The Founding Fathers

Introduction

The contribution of the founding fathers towards liberation and establishment of democracy in America is indisputable. The founding fathers created a platform that fostered the development of the current America. Essentially, the founding fathers are acknowledged for their effort towards the establishment of the U.S. Constitution. The development of the Constitution strengthened the American’s national government and improved the people’s welfare considerably. Despite the highlighted remarks, the motivation behind most strategies adopted by the founding father is questionable. The world of politics or governance is highly tricky because leaders often engage in concealed schemes that are hard to unmask. These plans provide leaders with ideal schemes for luring masses into supporting their ideologies that are often biased. For example, most of the founding fathers emphasized the idea of democracy; however, a number of their actions and ideologies contradict with the principle. This creates a serious controversy that makes one fail to understand the real motivating factor behind the strategies adopted by these leaders. The paper argues that the founding fathers were essentially motivated by self-interests, but not the quest for establishing a democratic state as they claimed.

The founding fathers established a new scheme of government following the espousal of the U.S Constitution in 1787. Under simple evaluation, the idea behind these new systems of command tends to incline towards revolutionary and democratic governance. This is because the schemes promoted the ideology that the authority to govern resides with the people. Furthermore, the systems believed that such power is accessible through liberal and transparent elections conducted by the country’s citizens, but not through forceful strategies. These are encouraging perceptions that highlights the commitment the leaders towards building a democratic environment. Surprisingly, such ideologies remained as theoretical commitments because in practice most leaders adopted strategies that were far from the idea of inclusion (Harris, and Thomas 38). Furthermore, the question of eligibility was pronounced even with the formulation of the Constitution. For example, although the leaders assumed that the power resides with the power, a controversy existed in determining the citizens who participate in the election process (Gingrich 30). The beliefs presented by most founding fathers toward this situation affirm that self-interest was the prime factor that motivated these leaders. From their actions, it is evident that most founding fathers promoted a perception that only those with a stake in the country should have the authority of determining individuals who would govern that particular country (Ackerman 68). Interestingly, some of these leaders popularized the notion that citizenship was the reserve of persons who were masters of their own lives. The election of George Washington highlights the practicability of such perceptions. Such restrictions created a history incident where only about 6% of the population of the new America elected Washington making him the first country’s President in 1789. This highlights violation of the concept of democracy because under this ideology, the majority should have the authority of selecting the leader of the entire population (Harris, and Thomas 27).

The founding furthers promoted a notion that since government is formulated to safeguard personal freedom and property, individuals participating in the establishment of that government should have some of such aspects. In essence, the leaders believed that individuals who own properties and are of greater value to the society should determine the composition of the government that would offer them protection. This meant that factors such as one’s wealth and status were essential when establishing the national government. For example, Harris and Thomas (57) notes period are identifiable in the American history where only the White males with the property had the right to vote while sidelining the women, the poor, Native Americans and Jews. In this context, the rich class could have a higher political authority than the poor class. It is apparent that such perceptions contradict with the principle of democracy, which highlights that all individuals have equal right and authority regardless of their backgrounds. Essentially, the scheme describes an effective strategy for protecting self-interests. This is because the leaders were able to build security for their positions by ensuring that the power resided with few distinguished individuals. For example, after establishing good relationships with the prominent individuals, a leader could have assurance of maintaining his or her office (Ackerman 40).

According to Ackerman (39), the new Americans were elated that they had successfully eradicated royalty and nobility; however, the individuals from the noble and well-connected families continued to dominate governance. In some occasions, individuals from such families won political posts with minimal opposition. The biased state of leadership in America during early years is indicated by the fact that most of the founding fathers came from the rich families. The need of protecting self-interests made the leaders of this period struggle to maintaining power within their camp. Surprisingly, the rich believed that they had the right of commanding the poor who should be willing to serve them because they were meant to be their masters. Even at future date after the concept of democracy had established a firm ground in America, the rich resisted the ideology because they believed the poor lacked the capability of protecting the nation and its properties. Interestingly, most founding fathers assumed governing strategies that accounted for the concerns raised by the rich which affirms that personal interests was the main element that motivated these leaders (Gingrich 50).

Harris and Thomas (56) assert that the founding fathers noticed that direct democracy could hardly work in a huge population the newly established nation. Studies highlight that most of these leaders were worried of the idea of democracy because they feared that the country would be unstable and weaken due to corruption and despots. Consequently, various founders like Alexander Hamilton emphasized the need of establishing a powerful central government while others supported the idea of Monarch. These leaders were worried that a realized governance was likely to make America face challenges such as the one experienced in Rome in the era of Cicero. The founding fathers argued that direct democracy was effective in small populations, but not massive population like the situation in America during the time. Consequently, the founding generation had intention of establish a republic; however, the leaders raised serious concerns over management of the new and radical government. Most of these leaders felt that such a government could be associated with severe conflicts. Consequently, they assumed that retaining power with few individuals was the only effective strategy of avoiding such conflicts.

Furthermore, the governing models proposed by the founding fathers were informed by two major principles. Initially, the group believed the prime objective of the formation of the government entails protecting people’s rights. This means that the individuals elected in the position of leadership should have knowledge of the essential rights that each member of their community should have at any time. Another core ideology includes the notion that the prime role of the government entails fostering the good will (Ackerman 39). This perception encouraged the founding fathers into assuming personal based strategies that promoted self-interests. This is because they prioritized ideas that seemed to have capability of fostering the good will according to their evaluations. For example, they avoided some democratic strategies that highlighted likelihood of affecting the welfare of the Americans. Often, procedures with the potential of fostering the good will accounted for the interests of particular individuals. Consequently, in adopting such strategies founding fathers deviated from the idea of democracy (Harris and Thomas 34).

Conclusion

The founding fathers were reputable leaders who worked tirelessly in improving the welfare of the Americans. These leaders formulated and adopted various strategies that set stage for the development a strong and independent nation. Furthermore, they had high knowledge of the significance, the role and the potential of government. These leaders also understood the concept of democracy adopting various strategies that targeted promoting the principle. Besides, it is apparent that the founding fathers were essentially motivated by self-interests. This is because these leaders believed that they had a vital role of leading the American towards the right direction. Consequently, they emphasized personal ideologies that they considered best for the society. Furthermore, these leaders believed that the large American population was hard to manage which affirmed the need of recognizing influential individuals in the society. This was supported by the idea that the masters have the authority of controlling their lives.

Works cited

Ackerman, Bruce A. The Failure of the Founding Fathers: Jefferson, Marshall, and the Rise of Presidential Democracy. Cambridge, MA [u.a.: Belknap Press of Harvard Univ. Press, 2005. Print.

Gingrich, Bob. Founding Fathers Vs. History Revisionists: In Their Own Words, Founding Fathers Set the Record Straight. Bloomington, IN: AuthorHouse, 2008. Print.

Harris, Matthew L, and Thomas S. Kidd. The Founding Fathers and the Debate Over Religion in Revolutionary America: A History in Documents. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012. Print.