In 1787 there was a large tension between the elites and the underdogs over debt and tax relief. The delegates at the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia worked to remedy this tension; however, they did so at the expense of the underdog, the indebted, suffering farmer, and for the benefit of the wealthy, who gained from the underdogs’ suffering. How did the delegates manage to design a constitution so biased towards the elite and how exactly did the document benefit the wealthy? Section I examines the interests of the indebted farmers and the wealth. Section II explains how the delegates came to design a constitution that benefited the upper class. Section III Provides examples from the Constitution that show its bias towards the elite and the outcome that was in their benefit. I. The Interests of the Public at the Time of The Convention ` At the time of the convention, farmers were the debtor class and were prone to revolt. Farmers, who lived all across the United States, sought debt relief and tax relief (Beard, 28). The weight of the debt at the time was crushing small American farmers who were being forced to pay their debts by selling their property for less than its value (Holton, 90). These debtors sought relief in many legal forms. For example, they asked for the “abolition of imprisonment, paper money, laws delaying the collection of debts, propositions requiring debtors to accept land in lieu of specie at a valuation fixed by a board of arbitration” (Beard, 28). However, they also sought relief through revolt (ex. Shays’ Rebellion) (Beard 28). Their desires contrast those of the creditors, stockholders, manufacturers, and shippers of their time (Beard, 29). These elites were of a “group of interests… that of p... ... middle of paper ... ...ons that both allude to the conflicts between the elites and underdogs and clearly benefit the elite, and finally that the delegates were mostly elites themselves – they clearly show that the Constitution was designed to benefit the elite at the expense of the underdog. Works Cited "The Federalist Papers." Founding Fathers. Accessed February 23, 2014. http://www.foundingfathers.info/federalistpapers/. Publius. "The Federalist No. 10." The Constitutional Society. October 21, 2013. Accessed February 24, 2014. http://www.constitution.org/fed/federa10.html. Beard, Charles Austin. An Economic Interpretation of the Constitution of the United States. New Brunswick, N.J.: Transaction Publishers, 1998. eBook Collection (EBSCOhost), EBSCOhost (accessed February 23, 2014 Holton, Woody. Unruly Americans and the Origins of the Constitution. New York: Hill and Wang, 2007.
This is perfect because as he refutes their rebuttals, they have nothing to be concerned for, seeing as he perfectly and adequately addresses each possible rebuttal. This fits in with the other papers, especially the previous papers as it establishes the thoroughness of the constitution and establishing it as a fitting founding document. The basic argument of this paper, as stated before, is to establish the constitution as a safeguard against insurrection. This is shown throughout the entirety of the paper, but gets into specific detail closer to the end of the document, dealing with upheaval from the inner infrastructure of government. He states that, in reference to the happy medium in which the Constitution has approached treachery, “the federal Constitution forms a happy combination in this respect; the great and aggregate interests being referred to the national, the local and particular to the State legislatures.” He recognizes that the United States forms a close to perfect
Many factors affect the strength of a nation’s government, but one in particular created the foundation for a country hundreds of years afterwards. The Constitutional Convention occurred in Philadelphia during the hot, humid summer of 1787, at a Philadelphian state house. Delegates from twelve of thirteen states all convened to create the Constitution that would become the supreme law of the nation, and would let power fall in the hands of the people. The author of Miracle at Philadelphia, Catherine Drinker Bowen, narrates the trials and contributions of delegates from the developing states that eventually built a bustling nation of liberty and freedom. Those four months spent in one room calmly debating how to improve the government is arguably the most important moment in American history.
The Constitution of the United States is one of the most iconic and important documents of all time. However, when it was first generated, its writing and ratification caused some major concerns. The purpose of the Constitution was to address the great number of issues of a new nation. To be more specific, the Constitution was meant to resolve the political, economic, and social problems of the country. Nevertheless, the document spurred much discussion and concern over people’s rights, the economy, and political corruption.
While the government of the United States owes its existence to the contents and careful thought behind the Constitution, some attention must be given to the contributions of a series of essays called the Federalist Papers towards this same institution. Espousing the virtues of equal representation, these documents also promote the ideals of competent representation for the populace and were instrumental in addressing opposition to the ratification of the Constitution during the fledgling years of the United States. With further reflection, the Federalists, as these essays are called, may in turn owe their existence, in terms of their intellectual underpinnings, to the writings of the philosopher and teacher, Aristotle.
