More handpicked essays just for you.
The influence of history in the American literature
Importance of the bill of rights today
Bill of rights and its importance
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
1. Zinn begins his description of the Constitution with quotes from Michener, Litwack, and Marshall. However, the views of Michener differ from the views of the other two. Michener really praises the document, saying that it is a flawless price of our history and that their is nothing that could have been changed to make it any better. The views of Marshall are that the constitution was a pretty good document, but there were a lot of people that suffered because of it and not everybody is going to excessively worship it. Litwack has an even more extreme opinion. He thinks that the Constitution was an extremely racist document that caused harm to the United States and supported slavery. The delegates had to compromise on a few controversial At the end of the first article Zinn describes representative democracy as " a façade for a controlled society and barrier". I think that by this he is saying that creating a government where the leaders are chosen by the people, only gives a false sensation to the people that they are in control. A façade is defined as a superficial appearance of an illusion of something. When you relate this to a representative democracy, you can tell that Zinn is saying that the representative democracy is just a cover. This means that the central government really has all of the power in the end and that the people don 't have as much influence on the nation as they Howard Zinn believed that the Bill of Rights was added in to make the Constitution more popular with the entirety of the United States. He says that the Bill of Rights is congress ' response to poor reviews of the Constitution without it. It made the citizens of the United States of America feel that they were secure and protected to have the rights they deserved. However Zinn argued that the Bill of Rights may not be as secure as the people think, because those rights are secured by a group of powerful wealthy people. This brings up his point that the Bill of Rights was only created to make the U.S. citizens feel better about the constitution and who was governing it. B) Patriotism and unity was used in the early United States to create support for the new Constitution. You would assume that the middle class workers would have opposed the new Constitution since it was devised by a group of wealthy elites. However this was not always the case. Howard Zinn uses the example of mechanics and small business owners in New York at the time. The new Constitution did not allow the importing of British products that American business owners made, allowing them to prosper under the new Constitution. This is an example of unity under the new
The Anti-Federalist Party, led by Patrick Henry, objected to the constitution. They objected to it for a few basic reasons. Mostly the Anti-Federalists thought that the Constitution created too strong a central government. They felt that the Constitution did not create a Federal government, but a single national government. They were afraid that the power of the states would be lost and that the people would lose their individual rights because a few individuals would take over. They proposed a “Bill of Rights”, to make sure the citizens were protected by the law. They believed that no Bill of Rights would be equal to no check on our government for the people.
In this paper we will discuss the different point of views on the revolutionary war period that lead up the creation of the constitution between Howard Zinn and Larry Schweikart. It is true that the constitution as created by the rich, however the rich were more educated than the poor at the time, making them the reliable leaders of the society. This said, the rich might have tweaked the Laws to their slight advantage. Schweikart explains the creation of the constitution in order to fulfil the needs of the population. However Zinn emphasizes the fact that the government is controlled by the elites who benefit the most form the foundation of the constitution.
by saying what it has become today in the way of its development. It is not
Some historical circumstances surrounding the issue of the ratification of the Constitution was weakness of the new government under the Articles of Confederation which led to the Constitutional Convention. Members of Congress believed that the Articles of Confederation, the first government of the United States, needed to be altered while others did not want change. This desired Constitution created a huge dispute and argument between the Federalists and the Anti-Federalists. The people who supported the new Constitution, the Federalists, began to publish articles supporting ratification. As stated in document 2 John Jay (Federalist) had many arguments to support ratification of the Constitution. One argument John Jay used was, with the ratification of the Constitution, he says, “…Our people free, contented and united…” The Antifederalists had numerous arguments they used to oppose the ratification of the Constitution. The Antifederalists believed that a free republic wouldn’t be able to long exist over a country of the great extent of these states.
The United States' Constitution is one the most heralded documents in our nation's history. It is also the most copied Constitution in the world. Many nations have taken the ideals and values from our Constitution and instilled them in their own. It is amazing to think that after 200 years, it still holds relevance to our nation's politics and procedures. However, regardless of how important this document is to our government, the operation remains time consuming and ineffective. The U.S. Constitution established an inefficient system that encourages careful deliberation between government factions representing different and sometimes competing interests.
Supporters of a constitution, lacking a bill of rights, were called Federalists. The Federalists included members such as Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay, whom wrote a series of essays that were designed to inform and persuade the public of their views pertaining to the issues of the day. Among these views was whether a bill of rights should be added to the constitution. The Federalists, via Alexander Hamilton, dealt with this issue in a foremost way in their 84th essay. In the 84th essay Hamilton begins by explaining that a bill of rights, which are “in their origin, stipulations between kings and their subjects, abridgements of prerogative in favor of privilege, reservations of rights not surrendered to the prince.”
