The Inherent Weakness of the Federal Government

Key Insight

The framers of the 1789 Constitution aimed for a strong federal government, but were constrained by the nature of their task: associating several peoples, not constituting a single one. This necessitated a shared exercise of sovereignty, where some issues are national (war, diplomacy), some provincial (town budgets), and many 'mixed' (civil/political status). Unlike consolidated nations, confederations like the US tend towards dismemberment.

The individual states naturally retained rights over purely provincial issues, but also the 'general' rights of civil/political status, social relations, and justice. While the Union handles national issues, its actions are less apparent and its interests less directly impactful on individual happiness than state affairs. State governments are supported by local interests and are more accessible, leading Americans to feel 'more warmly attached' to states than to the distant Union.

Patriotism remains attached to the state, which has a 'definite shape' and tangible identity, while the Union is an 'immense body—a vague object.' This concentration of 'authentic political life' in the states means the federal government is inherently weak, needing 'free cooperation of the governed' to subsist. If conflict arises between state and Union sovereignty, the latter would likely succumb, as states have historically prevailed through 'stubborn resistance,' with the Union giving in.