Founders of the U.S. Government (Essay Sample)

Name
Instructor
Course
Date
The Intellectual Influences on the Founders of the Government of the United States and Separation of Power
The founders of the government of the United States of America were statesmen and political leaders who took part in American Revolution. They were participants of American Revolution war, signers of the United States Declaration of Independence, and designers of the United States Constitution. There are two key categories: those who signed the U.S Declaration of Independence in 1776 and the delegates to the Constitutional convention. The first group participated either in the drafting or framing of the United States’ proposed Constitution. Another group that cannot be gainsaid is the one that signed the Articles of Association. Another group that cannot be gainsaid is the one that signed the Articles of Association (Rossiter 195)
Historians have a broader view of the founding fathers. They do not limit them to the framers and signers but the holistic group which participated in winning independence and creation of the United States of America. They categorize the group into ordinary citizens, soldiers, jurists, diplomats, statesmen, and politicians.
One of the most significant steps in founding of the United States of America was the creation of the Constitution. It was created in 1787, but intellectual foundations can be traced to long time ago. Experts have described it as the apex of the American enlightenment. It is an application of the eighteenth century Western science and learning to the affairs of humans. It cannot, therefore, be said that Constitution making was simply an event that evolved from the summer meeting of 1787. Its origin dates back almost to the whole previous history, as a product of enlightenment. Political theorists and historians have searched thoroughly through the past searching for a sole book or philosopher that might have directed the designers of the Constitution (Rossiter453). The key people they thought of were John Locke, Scot David Hume, and Montesquieu. However, none of them was the singular thinking of the founders.
Searching for one main personality to demonstrate the origin of the Constitution is not possible. Influence on the robust, expansive and meticulously created Constitution cannot be explained by the works of a single mind. Among other thinkers, the writings of Montesquieu, Burlamaqui, Locke, Polybius, and Hume were significant in creating the Constitution. These and other thinkers formulated indispensable aspects of the political culture of the United States. The founders, in their speeches, referred to their literary works by citing or quoting. The most common quotes were from Plutarch, Cicero, Blackstone, Plato, Pufendorf, and Rousseau. In their speeches, the founders quoted and cited so many promiscuously so that it became difficult to decipher the most influential personality (Ellis 300).
There were several influences affecting the actions and reasoning of the formulators of the Constitution,though implicating the influences of a particular thinker on a founder of the Constitution is difficult. The founders were pragmatic and experienced political leaders. Their shortcoming was that they were not logical and practical men who could be questioned about political philosophy. They were rather interested in ideas and making theoretical sense of their endeavors. They participated in a rich and progressive political culture that informed the Constitution they made. For them to understand the Constitution, they had to understand the political culture.
The most extensive feature of the political culture was republicanism. It formed the presumptions of American thinking. It shaped the founders’ belief of the elective political system and their social and moral objectives. The American Revolution had targeted at becoming a republican. This was a brilliant idea because in the eighteenth century era, monarchies were dominant. It was an intellectual technique by which citizens could show their dissatisfaction to selfishness, corruption, and luxury of the dominant monarchial culture. Such an ideology fanned the American Revolution. It was the ideology of the eighteenth century’s democratic revolutions. By the end of eighteenth century, the Constitution of the U.S was highly republicanized.
Another intellectual influence was the body of classic literature updated by the renaissance. The most significant was the writings of Machiavelli, the Italian philosopher. A collection of these values was combined into a custom called civic humanism. The practice highlighted that the moral conduct of the independent citizen is necessary for good politics. The practice further directed that good citizens should be independent, free of influence of parochial interests and property-holding farmers who are not controlled by other men. The classical conception became dominant among the educated people(Ellis 200).
The practice of civic humanism spread into the northern Europe culture. It inspired the works of republicans, including Harrington, Sidney, and Milton, and transferred to the eighteenth century by translators. Gordon wrote about the value of freedom of speech and religion. Even the French aristocrats embraced the values practiced by republicans. All this pointed at the phasing of monarchial systems and instigating electoral system of government. The aims of republicanism were to design a political system conscious of public welfare. Critics of the monarchial systems were concerned that kings were paying no attention to public good but were rather obsessed with parochial interests. By doing away with hereditary kings and instigating governments where people would elect leaders of their choice, the liberals who championed for reforms anticipated that this will compel the governments’ work welfare of the public.
The civic tradition had spillovers beyond the political arena. It had moral and social implications. Republics needed egalitarianism characterized with independence and a requirement that property-holding citizens were ready to forfeit their selfish interests for the public good. Such reliance on equal populace made the republic weak and short-lived politics. Monarchies, on the other hand, were formidable and brought leadership to their stride through absolute power, hereditary advantages, and sturdy army. Because republics embraced sacrifice of the people, theories of thinkers like Montesquieu cautioned that republics had to contend with small territories, uniform and moral conduct. The republics that sustained through the eighteenth century like Switzerland, Netherland, and the city states of Italy had small territories. In spite of this, the U.S in 1776 wanted to try Republicanism. Nevertheless, by 1787, Americans became concerned about this system.
By 1787, Americans were less enthusiastic about the republican system. The American people had cast aspersions on the ability of popular government such as the legislature to embrace morality and forfeit selfish interests. They were prepared for "systematic change" as James Madison referred to the new system of government. The system led to formation of federal Constitution. Most Americans were reluctant to embrace the new system as they said no other form will resonate with the ideals of the revolution or with the determination which derives freedom. The modelers of the new Constitution provided for occasionally elected leaders to take positions in the executive and the legislature. These leaders made the federal government assure a government based on the republican ideals for every state .
In 1787, American thinking was based on classical republicanism. The classical theory of balanced governments involved the concept of an independent president, popular House of Representatives, and the aristocratic senate.
Another influence on the creation of the Constitution was the English Constitution from which America attained its independence. The Constitution created a balance between House of Commons, the king and the House of Lords. The Americans did not believe in this Constitution. The king used his power to appoint men, who he crowned offices. The aim of the king was that these men could bribe and influence members of both the House of Commons and the House of Lords. The executive part was literally usurping powers to itself. When America got its independence from Britain, its aim was to miniature the English Constitution. To minimize these effects, most states significantly limited the appointing powers of the chief executive. The Constitution prohibited members of the judiciary and legislature from holding office in the executive branch simultaneously. To prevent the corruption that America observed in the English way of government, they separated from each other the powers of the executive, judiciary, and legislature.
The prohibition of legislators from holding executive offices marked a difference in their Constitution from that of their former mother country. They achieved preventing the English-style cabinet form of government. They avoided the corruption influence of the executive. The ultimate source of this balanced government structure was the English Constitution. The difference they made was separating the functional powers of judiciary, legislature, and executive. Each of these arms was a check on the other. The independent judiciary, presidential veto power, federalism, and bicameralism became a technique of checking mistrusted political power (Ellis 356).
The founding fathers wanted to design a state that was corruption free, responsible, and accountable to the people. All the efforts can be summarized into one topic- Separation of powers. It was to work for public good because appointments could not be skewed to the parochial interests of any individual; the arms of state now worke...