The “Security Dilemma” and the Constitution of 1787

Q3 Social Sciences

Orbis Pub Date : 2023-01-01 DOI:10.1016/j.orbis.2022.12.011

Michael S. Kochin

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Both Federalists and Antifederalists agreed on the need to strengthen the Union against threats from without and disunion from within. The Federalists, nonetheless, spent much time defending the Union and attacking their opponents as disunionists. The Federalists won because they succeeded in shifting the issue from the questionable necessity of immediate and unamended ratification of their proposed reforms to the vital security necessity of continuation of the Union, on which their opponents in fact agreed.

查看原文本刊更多论文

“安全困境”与1787年宪法

联邦党人和反联邦党人都同意有必要加强联邦，以应对来自外部的威胁和来自内部的分裂。尽管如此，联邦党人还是花了很多时间捍卫联邦，并攻击他们的对手是不团结主义者。联邦党人之所以获胜，是因为他们成功地将问题从立即批准其拟议改革的可疑必要性转变为延续联邦的重要安全必要性，而他们的反对者实际上也同意这一点。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Orbis SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY-

CiteScore

1.10

自引率

0.00%

发文量

审稿时长

37 days

期刊介绍： Orbis, the Foreign Policy Research Institute quarterly journal of world affairs, was founded in 1957 as a forum for policymakers, scholars, and the informed public who sought an engaging, thought-provoking debate beyond the predictable, conventional journals of that time. Nearly half a century later, Orbis continues to offer informative, insightful, and lively discourse on the full range of topics relating to American foreign policy and national security, as well as in-depth analysis on important international developments. Orbis readers always know the stories behind the headlines.