Wang Jianxun why Americans are afraid of the original standing army-ca1477

Wang Jianxun: why Americans are afraid of the original standing army? [Abstract] in Hamilton’s view, we should not prohibit the Congress to recruit troops in the constitution, and the government should be constrained by the corresponding institutional arrangements, if it does not work, it can only resist it. The author: Wang Jianxun (associate professor at the China University of Political Science and Law) in 1787 the United States constitutional convention, and then approved it for debate in the standing army is not open around the topic. The reason is because people remember just near the end of the war of independence, the British Empire’s "Red Army". In their view, George III’s domineering and colonial oppression, that is relied on his standing army, was one of the most powerful army in the world. One of the "King" Declaration of independence "in the list of crimes is that he is not by colonial parliament to maintain a standing army, and the army stationed in people’s homes. How can they tolerate, just get rid of a standing army, but also in the country to establish a. George III, October 25, 1760 became the king of Great Britain and Ireland after January 1, 1801 because of the king, to form the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland and the United Kingdom to become king until 1820 until death. Although the standing army’s history can be traced back to ancient times, but in the long war of the middle ages, mainly rely on mercenaries and temporary forces, the modern sense of the standing army basically appeared in Europe after entering the absolute age, especially in Europe, the centralized state. In feudal Europe, military service is usually stipulated in the contract between Lord and his collar, when the Lord needs war, leading officials will be sent for military service, not what the standing army. In order to defend freedom since ancient times, the British people are very sensitive to the standing army, "Glorious Revolution" after the "bill of rights", unless the consent of Parliament, the king shall not recruit or maintain a standing army in peacetime, otherwise, a crime. But this did not stop after the king of England to recruit and have a standing army, to George III, he has a well equipped weapon, advanced standing army. In the war of independence, the Americans suffered, insisted the eight year war, only in exchange for peace and freedom. In the early days of the reign of George Sans, Great Britain defeated France in the seven years war, and made great britain dominate the European countries, and successfully controlled the North America and India. However, with the defeat of Great Britain in the American War of independence, George III lost a large number of colonies in the americas. The picture is George III, William · beach Jazz around 1799 to 1800, as the canvas. In this context, people can not worry about the standing army? A handle of the anti Federalist seize the new constitution is, it allows the federal government to have a standing army in peacetime, which in their view is one of the biggest threats to freedom, so full of writing criticism. In fact, even the support of the new constitution of the founding fathers, peacetime standing military fear is the most powerful, even the federal constitution.相关的主题文章: