Building a New Nation – Chapters 7 & 8 (Part 1)

Foundations of Revolutionary Republican Government

The struggle to "build a new nation" begins concurrently with the War for Independence; winning the war and framing government are treated as twin, inseparable tasks. American political leaders turn to Enlightenment–era political theory but borrow most heavily from English Whig ideology (w h i g), then re-work it to suit their colonial experience.

Whig Ideology — The Four Cornerstones

  1. Government as a Threat to Liberty – Every government, by its very nature, endangers individual freedom.

  2. Power Breeds Corruption – The greater the power vested in officials, the likelier they are to misuse it.

  3. Social Compact / Consent of the Governed – (John Locke) Legitimacy reposes in popular consent, not in divine right or heredity.

  4. Eternal (Internal) Vigilance – Citizens must constantly watch their governors lest liberty erode.

American Republicanism — Refinement & Expansion

American patriots keep all four Whig pillars yet add emphatic, situational twists:

  1. Outright Rejection of Monarchy – “We don’t need no stinkin’ king.” No hereditary claim to office is legitimate.

  2. Popular Sovereignty – “We the People” possess plenary political power; office-holders merely borrow it.

  3. Rule of Law – Law stands above every person, elite or common. No exemptions, no privileges.

  4. Elected Representation – Officials are chosen by, answerable to, and removable by voters; vigilance enforces accountability.

The ideology is radical because it directly attacks the status quo (monarchical empire) and proposes an unprecedented republic across a vast territory.

The Spectrum Within Patriot Ranks

Even among patriots a split emerges:

• Radical Patriots – High faith in “public virtue.” Believe most citizens will sacrifice time, money, even life for common welfare. Hence, few governmental powers needed; people will comply voluntarily.

• Less-Radical (Moderate) Patriots – Doubt wide-spread virtue. Fear freeloading and disorder. Therefore advocate stronger governmental powers (taxes, coercion) to compel civic duties.

The Public-Virtue Litmus Test

A classroom thought-exercise: if the nation needs armies, schools, roads, would you - voluntarily - send 20\%–30\% of your annual income to the treasury? Radicals say “most would.” Moderates say “most won’t.” That single disagreement undergirds later constitutional fights.

Common Threads in Early State Constitutions (1776-1777)

Despite philosophical rifts, new states quickly draft written constitutions to lock principles in black-and-white and minimize “creative interpretation.” Shared elements:

  1. Written, public charters (clarity & authority).

  2. Power gravitating toward state legislatures (closest to voters).

  3. Formal (often expansive) Bills of Rights safeguarding civil liberties.

Divergent Experiments — State-by-State Snapshots

States now translate republican theory into markedly different blueprints, illustrating the radical–moderate divide.

Pennsylvania (Most Democratic/Liberal)

• Unicameral legislature only; no separate governor or judiciary at creation.
• Annual elections to keep delegates on the shortest leash imaginable.
• Suffrage for all adult white males, no property requirement.
• Result: government dominated by lower-to-middle-class farmers & artisans; faith that broad participation prevents corruption.

South Carolina (Least Democratic/Conservative)

• Tripartite structure: bicameral legislature, governor, courts.
• Built-in checks & balances to restrain each branch.
• Legislature elected every two years (longer leash).
• Property suffrage test: voter must be white, male, and own ≥50 acres.
• Outcome: policy set mainly by middle-upper economic strata; government wields wider coercive powers.

Massachusetts

Surprisingly sides closer to South Carolina than to Pennsylvania despite its radical reputation during resistance to Britain.

Georgia

Borrows Pennsylvania’s constitution nearly verbatim—literally substitutes the word “Georgia” for “Pennsylvania.”

New Jersey — A Curious Case

• Bicameral, moderate structure.
• Suffrage clause: "all free inhabitants worth £50" (no gender specified). Women landowners vote for roughly 10 years until legislature hurriedly amends language to shut that door.

Designing a National Government — The Articles of Confederation

• Drafted late 1776 in Second Continental Congress, dominated by radical patriots.
• Ratified 1781 after prolonged quarrel over western land claims (states cede trans-Appalachian territory to union).

Key Structural Rules

  1. Sovereign States retain primacy; Congress is expressly not "above" them.

  2. Single-chamber Congress; each state = 1 vote regardless of population.

  3. Unanimity required to amend Articles.

  4. No executive, no national judiciary.

  5. Powers omitted:
    • No power to levy taxes.
    • No power to regulate interstate or foreign commerce.
    • No coercive force over individuals—must request soldiers & money from states.

Popular maxim: “The power to tax is the power to rule,” and Americans, scarred by British taxes, deny that power to Congress.

Achievements Under the Articles ("Not Nothing")

• Fought & won the Revolutionary War.
• Negotiated the favorable Treaty of Paris (1783).
• Managed diplomacy with Native nations.
• Passed the Northwest Ordinances (1784, 1785, 1787)—a master plan to survey, sell, and eventually admit new states from the Ohio Country.

Post-War Financial Crisis

War debt to France, the Dutch, and domestic bond-holders remains enormous (≈40 million). Some states have paid their portions; others have not. Congress cannot impose uniform taxes; relies on voluntary state remittances—often late or absent. The moderate camp cites this paralysis as proof the Articles are too weak.

Flashpoint: Shays’ Rebellion (1786-1787)

• Daniel Shays, a disaffected Massachusetts veteran, faces farm foreclosure for unpaid taxes & debt.
• Western farmers petition legislature for relief—ignored by eastern commercial elites controlling state politics.
• Farmers shut county courts, attack tax collectors, then march on the Springfield federal arsenal intending to seize arms and compel policy change.
• Massachusetts militia disperses rebels; several convicted but later pardoned.
• For moderates, Shays is a “second Lexington”—proof that unchecked majority action (or minority mob) endangers property and order.

Political Fallout

Less-radical patriots exploit crisis to summon an Annapolis Convention (1786) “to revise the Articles.” Only five states attend → adjourn. Delegates call for a broader meeting in Philadelphia, May 1787—the Constitutional Convention.

Were the Articles Inherently Doomed? Historiographical Debate

Traditional view: Articles suffered structural, fatal flaws → replacement inevitable.

Revisionist (Merrill Jensen):
• Articles performed exactly as designed—minimal common government.
• Successfully accomplished every task within their delegated authority: winning war, making peace, organizing the West.
• They “failed” only because new economic & political problems lay outside their permitted jurisdiction; blame lies with states’ refusal to expand congressional powers, not with the Articles’ text per se.
• Therefore, the Philadelphia Convention was not automatic destiny but a contested political choice by a faction wanting stronger central control.

Continuing Tensions

The unsolved dilemma articulated at the outset—“enough power to function, but not so much as to tyrannize”—remains the guiding, contentious principle for the next 250 years of U.S. constitutional development.

The lecture pauses here, setting the stage for the Constitutional Convention of 1787 and the debate over the new federal framework.