Articles of Confederation Reality Check

This is a long post. If you plan on leaving comments, please read the whole thing first. Thanks!

In the early years of our country’s history the United States of America operated under the Articles of Confederation. On paper this document was largely similar to the Constitution we have today, yet some have argued in hindsight that the Articles served as a better protector of individual liberty. But if this were true, why did Americans who had just suffered through so much to establish freedom ever decide to abandon the Articles in favor of the Constitution? After all, the Constitution was ratified by a clear majority of delegates to state conventions. In fact, the vote was unanimous in three states and the average approval in the rest of the states was well over 60%. Furthermore, a majority of these delegates were men who would later go on to vote overwhelmingly for Democratic-Republicans. In addition, many men who had initially opposed the Constitution ended up voting in favor of ratification, including Sam Adams. Other anti-federalists who opposed the Constitution did so due to a variety of concerns about the new government, but only a small minority actually argued in favor of maintaining the Articles of Confederation. So why the overwhelming support for the Constitution among men who knew the difference between tyranny and freedom and who were willing to sacrifice so much for their ideals? The answer to this question reveals a situation which may have looked good on paper, but failed miserably in practice.

First of all, it is important to understand that the Revolutionary War was largely fought under the Articles of Confederation. (Technically the Articles weren’t ratified until 1781, but they had been used as a de facto government since 1777.) At first glance this might indicate that the Articles were a success, but a closer look shows a far different and bleaker picture. In reality, the weak and loosely formed government that operated under the Articles caused a great deal of suffering and misery for the soldiers who fought the Revolution. In all likelihood, the incompetent government probably caused the war to linger on for far longer than it otherwise would have, and many who fought under such desperate conditions attributed their victory to Divine intervention despite the inept government, not because of it. The soldiers, especially, were well aware of how miserably their government failed them. Forced to fight for freedom with inadequate food or supplies and little to no pay, large numbers of soldiers tried to march on Philadelphia three separate times to overthrow their own government. One time they came so close to succeeding that the members of congress fled Philadelphia in fear for their lives. This was the miserable contribution the Articles of Confederation made to our fight for freedom, and the people on the ground knew it.

Our early government’s ineptitude did not end once peace was established, though. In fact, the Articles of Confederation made it impossible to enforce the Treaty of Paris which had ended the war. Rather, Great Britain was well aware of our government’s weakness and refused to abide by all the stipulations of the treaty for at least two reasons. One, they knew they didn’t have to because we couldn’t make them, and two, we were incapable of upholding all of our obligations set forth in the treaty. Furthermore, we didn’t have a single head of government who could deal with this situation. Spain also noted our government’s incompetence and began to make power and land grabs in the southern half of the country. And our government under the Articles could do nothing about it. This pitiful reality was aptly expressed by Sam Adams when he wrote, “For want of this power in our national head, our friends are grieved, and our enemies insult us. Our ambassador at the court of London is considered as a mere cipher, instead of the representative of the United States." While in France Thomas Jefferson also complained stating, “There never will be money in the treasury till the confederacy shows its teeth. The states must see the rod.” In short, Europe was waiting anxiously in the wings for the inevitable collapse of the newly born nation. Fortunately the Constitution made it impossible for Europe to make good on their ambitions.

The Articles didn’t just create a hazardous foreign policy, though. At home the states were having a difficult time holding it together and by 1785 there was widespread talk of civil war. The Revolutionary War veterans still had not been compensated as promised and an organized movement was working to establish a military dictatorship to “save” the country from its perilous situation. States argued vehemently amongst themselves over trade policy, and the nation was suffering through a severe depression and inflationary crisis brought on by the lack of a sound monetary policy. Armed mobs had formed to protest the increasingly desperate economic situation, the most famous of which was Shays Rebellion. Things became so dire that even Sam Adams agreed to a proposal to hang anybody participating in such mob actions. Raw freedom without economic stability proved to be worse than what the Colonies had suffered through under British rule. This was not what America had fought for. This was not liberty at its best.

George Washington, a man who actually had to live under the Articles of Confederation, described the situation while corresponding with friends. “No day was ever more clouded than the present.... We are fast verging to anarchy and confusion,” he wrote. Later he lamented, “If ... any person had told me that at this day I should see such a formidable rebellion ... as now appears, I should have thought him a bedlamite, a fit subject for a madhouse." These are less than encouraging words from a man who turned down the offer to be a king. He knew what freedom was, and what he experienced under the Articles of Confederation wasn’t it. Even with two hundred years of hindsight, we all can still learn from his wisdom.