Should The Constitution Keep The Rich Or Poor Divided America?

539 Words3 Pages

Britain and European roots drive in the U.S having an economic interest over freedom. Layers of self-interest are threaded and lays as unnecessary compromises for the rights and liberties given to the excluded. Their self-interest could not be achieved without disrupting a correct and unbiased, balanced government from the beginning. This needs to keep the rich and the poor divided the country and the start of rebellions. These rebellions were merchants fighting the injustices. With every group stopped showing the example of scenting rebels to death would never mute or satisfy the public to accept things as they were. More chaos would continue on. As the country evolves more outrage over being inequality for all, as The Constitution promises, …show more content…

The constitution was written for elites by elites. Men with interests to stay wealthy and keep the peace, gather together with their own concerns and the masses second. The need for a large and central government to control the state override the need for equality for all. Charles Beard said, “The rich must, their own interest either controls the government directly or control the laws by which government operates.” Those who got together to defeat a common enemy which was anything stopping their own economic interest. This was the common man with no property, the indentured servant, woman, and certainly not the slave or the woman. The government was established with an economic interest for the elite and aristocrats as well as other men like them. This goal is deeply embedded in how they saw and wrote out ways to allow for a peaceful and orderly society. There are always exceptions to a mass collection, and thankfully so. Madison spoke of things like paper money, even property division and abolishing debts. His voice was for the government we can recognize today that is designed to be an “extensive republic” for the

Open Document