The framers left these powers with the Federal Government, of which they were supposedly in control of.Beard felt these elite men were conspiring to take even more power from the common man to better themselves. It seems like the framers really did do a good job at protecting the rights of average citizens.
Especially considering how long the constitution has lasted and how much changed in regard to everyday life has since then.
They did an incredible job at making the constitution a long lasting and effective document. I think that they wrote these documents as a debate, and that Roche most likely won.
The book seems intended as a bracing antidote to the phenomenon that Klarman has elsewhere The idea that the Constitution was really about money is not new, although it has lost favor in recent decades to “ideological” interpretations that focus on the Framers’ moral worldview and political goals.
Klarman draws the core of his argument from Woody Holton’s 2007 (1913).
While the convention nearly broke down several times over slavery and the apportionment of representation among the states, by late September the delegates had achieved their goal and produced a new constitution—the one Americans still live with.
No delegate was completely satisfied with the process or the results; of the 55 who attended the convention only 39 signed the finished document.
He was able to show that many of the men at the Constitutional Conventions fell into one of those categories.
He said that the reason the framers wanted to protect against majority rule, was so the majority could not overthrow the few rich men and take over.
Roughly stated, these books argue that during the period after the Revolutionary War most state constitutions were highly democratic, at least for the era.
At the same time, the country was suffering a post-war financial crisis that was ruinous to artisans and small farmers.