In a 2004 interview, Zinn said, “You might say it took twenty years, twenty years of teaching American history and gathering material and so on, but not knowing that I would write this book. When I actually sat down to write, it took less than a year to write it. I wrote it because after the movements of the sixties people had been radicalized and people became dissatisfied with the traditional history, and wanted histories that showed working people and black people and Native Americans and women. And I was aware that no such book existed, that no such history existed. So I decided that I would try to fill that gap.” (1)
The Bill of Rights was created as a listing of the rights granted to citizens, the Bill of Rights serves to protect the people from a powerful government. These civil rights granted to U.S. Citizens are included in the first 10 amendments to the U.S. Constitution. Additionally, Locke’s ideas about checks and balances and the division of church and state were later embodied in the U.S. Constitution as well. The Constitution replaced a more weakly organized system of government as outlined under the Articles of Confederation. John Locke was an English philosopher who lived during 1632-1704.
Since the advent of human government, one of the principle fears held by the constituents of the government has always been to prevent any form of tyranny or abuse within it. Tyranny can be loosely described as one person or a group of people having total power in a government leading to the subjugation and oppression of people’s rights. Many new nations wish to eliminate any aspect of their government that may eventually lead to tyranny. The United States was no different in this respect; the framers of the Constitution longed to have no signs of tyranny in their government because they had gone to war with Britain for that very reason. In 1787, a group of fifty-five delegates came from throughout the states to meet in Philadelphia to discuss the problems with the current government. The existing Articles of Confederation posed a monumental problem for these individuals; they recognized that the central government was almost entirely powerless under these articles. Besides this, another problem was that the government lacked a court system or a chief executive. The central government did not possess the power to tax the states either. These problems warranted change which prompted these men to get together. This new constitution they were to create was supposed to guard the people against all kinds of tyranny whether it be of a few, the many or majority, or even a single individual. This seemed virtually insurmountable a task to accomplish but was ultimately achieved. The Constitution guards against tyranny by having a central and state government that cannot overrule or have more power over the other, establishing the separation of powers to keep anyone from abusing it, and having a sys...
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.
Most Americans recognize the expression “We the People” as the commencement of existence. I recognize it as The Preamble of the Constitution, it doesn’t grant or deny power. Many, of course, accomplice it with the Declaration of Independence. The Preamble has been a major part in our United States history since 1787, its still exceeding its power and will continue to for a long time. In other words, The Preamble designates as the opening to serve our Constitution. The Conclusive point to this topic is…Is The Preamble or the Declaration of Independence relate more to teens now? Or back when it was dictated?
The true ideas written in the U.S. Constitution will be debated for all of time. No one knows the exact connotation of the Framers' words, but in today's world they are interpreted as words of freedom and liberty. The argument over whether or not the Constitution is as liberating as it is perceived may never be solved. This historic document has some unfortunate undertones that give it a counter-revolutionary feel, but at the same time it is full of wisdom to keep the American Revolution alive. While no one will ever truly know which side of the Constitution to believe, it has done its' job very well up till now, and will for many years to come.
Of the 55 delegates sent to the Constitutional Convention, only 39 signed the completed document. Some did not even stay through the entire event because they felt it was headed in a direction that they could not support. These men had different reasons for their objections, some of which are discussed in this paper, but most importantly, they felt that the Constitution would threaten Liberty rather than secure it. The ratification of the Constitution was an essential first step to secure and stabilize this new national, but the voices and views of the Anti-Federalist were also very important. The first amendments to the Constitution, including the Bill of Rights, were due in much part to satisfy those voices and established many of the rights that we still hold dear today.
The Constitution is the greatest document in American history. It has pushed for progressiveness and equality. The Constitution is basically the supreme law of the United States. The Constitution was written to organize a strong national government for the American states. Before the Constitution, the nation's leaders had established a national government under the Articles of Confederation. The Articles gave independence to each state; the states lacked authority, the ability to work together, and to solve national problems. The U.S. Constitution established America's national government and fundamental laws, and guaranteed certain basic rights for its citizens using five big ideas and this shaped today's America.
...uestioned, overall, the Constitution of the United States was their foundation of what they stood for, and was used to enforce the rights of men against the tyrannical aristocracy that resembled the unjust monarchy of Britain from which they fled. The concepts and ideals of these two men were a giant stepping stone to the democratic government that rules America today.