Hey guys, and welcome to another Hip Hughes History lecture.
In this video lecture, we're going to take a look at the essential question:
Why did the Articles of Confederation fail?
So let's get to it. Giddy up!
The Articles of Confederation were our 1st Constitution.
That's right, folks. We've had 2 Constitutions.
We're very much used to hearing: "the United States Constitution".
Well, that puppy was written in 1787.
And if you know anything about American history, the year 1776? Maybe that rings a bell for you?
That's the Revolutionary War in Independence.
So for that 11 year period - from 1776 to 1787, the United States was run under the 1st constitution.
The Articles of Confederation.
And I'd like to start with kind of like a mantra - something that if you just repeat enough, you probably will get the multiple-choice right,
but we're obviously going to explain it in depth, and that is:
the Articles of Confederation suck because the Feds were too weak.
The Articles of Confederation suck because the Feds were too weak.
Or the States were too strong.
So, in order to understand what that means, we have to understand the word:
Federalism
And that's a really big word on the exam in this course.
You have to know what federalism is.
If you don't know what federalism is come exam time, you probably should play sick.
You should probably get like a cold or the flu. Don't go. Because you need to know that word.
So, federalism is our form of government (as I sneak over here for a second) right?
And basically, the concept is that, under colonialism or the colonial era, the United States - the Americans - the colonists, right?
really had kind of like a bad view of what government was
because of the abuses that - you know - the King of England and the English government had kind of done to the Americas.
It depends on how you look at it but: no taxation without representation
and the denial of some natural rights
consent of the governed... you know - we really didn't like government.
So, in the analogy that I use when I teach that is with Ike and Tina Turner.
Tina Turner being the colonist and Ike being the abusive - you know - kind of King of England,
and that eventually what does Tina do? She grows up, right?
She reads 'Common Sense' and she decides: 'I'm out of here'.
So now that she's out of here - that's 1776 - obviously, she has to fight her way out in the Revolutionary War,
but she has to, now, form a new government, right?
In a sense, she has to kind of date a new guy.
So it's that idea in her head about men - you know - that 'men are abusive' or that 'government is abusive',
that makes her come up with a form of federalism.
Because, you see folks, Tina now has the power.
So. rather than handing all of that power over to some - you know - guy that we really don't know well,
she's going to - and here we go with the definition:
federalism is the division of power between: the federal government (that new guy),
and then some just for Tina. Tina's going to be the states in this analogy.
Let me do that in 1 big swoosh:
federalism is the division of power between: the Feds and the States.
So both of our Constitutions have had that theory or that in action of federalism.
Today, we have - you know - rather powerful federal government, and - you know - we're not going to give viewpoints here - whether it's good or bad,
but throughout American history, the federal government has grown in size,
and, y'know, the States still retain power: marriage laws and schools, and, y'know, some of these issues.
But the federal government is definitely the authority figure in that relationship, under most aspects of what we would consider 'public policy'.
So, when Tina 1st gets her hands on the power, she's going to form the Articles of...
You said it didn't ya?
The Articles of Confederation.
She's going to rip it like this:
Federalism is the division of power between the Feds...
and the States.
So, the Feds are incredibly weak
and now you know why - Tina doesn't like government.
She doesn't really trust - you know - federal central authority.
So the colonists, when they write the 1st - you know - Articles of Confederation - the 1st Constitution,
they're going to delegate (give to) the federal government very limited power.
And the States,... are going to be like independent nations in a sense.
They're going to have...not all of the power, but most of the power that, today, we find in the federal government.
So, let's take a look at what I call: the good, the bad and the ugly of the Articles of Confederation.
A little bit good.
A little bit more bad.
And a lot of ugly.
Let me go see if I can go find that right now.
So I found it!
I found the good and I found the bad and I found the ugly.
And as we dive into that, let's just get some basic structure down.
There is a Federal government, you know?
We said that - you know - federalism is the division of power between the-
There is a little federal government. There's a big State governments going on,
but there *is* a federal government.
So, we need to look at the structure of that federal government.
Basically, there is 1 branch of government.
Today, we have 3 branches - we have legislative, executive and judicial.
There's only the legislative under the Articles of Confederation.
There is a Congress with 13 members.
Guess what the 13 members represent?
Yeah! They represent the 13 States.
Every State - big - small - it doesn't matter, gets an equal voice, gets 1 vote in that government.
So, that's what it looks like.
So good, bad and ugly:
The 'good' is the law.
I only go over 1 because really there is only 1 fundamentally, really good law for the United States government passed under the Articles
and that is the Northwest Ordinance of 1787.
And I'm going to explain why I said it like that in a second,
but basically, what this law does is it gives the federal government the ability to grow the nation.
It is a procedural law that basically sets up a formula for territories to join the United States and become States.
So, sometimes in class I've said it like: 'the uh oh mama can go get pregnant law'
[speaks with an accent:] Mom go get pregnant. Oh Northwest Ordinance in 1787.
And you know that's kind of a strange vocabulary word that will pop up in the exam
and if you have a lot of facts stuffed in your head, sometimes it's hard to pull that 1 out,
but, generally, if you see that word and [with a strong accent Hughes says something like:] you seeing it like I see it,
you'll get that pregnancy visualization in your mind,
and then maybe the multiple-choice will start to kind of pop out that idea of the United States growing;
of the United States being able to eventually - you know - do 'Manifest Destiny'
through Louisiana Purchase and the Mexican War and all that other, y'know, stuff that comes later.
So, from United States' perspective, that's good.
