This is what Noam Chomsky and Howard Zinn say. Do agree? If so, why? If not, why not?
More detail as I understand it: They refer to the Federalist papers. They quote the "majority faction" wording in them, saying that protection is needed from "majority factions" among other factions. They interpret "majority faction" to mean the poor or the masses.
2007-09-04 06:43:15 · 3 answers · asked by L Dawg 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Government
I worded the question wrong! It should be "protect the rich from the poor."
2007-09-04 08:24:52 · update #1
It is difficult to make a supposition from the papers you refer to when trying to apply the content to modern times.Masses of that day:
women could not vote
only those men over 21 and residing in a "state" could vote
1/2 of the population were not represented.
when they refer to protection of other factions from the will of the majority faction,they recognized that the registered voters of that era,carried considerable power and needed to be held in check through the other branches of the government to protect the interests of those who did not reside in the cities.
2007-09-04 07:03:36 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
When discussing the Constitution it is best to read the Constitution. The Federalists Papers make interesting reading but they are not the Constitution.
There is no need of government protection for any group in America no matter how you chose to define it. All men are created equal and all voters are entitled to one vote. No matter how much money they have or have not.
Money is important but not as important as votes. If you start a group and can honestly represent the many thousands of voters, believe me, if you want access in D.C. you will get it faster than any wealthy individual.
Everyone bashes lobbiests but who are they? Just big business? No. You will find plenty of labor unions, small business organizations, pro-lifers, pro-abortionists, gun banners, gun rights supporters, anti-war people, pro-war people, veterans, you name it.
All you need to be a lobbist is an issue and a group.
.
2007-09-04 14:44:34 · answer #2 · answered by Jacob W 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No. In fact, the U.S. Constitution doesn't even protect the rich from themselves. -RKO- 09/04/07
2007-09-04 13:53:59 · answer #3 · answered by -RKO- 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