New America’s Social, Political, and Economic Identity between the Year 1776 – 1801

Name

Institution

Year

The main basis of the struggle to create a new social, political, and economic identity between years 1776-1801 was disagreements over the extent to which the federal government should be powerful over the states since this was the basis over the disagreements regarding the ratification of the Constitution. The enlightment period brought about by the European colonialists accelerated the changes that took place between 1776-1801 including social, economic, and political in America. The key changes during this period were triggered by the deep division that covered the land as well as lack of a cohesive social and political structure.

The economic set up during this time was also very loose considering that many people at this time had individualistic thoughts. The slavery and the greed to prosperity by this time was a major obstacle to building a strong fabric of the economy and this was a major obstacle to the social and even political bonds. By the year 1795, the fabrics of the Whites and the Blacks in reference to their economic and social status were already hinged on their preferences and history. The Whites who had been the dominant race adopted a socio-economic setup that greatly locked the Blacks and other minor races out (Reed, 2019). One of the problems that related to a race-oriented socio-economic setup is that it only derived the efforts of that race. In reference to the slavery period and the dominance of the Whites, the other races felt neglected and thus the economic setup could not be easily established.

The making of America in its core social, economic, and political setup was at risk because of the post-colonial mentality that denied equal rights and access to the minorities. This even affected by the political and governance structure where there were frequent oppositions from Blacks and other minority groups (Harding, 2015). The need to shift from farming to mechanical economy was also a cause of alarm as this deprived many of jobs and this broke the already established economic setup. In spite of its positive impacts, the shift to urban life necessitated by urban employment and industrialization triggered the lack of balance between the input and output and this affected the economic fabric mainly in the early 1800s (Atkins, 2016).

Going by the Constitutional Convention of 1787, many failures and obstacles to building a strong fabric of social, economic and political are noticed. For example, the shift from slave-mentality labor to capitalist design in the work places and farms was not openly adopted by the wealthy people (Harding, 2015). This crated a scenario where the minorities were exploited and hardly given a chance to deliver in a positive way that limited the economic strength in the country. The struggles in this period mainly in economic and social fronts affected the progress made in the new land.

European colonists united in 1776 to separate from England, winning a revolution based on the principles of representative government, freedom of expression, and equality (Reed, 2019). By 1790s, the key changes in economic and political alignment had already been established that mainly touched on the role and powers of different individuals. The key changes during this period were triggered by the deep division that covered the land as well as lack of a cohesive social and political structure. The economic setup by this time was already tied to a multi-sided approach where the change from centralized politics to a diverse ruling obscured the transformation.

References

Atkins, J. (2016). From Confederation to Nation: The Early American Republic, 1789-1848. Routledge.

Harding, B. (2015). ” Breaking Up, and Moving Westward”: The Search for Identity in Post-Colonial America, 1787-1828.

Kennedy, C. S. (2015). The American Consul: A History of the United States Consular Service 1776–1924. New Academia Publishing.

Reed, I. A. (2019). Performative state-formation in the early American Republic. American Sociological Review, 84(2), 334-367.