Were the Founding Fathers Democratic Reformers?
- Pages: 2
- Word count: 332
- Category: Property
A limited time offer! Get a custom sample essay written according to your requirements urgent 3h delivery guaranteedOrder Now
NO, a historian name Charles Beard draws another view of the Founding Fathers. He states that, “the rich must in their own interest, either control the government directly or control the laws by which government operates.” Beard states that the Founding Fathers were men that consisted primary of white male lawyers, who had considerable wealth, land and slaves. Farmers were not considered to be a part of this group. They began openly criticizing the unfairness of taxation of the federal government on them. “Thomas Jefferson wrote that uprising like this is health for the society. In short, “The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is its natural manure.” Alexander Hamilton a Constitutional elite of the time, had the following to say, “Can a democratic assembly who annually revolve in the mass of the people be supposed steadily to pursue the public good? Nothing but a permanent body can check the imprudence of democracy.” With views similar to this one the founding fathers empowered the federal government the right to collect taxes, appropriate money and deny the states the right to impair obligation of contracts.
When comparing the resources of the wealthy might have compared to an average citizen, these contracts tended to favor the rich. Two examples of these contracts extend from employer to employee and landlord to tenant. The federal government was given the power to protect the interest of the owners of such contract through laws and by force if necessary. Zinn states that the Founding Fathers were not enlightened as they are portrayed in history. “In fact, they did not want a balance, except one which kept things as they were a balance among the dominant forces at that time. Zinn further expands upon this by the fact that there was no consideration for equal balance between slaves and masters, property less and property holders, Indians and white’s protection it seems at first glance.”