Founding Fathers Essay

In the past century, in that location has been a increase debate as to the motives of the founders of the republic and as a result the temper of our organisation. While Marxist analysts such as Charles beard contended that the founders were wealthy selected that ultimately required a conservative document intended to weaken the paltry popular majority, different scholars like John Roche believed that the fathers had no such schedule and they were working purely to reconcile states interests. Pluralists, such as Hofstadter, believed that the intact force per unit area of checks and equilibrates intended to create a slow policy-making process in which no interest can completely win and oppress other interests over a long period of time. While the scholars, Beard and Roche, deposit a strong defense of their opposing argument, it appears, based on the constitutional document and historical analysis that Hofstadter provided a more accurate portraiture of the founding fathers and their purpose in flesh the various pieces of the physical composition.The men who wrote the constitution came from a naval divisionicular background of wealthy and organisationally elite great deal and as a result one of their main concerns in the freshly developing nation was the apology of their seat. Under the Articles of Confederation, there was no guaranteed discipline of property and the economy was becoming a mess as there was no powerfulness to keep it controlled. Charles Beard states in his document, They were anxious to a higher place everything else to safeguard the rights of private property against any leveling tendencies on the part of the propertyless masses.In a country where the majority rules, the wealthy some became vulnerable to possibility of the poor world taking their belongings. Beard believes certify of this can be seen throughout the Constitution, such as the Contract and duty clause which both limit state powers and allow recounting t o gravel trading and property rights. The second piece of evidence is that certain branches of the government, the Senate, President, and peremptory Court, are non directly elected by the people.John P. Roche suggests that the material body of the Constitution was essentially a democratic process involving the unification of the state, political, and sparing interests of the nation. Roche recognizes that the framers were an elite, save he is careful to point out that they were a political elite dedicated for the most part to creating an efficient and at the aforesaid(prenominal) time controlled national government that would be able to overcome the weaknesses of the Articles of Confederation. The framers were not an organized few dedicated to particular notions of political or stinting beliefs beyond the need to create a national government that would be capable of uniting the disparate interests of the state. When the Constitutionalists decided to challenge the Confederation, they used the methods of political legitimacy. The 3/5 compromise allowed more representation of the lower population in the house of representatives and the bill of rights was formed in order to image state rights and check the central government. Roche believes the bicameral legislation of the constitution was impelling at producing pluralism.Finally, the last theory of what the founding fathers intended for the purpose of the Constitution to be was to create a balanced government that followed the philosophy of checks and balance which derived from the Enlightenment ideals of Montesquieu. In The Founding Fathers An Age of Realism, Hofstadter argues that the agenda of the founding fathers was not only to ensure the rights of property for the wealthy elite, but also for the poorer masses. to the highest degree of them would probably have admitted that the rich, unrestrained, would also plunder the poor. The purpose of the Constitution was to create a government that allowed bot h the elite and individuals to maintain their rights and opportunities in the nation. The enclose made sure to include legislation that aided the wealthy but also pieces that helped represent the larger population.The contract and commerce clauses saved property rights and strengthened the central government, but then the Bill of Rights and the tin of Representatives gave power to the states and the poor majority. In addition, while the President can veto bills, Congress has the chance to override the veto with a 2/3 majority. The Senate, representing states, and the House of Representatives provide involvement for the majority in the Constitution, while the President and autocratic Court are chosen by the minority and provide protection for the smaller group of individuals. The founding fathers madesure to include checks and balances when they actual the Constitution in order to ensure a fair government where one group does not hold the most power.Both Beard and Roche have cont rasting views on what the purpose was of the founding fathers in their framing of the Constitution, but both are ultimately flawed as it is ill-timed to say that their agenda was limited to selfish greed or self-sacrifice for the majority. The real agenda, as Hofstadter explains, was to form a balanced government that ensures the canonical rights for both the majority and minority, allowing the wealthy and the poor to be represented and protected under the branches of the government and legislation through a system of checks and balances.