Wednesday, October 8, 2014
Reflection - Beard v. Roche - whose argument makes the most sense to you?
As per today's seminar in class - who did you personally agree with and why? (cite evidence to support your response) Then, create a hashtag that the theorist YOU chose would have used / created to express their ideas. Ex. - #allforthemoney
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I personally agreed with Charles Beard and his argument that the Founding Fathers merely created the new Constitution to benefit the wealthy landowners and protect their private property as well. According to Beard he states that the Articles of Confederation caused "every powerful economic class in the nation [to suffer]...immediate losses..." Many business men felt that the Articles of Confederation was horrible as it prevented them from "rich opportunities". There was no currency between states and national as each state had their own currency. It lack structure, organization and growth for the country, but most importantly for the wealthy men. In Roche's case, he believed that that the Founding Fathers were "practical men" who took into consideration on what the people wanted. But behind every action is a motive that will always benefit that person's own desire in return which is what Beard claims this Constitution is. As for a hashtag: #PeopleAreGreedy
ReplyDeleteRoche and Beard basically have the same perspectives. They both saw the separation of powers as being suspicious. The only difference is when it comes to the views they had on Our Founding Fathers. My group today sided with Roche because Beard is like totally against Our Founding Fathers describing them as being selfish, self-interested, etc but it if wouldn't been for them, we wouldn't have the strong central government that we have today in America under the Constitution.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Alondra. Charles Beard's argument that our Founding Fathers created the new constitution to protect their private property seems more accurate. In his argument he state's that George Washington was one of the wealthiest property owner of his time, and the new government was basically created to pay off the national debt that he and the rest of the founding fathers owed as well as for their own self-interests. Think about it, there are certain things that the government will not share with the people because it's probably best for us not to know. Here we have Charles Beard basically exposing what the truth behind the new constitution might have possibly been. Sure, Roche is being more cordial about it and states that they've created it for the people... But Beard does make an excellent point as well. When it comes to someone's interest, they will do anything to preserve that idea, and I think that's what Beard was emphasizing throughout his arguments.
ReplyDelete#INTERESTALWAYSCOMESFIRST!
ReplyDeleteI believe that the argument presented by Roche makes the most sense because the way he praises the founding fathers is the way the government has been teaching children from young. That they created it for the people, it as in the Constitution and our government based on the separation of Federal and State powers. I feel like Roche's argument is something that I am used to and is more universal according to government because that is what I have been taught throughout my life in school up until recently. Beard's argument is one that tells the real reasons why American government is this way which is very controversial to what I have been learning, so I believe that Roche’s argument makes more sense.
ReplyDeleteI know it is pretty late but,
ReplyDeleteDuring the reading, i saw both of these guys have around the same ideas but they worded it differently. But after i finished reading both I would agree with Beard. Yeah it may seem that he is against our founding fathers but the is the great thing about America, we have a voice. I feel like his argument is more agreeable. The way he explains the ideas of our founding fathers it does make them seem like they were selfish. Most of the things they wrote were like benefits for them. They were wealthy land owners. They wanted a govt system that wouldn't take that away from them. So i agree with Beard.
Due to my own pessimistic view of the government, I'll have to agree with Charles Beard. No matter how efficient and amazing the government is today, bottom line is that the Founding Fathers wrote the Constitution to protect themselves and their property. They did not adequately represent the whole of America, seeing that America at that time were filled with farmers, not wealthy politicians. #represent
ReplyDeleteI believe that Beard's argument is more accurate even tho Roche's argument also makes sense. Beard argued that the framers created the constitution in order to protect their properties and interests and also the interest of other elite classes. Although he makes this argument he also praises the framers and calls them intelligent. Even though the framers wanted to create a strong economy they were of course thinking of their well being and protecting themselves first. It's just a part of human nature.
ReplyDeleteI believe that Beard's argument was more valid because when you put into perspective the representation as a whole for a country who is supposed to be unified, the formation of the goverment was more bias towards the wealthy. It sought to protect the rights of the people creating our constitution. It was based on self-interest within the elite powers. #nofair #misrepresented
ReplyDelete