I find it interesting how Madison was not selfish when creating the constitution.Chomsky states the theory that the constitution was set up to prevent democracy, while giving a sense of hope to the poor that they have control.Although this sounds like a scam and huge conspiracy lie, if this was true... then I find it astonishing how Madison's purpose was to vest the power in the rich since they can make the best decision for the entire community.These are called "special classes."
Although his original purpose was not entirely democratic it was not structured to harm the poor. I would have expect for Madison to create a constitution that entirely benefits the rich and purposely harms the poor. Yet that is not the case, Madison wants a constitution that makes America progress and truly excel.
Madison's original intent of the constitution connects to Aristotle writings of government system. Both favor democracy but are able to see through the general issue that comes with it.However, the distinct solutions are both polar ends.Madison is to reduce democracy;give more power to the special classes, while Aristotle is to reduce inequality;close the huge gap between the upper and the lower classes.
I cant really say that Chomsky or Madison are crazy because they are reasonable arguments and if you observe society it does seem to be run by special classes with a huge inequality gap.On the other hand Aristotle arguments perfections the intended government. If the inequality gap closed down the working class would not try to snatch the wealth of some hard working prosperous people and they would hopefully understand why some people are best suited to run the decisions of the government.
In conclusion, I do agree with the controversy on democracy.If democracy was in effect then there would be no significantly wealthy people in the united states, since their prosperity would be spread out evenly.However giving fake hope to the working class, hope of democracy which is not there ... is not correct.It is a grey area where I cant take a stand whether democracy is the ultimate best system.
On a completely different topic here....I really enjoy reading opposing views and criticisms because they help you observe stuff you may have not noticed.Nevertheless, I do think Chomsky is too radical. He does not seem to see any type of hope or benefit in the American system.Yeah, it is reasonably to say that a big part of the system is wrong or simply failing however there is positive stuff about this structure, there is prosperity and America is not all corrupt.At least Chomsky does recognize the recent democratic victories of the social classes, yet he doesn't clearly state if these are fundamental to creating a better system, he doesn't really say anything about them. Yet he does see failure in the constitution, he sees failure in the economic system, he sees failure in social classes, he sees failure in corporation and I am sure that as we read the book we will find a flaw in almost EVERY single aspect of United States government.
Canada has nothing to do here , yet they are very nice people :)
Yes. Chomsky is definitely going to challenge some of the things we believe about America, and so this will be an interesting book. Our task in this essay is to evaluate the text based on persuasive strategies and the strength of the evidence.
ReplyDeleteOh, and yes. You're right. He doesn't really offer a solution.
Btw, I have heard that Canadians are very nice. In fact, some of my best friends are Canadian.
I also believe that democracy should be in effect but I don't think that will be possible anytime soon. There are so many different opinions out there that in the end, someone will still feel left out. I think this is one of the problems of being so diverse. Yet it is a good, it is so hard to please everyone in a democracy. I find it crazy how Americans are basically categorized by their economic status; the top 1%, the middle class and the poor. The people in the lower tier of the spectrum only aspire to be a person in the top 1% but there are so many barriers and obstacles that they really can't, as you states its just "fake hope". There needs to be a better way for everyones voices to be heard. There needs to be a better way to reduce inequality economically and overall.
ReplyDelete