Final answer:
Americans did not want a strong national government because they feared it might become oppressive and infringe on individual rights and state autonomy, similar to the British monarchy they had fought against during the Revolutionary War. The resulting Constitution was a compromise, creating a central government with enough power to govern effectively but with checks to prevent tyranny.
Step-by-step explanation:
Americans' reluctance to have a strong central government can be traced back to their past experiences with authoritarian rules, such as the monarchy of England before the Revolutionary War. The fear was that a powerful national government could oppress citizens and deprive them of their rights. This perspective was influenced by the desire for individual liberty and the fear of a repeat of injustices they faced under colonial rule. Supporters of a strong state government, with a weaker central government, argued that states could better understand and protect the needs and interests of their residents. The debate ultimately led to a compromise in the Constitution, which was intended to balance the power between the states and the federal government.
During the Constitutional Convention and later the ratification debates, concerns about social stability and state sovereignty were paramount. States with economies reliant on slavery, such as those in the South, preferred a weaker central authority to maintain their social and economic structures. The eventual compromise reflected in the Constitution included a more capable central government to regulate commerce and protect the nation, but with checks in place to limit its powers, heavily influenced by fears of tyranny and the need for state autonomy.