There is no definitive answer to this question as it depends on a variety of factors, including the specific country in question and the particular type of government. However, in general, governments with a weak national government are considered to be less effective and less stable than those with a strong national government. This is because a weak national government is less able to effectively manage the country's affairs and to protect the rights and interests of its citizens. In addition, a weak national government is more likely to be overthrown by a strong, centralized government.
Confedration
No. The confederation created by Articles of Confederation was designed to have a weak central government and a strong state government.
Federal government is the name for this system of government. Under this system, states get to retain their individual rights and maintain their own governments, but some duties, like currency and defense, are delegated to the federal government, which is elected by all the states working together.The Articles of Confederation was the first document establishing a federal government, in 1781, but the federal government created by that document was far too weak. In 1789, a new, stronger federal government was created by the ratification of the U.S. Constitution.
Federalism and the federal system define the basic structure of American government. There were many disagreements at the Constitutional Convention. Many delegates feared a national government that was too strong and many delegates feared that states' rights would merely continue the weak form of government under the Articles. The Constitution created a federal system of government (federalism) as a compromise. Under federalism, power is shared and divided between national and state governments. Both levels have their own agencies and officials and directly affect the people. The Founding Fathers really had no other choice except federalism. The weak union created under the Articles would not work yet people did not want to give all the power to a national government. Federalism was the middle ground--compromise--a way to distribute authority between the states and the national government
They didn’t create a weak national government, but one with a balanced set of powers.
They didn’t create a weak national government, but one with a balanced set of powers.
The Articles of Confederation had a Weak National Government. The U.S. had a Federal Sytem Government ( Or strong Government )
Why was a weak national government created under the Articles of Confederation? The 13 states had not evolved a national identity. The 13 states were wary of a British-style government. The 13 states were unwilling to make compromises. The 13 states had conflicting economic interests.
New jersey favored the weak government :)
it was very weak. no standing army no taxing by national government no single national currency no executive leadership
Weak would be the best way to describe the national government created by the Articles of Confederation. Under the Articles of Confederation, the states held most of the power.
The Articles of Confederation created a weak national government, and there were several functions it could not do, such as impose taxes. It also couldn't regulate trade.
There is no definitive answer to this question as it depends on a variety of factors, including the specific country in question and the particular type of government. However, in general, governments with a weak national government are considered to be less effective and less stable than those with a strong national government. This is because a weak national government is less able to effectively manage the country's affairs and to protect the rights and interests of its citizens. In addition, a weak national government is more likely to be overthrown by a strong, centralized government.
the people
Weak.
The Democratic-Republicans, who were opposed to the Federalists.