Between 1781 and 1789, the Articles of Confederation failed to provide the United States with a competent government. The Articles of Confederation were feeble because it gave more power to the states rather than the federal, central government. There were little to no foreign affairs, and currency was a major issue due to each state have their own. Granting the power to the states turned out to be a senseless approach to creating a strong and functional nation. Due to this placement in power, the
two documents were established by the same people, but they differed more than they resemble each other. In the Articles of Confederation the States are considered sovereign and only the state governments act directly on the people. While in the Constitution the people of the whole nation are considered sovereign and the central government and state act directly on the people. The Articles had no system of federal courts and there was no taxing power given to Congress they could only request, while
Perhaps the strongest argument for the ratification of the United States constitution is one posed in the federalist papers. It states rather emphatically that the Articles of Confederation could not protect the nation where there a state of emergency or a situation requiring the mobilization of troops on a large scale. This is illustrated by John Jay when he said 'Leave America divided into thirteen or, if you lease, into three or four independent governments - what armies could they raise and pay
a different effect and helped shaped our world today. Theses wars were recorded in history and are defined by the results, aftereffects and how they differ from one another. To fully understand what happened during this time period one must compare and contrast how these events occurred. The English Civil War resigned in the year of 1642 and ended in 1648. It was a fight between the ruling of kings as well as parliament. It went on many times and the ending