Y'know, if you're a Native American or you're a Mexican, the Northwest Ordinance is probably not a good thing,
But let's move on from there.
Let's do the bad and the ugly.
The bad is the structure itself - kind of the rules of the Articles that really are going to hamper - handicap in a sense, the ability of the United States to go forward.
So, here are just a few of them:
Number 1. There's no President, right?
If the aliens come down from outer space and say 'Take me to your leader',
there is no leader.
There's no court system.
There's no ability to tax.
The federal government had to ask the States for money.
And in a sense, you know, the federal government really has an empty wallet.
It has a credit card with no credit on it, in the sense.
There is no army.
The army consisted of the....what today would be the National Guard,
but the 13 States had their own military.
There's no monetary system,
so there's no national money.
There's no ability to control interstate commerce, kind of, between the States.
Rhode Island, I think, had set up basically, its own tax system,
that if you wanted to sell goods in Rhode Island you had to pay Rhode Island money to do that from other States.
So, those are some of the bad structural aspects.
In terms of passing laws, remember there were only 13 members in Congress - 13 States.
You needed 9 out of 13 to pass a law.
So, that's what's called a 'supermajority' - it's hard enough to get 51% - you know - to do *anything*
so to get 9 out of 13 made it very difficult to pass laws - you know - to change the Articles of Confederation.
Let's say they had a realization: 'ohh man! That's messed up! We have to change that!'
You needed all 13!
So that's going to be a problem.
And we're going to find out - you know - through the Annapolis Convention, that eventually we're not going to be able to get 13 to agree to change *anything*
which is going to ultimately destroy the Articles of Confederation.
So, kind of, that's the good and the bad.
You know 'ohhh mama get pregnant Northwest Ordinance of 1787'
The inflexibility of the Articles.
9 out of 13 to pass a law,
but more importantly, 13 out of 13 states to agree to change that baby, which makes it completely inflexible.
You really can't - you know - move forward and change things.
And - you know - the structural aspect itself - the idea that
there's no President;
there's no President; there's no tax system;
there's no President; there's no tax system; there's no court;
there's no President; there's no tax system; there's no court; there's no military;
there's no President; there's no tax system; there's no court; there's no military; there's no paper money.
It's all going to make it for, kind of, a bad scene later on.
So let me go get the ugly and then we're going to be done.
Ugly! It's ugly, where are you?
Argghghhhh! Argghghhhh!
I found it! It's the ugly!
The ugly is in the idea of Shay's Rebellion.
Shay's Rebellion - many, many exams I've seen that on - in New York State, the Regents and other exams.
They want you to know Shay's Rebellion!
In a sense, Shay's Rebellion is really like kind of the match that's going to set those Articles on fire.
We've already put the wood down!
We put all of those kind of bad aspects and weak aspects and inflexible aspects of the Article - that's kind of like kindling with gas on it!
All you really need is a spark or something to light that afire.
And that was Shay's Rebellion.
In the State of Massachusetts, Shay was a former Revolutionary War soldier,
and he was a little p***** o**.
He was a little upset that what he felt the government (Massachusetts) wasn't doing for him.
That he was paying taxes and he really didn't feel that he had proper representation.
That he felt he was owed debt from the Revolutionary War.
He really thought, in a sense, that the government wasn't doing well by him.
So, the Declaration teaches you that if the government isn't giving you - you know - your natural ri- protecting your natural rights, or is abusing its power,
that you should - you know - force it to change, whether that's through non-violence or maybe violence - the Revolutionary War.
So Shay and his band of followers basically march on the capital - basically demanding change,
demanding, y'know, representation - more representation and demanding some recourse to their debt problems.
So, the concept is that - you know - almost if you can be the Governor of Massachusetts and look out the window
and see this kind of angry mob coming towards you and you're kind of getting a little nervous - you think maybe this is it.
Maybe they're going to cut my head off!
So you grab the phone and who do you call?
You call your daddy.
You call the federal government.
You call the entity that is there to protect you and what do you hear on the other end?
Boop boop boop boop 1-800 Congress.
Uh oh!
They're not going to be able to help.
There's hardly anyone on the other end.
They have no army. They have no taxpayer power.
They'd asked the States for help to go help another State.
And it's not that Shay's Rebellion cuts heads off, and it's not that Shay's Rebellion is successful.
Eventually, they are - you know - captured and they are charged, and I think later some were pardoned maybe.
Maybe some were executed.
I'm not an expert on Shay's Rebellion but what I do know is that it scared the hell out of some people.
it scared the hell out of people like Alexander Hamilton,
and people that had power and land and money because this really represented:
the fear of a lot of property owners was that 'the day might be coming where they come for us'.
So we need a federal government with more power.
Hence, they wrote the Federalist Papers which are going to argue for a new Constitution.
So, that's the ugly - Shay's Rebellion.
Eventually, the States end up in Annapolis, Maryland at a meeting.
It's called 'the Annapolis Convention' - 'the Annapolis Meeting', where they try to scratch their heads and figure out: 'What are we going to do?'
So, they decide that they're really going to have to have a Convention to change this baby majorly.
Rhode Island, you you didn't even show up to the Annapolis Convention.
So, when you don't show up to the Constitutional Convention, and you need all 13 to be there to make any changes.
That's it.
Articles of Confederation, poof! Goodbye!
So, I hope that you learned something about the Articles of Confederation.
If you learned *anything*, hopefully, you know what federalism is and now you can say with me that:
the Articles of Confederation sucked because the Feds were too.....?
You did it! Good for ya.
All right guys. We'll see you in another video lecture - keep studying and er...
Good for you. See you later!