James Madison was no stranger to opposition. In publishing an essay referred to today as Federalist Essay No. 10, Madison participated in a persuasive attempt to ratify the Constitution, a document he drafted and for which he is credited as its “Father”. Along with John Jay, who became the United States’ first Supreme Court Chief Justice, and Alexander Hamilton, who became the first Secretary of the Treasury, Madison articulates in his writing the necessity of the Constitution as a remedy for the extant ills of an infant nation recently freed from the grasp of distant monarchical rule. This young nation faltered under the first endeavor of organized government, the Articles of Confederation. The Articles were designed during a period of emerging …show more content…
He addressed as one objective of the Union that was to become the United States “break[ing] and control[ing] the violence of faction”. Madison acknowledges prior failed attempts at establishing popular government, but he asserts that the American Constitution is one of stronger rhetoric that improves upon inherent flaws, such as “the instability, injustice, and confusion introduced into the public councils”. The new Constitution, Madison claims, is well equipped to reduce the malignant effects of faction. The method of representation that the Constitution details prevents “the public good [being] disregarded in the conflicts of rival parties”, with fortune favoring the “the superior force of an interested and overbearing majority”. It is necessary to note that Madison refrains from mentioning specific individuals and events throughout the essay; doing so reinforces the concept of republican democracy in that each individual, and not specific men, possesses the ability to influence public policy. Madison furthermore defines a faction to demonstrate his understanding, and that of the public’s, in the presence of a disease others deem detrimental to the preservation of the general public’s rights and interests. Madison does not present a distinct, succinct thesis in Federalist No. 10, though a statement resembling a thesis follows the definition of a faction. Madison states, “There are two methods of curing the …show more content…
Continuing the metaphor of faction as a disease, Madison labels “[a] republic” as “the cure for which we are seeking”. Madison notes that a republican government differs from pure democracy in that the delegation of the government is smaller and can thus achieve efficient action. Another contrast lies also in the extent to which a republic has influence over a “greater sphere of country”. The passing of public views “through the medium of a chosen body of citizens” allows for refinement of ideas due to the influence of elected officials’ wisdom and is “more consonant to the public good than if pronounced by the people themselves”. To protect against the caprices of wicked men, the number of representatives of the people will be a quantity that stymies the influence of the few but is able to, as Madison states, “guard against the confusion of a multitude”. Madison then references his belief in the common sense and good will of men in that “the suffrages of the people” is likely to result in the election of men most deserving and fit for their roles as representatives and lawmakers. Madison presents an avowal that counters one of the Anti-Federalists’ major grievances: “[t]he federal Constitution forms a happy combination” with “the great and aggregate interests being referred to the national, the local and particular to the State legislatures”; Anti-Federalists feared that a stronger
Federalist 10 is an article by James Madison and by far is one of the most famous. In the article Madison stressed that the strongest factor in the Constitution is that it establishes a government capable of controlling the violence and damage caused by factions. Factions are a group of individuals who gather together in a union or political party and are against government control. They are sometimes groups called ‘sub-factions’ and they were technically a party within a party. Factions try desperately to advance their agenda, special economic interests, and political opinions. Factions work against the public interest and infringe upon the rights of others. To put an end to factions is inevitable. Madison summed it up best by saying as long as men hold different opinions, have different amounts of wealth, and have different amount of property, they will continue to associate with those similar. In other words, those who had large amounts of money and owned land/property were the typical individuals who would be in factions.
This passage places emphasis on one of the three arguments James Madison makes in Federalist 10. Madison explicates the deficit of factions specifically factions that could cause nothing but “mischief” for the United States. In this particular passage, he explains how factions are inevitable in our country, however, controlling the effect of factions would diminish their “mischievous impact.” Thus, prohibiting factions assists in reducing the probability of “[a] weaker party or an obnoxious individual” from gaining power over the minority. These smaller factions that Madison hopes to avoid are a direct result of “pure democracy” that he accounts as have “general[ly]…short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths.” Therefore, this particular fragment from federalist 10 serves as the precedent to the introduction of a mixed Constitution of a democracy and republic, in this case, a large republic.
