The Constitution and The Federalist

This is probably the most well-known example of the second major principle guiding the Constitution, the system of checks and balances. Similar to the separation of powers, this principle stipulates that the different branches of government have to be in agreement on major decisions and that each branch has the power to limit the power of the other branch. The idea of separation of powers would be pretty much meaningless if it did not include this as well. These two principles were designed above all else to prevent tyranny, even at the expense of effective government, or what Hamilton would call "energetic government." 

 Tyranny is unjust or oppressive governmental power. In order to prevent this from happening the founding fathers set systems in order to prevent the abuse of power. The separation of power system called checks and balances, is where the government is divided into different branches with each branch having special powers. Certain branch have power over the other in order to keep them balanced.

So basically each branch of government has the ability to check and then if necessary balance the other branches. If the declaration of Independence states that all men are created equal then why shouldn't the government be equal in making, explaining and passing laws.

What I Saw In America by G.K Chesterton

What Is America

"One of the questions on the paper was, 'Are you an anarchist?' To which a detached philosopher would naturally feel inclined to answer, 'What the devil has that to do with you? Are you an atheist?' along with some playful efforts to cross-examine the official about what constitutes an ἁρχη [Greek: archê]. Then there was the question, 'Are you in favour of subverting the government of the United States by force?' Against this I should write, 'I prefer to answer that question at the end of my tour and not the beginning.' The inquisitor, in his more than morbid curiosity, had then written down, 'Are you a polygamist?' The answer to this is, 'No such luck' or 'Not such a fool,' according to our experience of the other sex. But perhaps a better answer would be that given to W. T. Stead when he circulated the rhetorical question, 'Shall I slay my brother Boer?'—the answer that ran, 'Never interfere in family matters.' But among many things that amused me almost to the point of treating the form thus disrespectfully, the most amusing was the thought of the ruthless outlaw who should feel compelled to treat it respectfully. I like to think of the foreign desperado, seeking to slip into America with official papers under official protection, and sitting down to write with a beautiful gravity, 'I am an anarchist. I hate you all and wish to destroy you.' Or, 'I intend to subvert by force the government of the United States as soon as possible, sticking the long sheath-knife in my left trouser-pocket into Mr. Harding at the earliest opportunity.' Or again, 'Yes, I am a[Pg 5] polygamist all right, and my forty-seven wives are accompanying me on the voyage disguised as secretaries.' There seems to be a certain simplicity of mind about these answers; and it is reassuring to know that anarchists and polygamists are so pure and good that the police have only to ask them questions and they are certain to tell no lies."

Chesterton mentioned that "nobody should be ashamed of thinking a thing is funny because it is foreign," and also " one should be ashamed of thinking its wrong because it is funny." The form he got at the embassy most would naturally find funny due to questions such as "are you an anarchist or a polygamist?" What is even more funny is which anarchist or polygamist would answer those questions truthfully wanting to gain admittance into a country which condemns such a person.
What he's saying though is that its quite natural to laugh at these questions because they wouldn't understand where they are coming from.

I chose this chapter because the writer amuses me in trying to explain how easy it is to laugh or make fun of a thing because we do not understand and respect it. Chesterton explains that The American constitution is founded on a creed and is the only nation in the world to do that. In the declaration of independence the creator is named as the ultimate authority being founded on theological principles and most definitely denounces anarchism and atheism. He further went on to say that America is very patriotic and wish to make all their citizens patriotic Americans.

Assignment 02/13

 

 

Essay: Despite Negativity, Americans Mixed on Ideal Role of Gov’t by Frank Newport   

"A majority of Americans (56%) say they would be willing to pay less in taxes and accept fewer services, rather than either leaving things as they are now or paying more taxes for more services.
This supports the general position of some conservatives and libertarians, including GOP presidential candidate Ron Paul. They argue that citizens should want their government to do less, and thus collect fewer taxes. Liberals, on the other hand, have focused on the value of the services the government provides, particularly in terms of creating jobs and providing a social safety net, and the necessity of keeping tax revenue flowing in order to fund those services. Fewer than half of Americans, however, currently want to keep or add to the level of taxes and services they have now."

The above paragraph is saying, according to the participants in the poll, most Americans wouldn't mind fewer government services for less taxation while less than half wants taxes to remain the same or pay higher.

I choose this paragraph because I don't think we should have to pay more taxes in order to get more or better services. The federal government collects billions each year and should stop unnecessary spending. They need to implement and execute ideas that will significantly change the way they handle the tax payers dollar. By being successful at this would undoubtedly allow the government to do more for the people.