2. Based on the excerpt, which proposed aspect of the Constitution was seen as almost pointless by the author?
Answer: C
The creation of a strong chief executive was seen as almost pointless by the author.
The author perceives the establishment of a strong chief executive as ineffective given the historical context of repeated violations by overbearing majorities, suggesting that such a position would not prevent the infringement of rights.
A) the establishment of checks and balances
The establishment of checks and balances is crucial in preventing any one branch of government from becoming too powerful, which the author likely recognizes as necessary. This option does not align with the author's sentiments regarding the inadequacy of the chief executive's authority in protecting against majority tyranny.
B) the existence of a national court system
The existence of a national court system serves as a safeguard for individual rights and the rule of law. The excerpt does not indicate that the author finds this aspect pointless; instead, it suggests that judicial oversight could potentially mitigate the issues posed by overbearing majorities.
C) the creation of a strong chief executive
The author views the creation of a strong chief executive as almost pointless, arguing that it would not adequately address the problem of majorities infringing on rights. This perspective highlights a skepticism towards the effectiveness of a strong executive in protecting against the very violations mentioned in the excerpt.
D) the inclusion of a bill of rights
The inclusion of a bill of rights is fundamentally aimed at protecting individual liberties from government overreach. The author does not dismiss this aspect as pointless; rather, it may be viewed as a necessary measure to safeguard against the very violations by majorities that the author critiques.
Conclusion
The rationale behind the author's view on the creation of a strong chief executive being almost pointless stems from the belief that such a position would fail to prevent the tyranny of overbearing majorities. In contrast, the other options—checks and balances, a national court system, and a bill of rights—are all seen as essential mechanisms that could effectively counteract the threats to individual rights highlighted in the excerpt. Thus, while the author recognizes the importance of certain constitutional elements, they question the efficacy of a strong executive in this context.