Question

Based on the premise that the country’s founders could have created a completely new political enterprise that was, by their standards, an attempt at being universally ethical, how did their contemporaries assess their attempts to forge new methods of civic engagement with the Articles of Confederation and the Constitution?

A) They were universally praised.
B) They faced skepticism and criticism.
C) It had no impact on contemporary views.
D) It led to a new era of governance.

Answer 1

The founders faced skepticism and criticism as they created new methods of civic engagement with the Articles of Confederation and the Constitution; these documents were the subject of significant debate, reflecting a variety of contemporary viewpoints.

Step-by-step explanation:

In assessing how the contemporaries of the United States' founders viewed the creation of the Articles of Confederation and the Constitution, it is clear that there was significant debate and division.

The initial system set up under the Articles of Confederation was a response to colonial experiences with British rule, emphasizing the fear of a powerful central government.

This resulted in a weak central government that led to numerous problems, prompting the development of the United States Constitution as a more viable framework. Even then, the proposed Constitution was not universally accepted and sparked a wide-ranging debate between the Federalists, who supported it, and the Anti-Federalists, who feared it gave too much power to the central government and lacked a bill of rights.

It is evident that the framers of the Constitution faced substantial skepticism and criticism as they attempted to forge new methods of civic engagement and national governance.

They sought a balance between a government strong enough to ensure national coherence, and flexible enough to respect state sovereignty and individual liberties.