The essay under critical analysis is entitled, “Philadelphia’s Radical Caucus That Propelled Pennsylvania to Independence and Democracy,” written by Gary B. Nash. This analytical essay consumes the fourth chapter of the book Revolutionary Founders: Rebels, Radicals, and Reformers in the Making of the Nation, edited by Alfred F. Young, Gary B. Nash, and Ray Raphael. His essay, along with the twenty-one other accounts in the book depicting lesser-known individuals, whose contributions in securing independence from Great Britain and creating a new government in America rival that of the nation’s more notorious and beloved founders, such as Thomas Jefferson or James Madison. Dr. Nash focuses his efforts on Philadelphia’s Radical Caucus of the 1770’s and 80’s and the lasting influences of the 1776 constitution it created within American politics as well as several nations around the world. Within his analysis and interpretation of Pennsylvanian politics during the American Revolution, Dr. Nash utilizes a pro-whiggish, radically sympathetic stance to assert the Radical Caucus’ remarkable ability to gain support from and bestow power upon the common working man, take political power from conservatives within Pennsylvania’s public offices, and revolutionize democratic thought through their landmark reformations of the state’s constitution. Respecting the fact that Dr. Nash’s position on this subject required extensive research through first hand accounts, pamphlets, newspapers and the analysis of countless preserved records, indicates that the account he has given is very credible. Complying with his presentation of facts and the significance of the topic within early American history has prevented a well-rounded counter-argument ...
...wer] need a people that imagines itself in ways that make leadership by those aspirants appropriate” (6). It is apparent that the elite class of men would not represent all classes of men in an appropriate matter. The Federalists’ solution to this was to only have the elites be able to elect representative; the Anti-Federalists saw the need to point out that this representation would not be for the common good of the country and its citizens. The works of the Anti-Federalists shows that they were interested in the idea of having all types of men be represented in government.
Ernst, Joseph Albert. Money and politics in America, 1755–1775; a study in the Currency act of
Foner, Eric. "Chapter 9." Give Me Liberty!: An American History. Brief Third ed. Vol. One. New York: W.W. Norton, 2012. N. pag. Print.
Wealth and Democracy. By Kevin Phillips. (New York: Broadway Books, c. 2002. Pp. vii, 422. ISBN 0-7679-0533-4.)
Reid, John Phillip. Constitutional History of the American Revolution / the Authority to Tax. Madison, WI: Univ. of Wisconsin, 1987. 33. Print.
Factions are products of human nature, but the purpose of government and law are to control these often insatiable desires of self-interest. Detailed within James Madison’s address to the people of New York, “The Federalist No. 10”, are the destructive and counterintuitive ideas of factions to a democracy. Agreeing with that notion, factions are detrimental to the idea of a democracy due to the separation of people and ideas; and the subsequent establishment of tiers of power and status within both political and economic systems.
xvii[xvii] “The Constitution of the United States of America” from American Politics: Classic and Contemporary Readings (Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1999) pgs 566-572. Article I, Section 2, Clause 1.
In creating the Constitution, the states had several different reactions, including a rather defensive reaction, but also an understanding reaction. As a document that provided the laws of the land and the rights of its people. It directs its attention to the many problems in this country; it offered quite a challenge because the document lent itself to several views and interpretations, depending upon the individual reading it. It is clear that the founders’ perspectives as white, wealthy or elite class, American citizens would play a role in the creation and implementation of The Constitution.
Howard Zinn agrees with the notion that the United States Constitution was created largely with the economic interests of the upper classes. He cites early 20th century historian Charles Beard’s book, “An Economic Interpretation of the Constitution,” to bolster his point that the Constitution was drafted in such a way to predominantly benefit the upper class. In his book, Beard claimed that the wealthy must either control government directly or influence its laws to protect their interests (150). That claim makes sense when looking at the constituency gathered in Philadelphia in 1787; a large majority of the 55 men present were wealthy and owned capital of some sort.
3. Beard, Charles A. "An Economic Interpretation of the Constitution of the United States". American Politics. Houghton Mifflin Company. Boston, MA. 1999. (Pages 27 -- 33).