Summary of Charles Beards "Framing the Constitution. Essay
920 Words4 Pages
Charles Beard’s suggested that the Constitution was a document that was only created to protect the framer’s wealth. Beard believed that the reason why the rich framers wanted to protect against majority rule was to prevent the majority to overthrow the rich. Beard did manage to fit most of the framers under “rich” categories such as lawyers, landowners, and merchants. But, he failed to realize that the framers limited majority rule to protect the rights of minorities, also. The framers attempted to perfect the constitution by protecting the minority while giving majority some power. The Constitution was drafted by framers that took a lot of time and effort to make a document that has held this nation together for centuries. The…show more content… But, the Constitution limits the majority only because of the fear of uprisings from the minorities. The framers wrote the Constitution with the mindset of preventing the majority to dominate the minority. If there was no limit on majority rule, the majority could end up making all the decisions. This would leave the minorities fueled with anger and they would have a reason to overthrow the government. An uprising that caused the framers to limit majority rule was Shay’s Rebellion. The framers saw that the minority, poor farmers, did not have any choice because the majority dominated them. The framers also realized that this uprising could have taken down the nation because the nation was also unorganized and weak at that time. This event made the framers realized that the minority should also have power or else the majority would dominate again.
Notes: * Plenty of grammatical errors. * Your main point was obvious: Beard’s opinion is incorrect, and limiting majority rule was for political purposes, not economical purposes. * Try to make your points more concise. I had a hard time understanding what the main point of each paragraph was. * Write like a pundit. Make a clear, strong point. Don’t cloud your point with slips of data. * I’m not sure if your interpretations of majority rule match mine. Majority rule was instituted to protect the majority from getting too powerful. The majority could not act unwillingly against the minority’s