32 Chapter 2Chapter 2 || The Constitution and the FoundingThe Constitution and the FoundingThe Historical Context of the Constitution
The Constitution was created through conflict and compromise, and understanding
its historical context can help clarify why the framers made the specific choices they
did and how those choices influence our understanding of the Constitution today. The
first event that led many American colonists to question the fairness of British rule and
shape their ideas about self-governance was the Stamp Act of 1765, which imposed a
tax on many publications and legal documents in the colonies. The British Parliament
enacted the tax to help pay for the French and Indian War (1754–1763), which those
lawmakers thought was only reasonable because the American colonies had benefited
from the protection of British troops during the war. However, many colonists saw this
as unfair “taxation without representation,” because they had no representation in
British Parliament and thus had no say in the passage of the act. A series of escalating
events moved the colonies closer to their inevitable break with Great Britain. These
included the British-imposed Tea Act (1773) and the resulting Boston Tea Party later
that year, in which colonists dumped tea from the British East India Company into the
harbor rather than pay the new tax on tea. The British Parliament responded to the Tea
Party with the Coercive Acts (or Intolerable Acts) of 1774 in a series of moves aimed at
making sure the colonists paid for the tea they had destroyed, and designed to break the
pattern of the colonists’ resistance to British rule. Attempts at a political solution failed,
so the Continental Congress declared independence from Britain on July 4, 1776.^6DESCRIBE THE HISTORICAL
CIRCUMSTANCES THAT LED
TO THE CONSTITUTIONAL
CONVENTION OF 1787praised it as a brilliant gamble, while some fretted that he still had the power to blow up
the world in four minutes.^5 Could the president start a war with North Korea or launch
a nuclear strike on his own? The historic summit between Trump and Kim in June 2018
was similarly met with praise and skepticism. Is this concern warranted?
Trump has indeed raised serious questions and disagreements about the appropriate
scope of a president’s power (some of which will be discussed later in this chapter,
including the war powers). And one thing is for certain: the early years of Trump’s
presidency have put the Founders’ recognition that self-interest and conflict are inherent
parts of human nature on full display. The Constitution represents the Founders’ attempt
to reckon with this propensity for conflict by dispersing power across different parts of
government. This means that parts of the political system are always competing with one
another in pursuit of various interests: for example, Republicans in Congress may want to
cut spending to balance the budget, whereas a Democratic president may want to achieve
that goal by using a mix of spending cuts and tax increases. This creates a conflictual
process that is often criticized as being mired in “gridlock” and “partisan bickering,”
but that is exactly the system our Founders sought to create. Think about it this way:
dictatorships do not have political conflict because dissenters are sent to jail or shot. We
experience political conflict, including the criticisms that some have levied against Trump,
because there is free and open competition between different interests and ideas.
But if the critique from the left is correct and President Trump is operating outside
of normal political bounds, is American democracy in danger? Do we really need to be
afraid of nuclear war? Does the American political system as laid out in the Constitution
work to keep conflicts between politicians and branches of government in check, or does
it allow space for these conflicts to spiral out of control?Full_03_APT_64431_ch02_030-069.indd 32 16/11/18 1:29 PM