Taking Sides

Howard Zinn's "no" argument is the most powerful and persuasive. What really bothered me was that the founding fathers claimed to be democratic when the only real representation was among the wealthy! Women, slaves, Native Americans, and poor people had no say and were not represented at all. After reading this point of view, it seems as if every decision that was made by the founding fathers was extremely beneficial to them, but limited the power of everyone else. In addition, I believe that they made the Constitution in such a way that the people felt more represented and cared about than they actually were. Also, the Bill of Rights was established to guarantee that the people had more freedoms; however, the Sedition Act of 1798 basically took those freedoms back. In conclusion, the founding fathers may have had good intentions, but they were not truly democratic if they only represented themselves.