Module 5 Discussion Assignment
Yes
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.
Zinn goes into detail how proletarian unrest, namely Shays’ Rebellion and the Whiskey Rebellion, caused unease amongst the wealthy. The solution, according to James Madison in Federalist #10, was a unifying Constitution. Madison believed that it would be easier to quell uprisings and dissent if the government was much larger; instead of unruly residents solely dealing with a state’s governing body, they would have to deal with the entire country (156).
Zinn makes a convincing case for the Constitution being heavily influenced by moneyed interests but its implementation was made possible by the
…show more content…
Wood doesn’t necessarily disagree that the constitution was framed by the upper class of the newly formed United States but he does disagree on the incentive; he believes the framers of the Constitution constructed it in the way they did due to political turmoil, not to benefit from economic protections. Wood points to the “excessive democracy” and localist, factious politics that emerged during the era of the Articles of Confederation. State legislatures were being filled with elected men who were less educated and had parochial interests. According to Federalists, these men were enacting “the confused, unjust, and narrowly based legislation of the 1780’s
The states, in which Shays rebellion has taken place, were becoming unjust/unfair the way in which the state collected taxes. Since the Articles of Confederation was a complete failure, the founding fathers had to draft the active construction and choose a new system of government. According to article 2 “The state government will retain all powers that are not specifically given to the national Congress.. ” (Williamsburg, 2009)
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.
The year of 1776 was a time of revolution, independence, and patriotism. American colonists had severed their umbilical cord to the Mother Country and declared themselves “Free and Independent States”.1 The chains of monarchy had been thrown off and a new government was formed. Shying away from a totalitarian government, the Second Continental Congress drafted a document called the Articles of Confederation which established a loose union of the states. It was an attempt at self-government that ended in failure. The Articles of Confederation had many defects which included a weak central government that lacked the power to tax, regulate trade, required equal representation and a unanimous vote to amend the Articles, and had only a legislative branch. As a result the United States lacked respect from foreign countries. These flaws were so severe that a new government had to be drafted and as a result the Constitution was born. This document remedied the weak points of the federal government and created one that was strong and fair, yet still governed by the people.
During the American Revolution, the Americans aspired to keep their government as far away from the resemblance of the British government as possible. Politics were changing in a time where the monarchs ruled the American people, that had to be put to a stop. States’ rights were being advocated into the new United States government as much as humanly possible. James Madison was a helper in writing the Federalist papers along with John Jay and Alexander Hamilton. Madison writes “you must first enable the government to control the governed” (Doc I), which demonstrates the authority that the Federalists initially wanted
In 1789, the Confederation of the United States, faced with the very real threat of dissolution, found a renewed future with the ratification of the Constitution of the United States. This document created a structure upon which the citizens could build a future free of the unwanted pitfalls and hazards of tyrannies, dictatorship, or monarchies, while securing the best possible prospects for a good life. However, before the establishment of the new United States government, there was a period of dissent over the need for a strong centralized government. Furthermore, there was some belief that the new constitution failed to provide adequate protection for small businessmen and farmers and even less clear protection for fundamental human rights.
However the federalist lost out to a new Republican government. Federalist saw a government that would be defined by expansive state power and public submission to the rule of elites however; Jefferson (a republican) said the American nation drew energy and strength from the confidence of a reasonable and rational people. “Once the legitimate party prevailed, Madison and his allies believed, the “monocratic” crisis would end, parties would be rendered unnecessary, and the high-minded decision of enlightened natural leaders would, at last, guide the nation.” (Wilentz, pg. 65). A strong central government would be one with checks and balances to keep fairness as well as branches to represent different parts of government. A strong government would also help to prevent riots and chaos in America when people did not like the decisions made. However, it still upheld the ideals of a weak central government where fairness of the people was in place. Incompletion the formation of the Republican opposition in the 1790’s continued the legacy of the American Revolution through inclusion of all Americans and fairness in the
...ailable. Charles A. Beard argues this point in his book An Economic Interpretation of the Constitution of the United States, stating that “The Constitution was essentially an economic document based upon the concept that the fundamental private rights of property are anterior to government and morally beyond the reach of popular majorities.”
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).
