government in that land? What essential things were missing?

All rights reserved. Permission is granted to freely utilise this information for nonprofit educational purposes only. Copyright must be best-selling on all copies. The development of this text was originally funded and cosponsored by the Commission on the Bicentennial of the United states Constitution. The The states Department of Teaching disclaims the responsibility for whatsoever opinion or conclusions contained herein. The Federal Government reserves a nonexclusive license to use and reproduce for governmental purposes, without payment, this material where the government deems it in its interest to practise so.

ISBN 0-89818-177-1

Source: https://www.civiced.org/lessons/how-does-government-secure-natural-rights

Posted by: suttonthereatend.blogspot.com

Share this post