In Federalist Paper Number 10, Madison sees Factions as being inevitable. Humans hold differing opinions and are all living under different circumstances, and are likely to group together with those most like themselves. Some groups of people will attempt to work together to benefit themselves even if it goes against public interests and even if it infringes upon the rights of others. In the Federalist Paper Number 10, Madison feared that Factions could be detrimental to the common good and in order to minimize the effects and control the effects of Factions, the best form of government would be a large republic. According to Madison, to minimize the negative consequences of Factions, they must either be controlled or the causes of Factions must be removed. Since he describes the causes of Factions being the different interests and living conditions between individuals, it can be argued that this solution is not very feasible. It would be impossible to make sure every single person makes the same amount of money, has the same goals, and even goes through similar life experiences. The greatest source of Factions, the deepest and biggest cause of Factions, according to Madison, is the unequal distribution of property. The acquisition of property or lack of property creates class divisions the foster differing interests. Since it is not possible to
In the Summer of 1787, fifty-five delegates representing 12 out of the 13 states in Philadelphia to fix the Articles of Confederation. They met in philadelphia because the Articles of Confederation was too weak. Shay’s rebellion was the end of the Articles of Confederation bringing down the whole network calling for a change of government. They did this to prevent a tyrant or tyranny. A tyrant/tyranny is when someone or a group abuses their power. The Constitution guarded against tyranny through Federalism, Separation of powers, Checks and Balances, and The Great Compromise.
The elite opted to prevent rebellions which voiced the opinions of disregarded members of society such as women, slaves, indentured servants, and men who didn't own land, by intervening and taking them into their own hands because they wanted to preserve their power. In 1780, Shay's rebellion, led by Daniel Shay, a veteran of the Battle of Bunker Hill, allowed farmers who were unable to pay their mortgage, to speak out. Creating chaos amongst the peaceful streets of Springfield, armed farmers were stopped by state militia. Shay's rebellion led way to the Philadelphia Convention in which fifty-five men representing twelve states congregated on 1787, in proposal of drafting a new constitution. Through the occurrence of the American Revolution, they were aware of the power that their people were able to execute and wanted to stabilize the government by creating a new Constitution....
During the construction of the new Constitution, many of the most prominent and experienced political members of America’s society provided a framework on the future of the new country; they had in mind, because of the failures of the Articles of Confederation, a new kind of government where the national or Federal government would be the sovereign power, not the states. Because of the increased power of the national government over the individual states, many Americans feared it would hinder their ability to exercise their individual freedoms. Assuring the people, both Alexander Hamilton and James Madison insisted the new government under the constitution was “an expression of freedom, not its enemy,” declaring “the Constitution made political tyranny almost impossible.” (Foner, pg. 227) The checks and balances introduced under the new and more powerful national government would not allow the tyranny caused by a king under the Parliament system in Britain. They insisted that in order achieve a greater amount of freedom, a national government was needed to avoid the civil unrest during the system under the Articles of Confederation. Claiming that the new national government would be a “perfect balance between liberty and power,” it would avoid the disruption that liberty [civil unrest] and power [king’s abuse of power in England] caused. The “lackluster leadership” of the critics of the new constitution claimed that a large land area such as America could not work for such a diverse nation.
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.
The beginning of the Constitution provides a basis for one to question the righteousness of the Framers intentions. The Constitution starts by saying, “ We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by the Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.” This was not a true statement. That phrase excluded black people, women, and men who lacked wealth. Government under the British did the same thing; all the power was made accessible to only the rich. The American Revolution was aimed at acquiring equal and fair representation in government for everyone. Next, the Constitution established a Supreme Court. The Supreme Court was a group of selected people who would make major legal decisions for the country. These people were not elected or chosen by the people, they were chosen by the government. This placed a form of power over the people of the United States that had been held by King George. The Supreme Court had the power to ma...
Before the war, Parliament and the King of Britain were in control of the political affairs in America and kept the ruling power with the wealthy loyalists. Once the Americans won the war, some type of government needed to be instituted for the new nation to function. Rather than have everyone participate in the formation of the Constitution, there was a an unequal balance between the rich and poor. As Zinn states, “...by studying the economic backgrounds and political ideas of the fifty-five men who gathered in Philadelphia in 1787 to draw up the Constitution. He [Beard] found that a majority of them were lawyers by profession, that most of them were men of wealth, in land, slaves manufacturing, or shipping…” The groups that weren’t represented in the Constitutional Convention were the slaves, indentured servants, women, and men without property. Instead of the wealthy British ruling, this time it’s the wealthy Americans, but still the wealthy have control in the government. Even in Maryland during 1776, to be governor one had to have 5,000 pounds of property and 1,000 pounds to be senator. As a result, “90 percent of the p...