He states that the government had too many leaders and not enough followers. That the government administrated by too many people who had a different motive on running the state. In addition, Madison agreed to what Hamilton was saying. Therefore, Madison helped Hamilton settle this dilemma. “It has been seen that delinquencies in the members of the Union are its natural and necessary offspring; and that whenever they happen, the only constitutional remedy is a force, and the immediate effect of the use of it, civil war.” (Hamilton) Hamilton father explains why this would be a problem with government and predicts what might happen if it reaches to that point. “To this reasoning, it may perhaps be objected, that if any State should be disaffected to the authority of the Union, it could at any time obstruct the execution of its laws, and bring the matter to the same issue of force, with the necessity of which the opposite scheme is reproached.” (Hamilton) Both Alexander Hamilton and James Madison wrote the 18th and 19th Federalist paper. The 18th article spoke about contradicting the argument of anti-federalists that proposed a monarchical rule in America. Madison states that if the anti-federalist and federalist do not collaborate on the rule that they established for the people. They would become like the people in Greek history. “Instead of this obvious policy, Athens and Sparta, inflated with the victories and the glory they had acquired, became first rivals and then enemies; and did each other infinitely more mischief than they had suffered from Xerxes.” Demonstrating a jealous view of power and disorganized fashion. “Their mutual jealousies, fears, hatreds, and injuries ended in the celebrated Peloponnesian war; which itself ended in the ruin and slavery of the Athenians who had begun
Everyone has heard the name Alexander Hamilton, but few are familiar with his views and actions regarding the survival of the young American republic. He could be recognized for anything from serving our fledgling country by fighting in the New York militia; to serving his community as a lawyer and as a national tax agent; to beginning his political career as a representative for New York at the National Congress. Though most would agree his most important contribution to our struggling republic was to spearhead the project which formed the doctrine helping to establish the foundation in which modern democracy is based, the Articles of Confederation.
Madison begins perhaps the most famous of the Federalist papers by stating that one of the strongest arguments in favor of the Constitution is the fact that it establishes a government capable of controlling the violence and damage caused by factions. Madison defines that factions are groups of people who gather together to protect and promote their special economic interests and political opinions. Although these factions are at odds with each other, they frequently work against the public interests, and infringe upon the rights of others.
James Madison, an American statesman and political theorist that was present at the constitutional convention. Many of the ideas proposed by Madison are part of the reason that the Constitution has withstood the test of time. Madison was ultimately prepared to deal with one of the biggest problems this new government would face in his eyes, factions. Factions, which as defined by Madison are “a number of citizens, whether amounting to a majority or minority of the whole, who are united and actuated by some common impulse of passion, or of interest, adverse to the rights of other citizens, or to the permanent and aggregate interests of the community” (Madison 156). Madison addresses various ways that he sees factions can be cured of its mischiefs such as removing a faction’s causes and also controlling their effects. Madison points out that this is would potentially create an even bigger problem than the factions themselves by stating, “Liberty is to faction, what air is to fire, an ailment, without which it instantly expires” (Madison 156) Madison also stated that the way for a government to remove the cause of faction was either to destroy the liberty that causes factions to exist in the first place or to give every citizen the same beliefs and opinions. Madison deemed this impractical, because it is nearly impossible to give everyone in a given place the same opinions and destroying the liberty would take away the very thing that the colonies fought for 4 years earlier. The fact is Madison knew that the country wouldn’t be able to count on a well-educated statesman to be there any time a faction gets out of hand. Madison knew the only viable way to keep factions under control is not to get rid of factions entirely but to set a r...
In conclusion, Madison thinks the human nature is ambitious, and the fixed outcome of human ambitions is people create factions to promote their own interests. In the case of preventing corrupt or mischief by factions, he believes majority and pure democracy is not a solution. The method he advocated is a large republic with checking system. He converts human ambition to provide internal checks and balances in government. His point of view stimulated the approval of the proposal of the United States Constitution.
...he other hand, Madison discusses the topic of liberty in that it is what fuels factions. He says that removing liberty is one of the only ways to destroy a faction. He proceeds to state that this is not probable, and that factions can not be destroyed, but we must control their consequences in order to have a stable government. Madison believes that the Constitution preserves man's liberty by fairly representing them in a central government.
In the Federalist Papers, there was a great concern for Factions. Factions are a political group that has one single major aim. They can be very powerful; which could be a positive and a negative thing depending on the goal they are trying to achieve. A fear that factions could actually control the government made the founding fathers uneasy. The Constitution did not support factions but could not abolish them either, because it would go against the liberty of citizens. Madison also did not support factions as he states in Federalist 10 that “The public good is often disregarded in the conflicts of rival parties”. Either way factions had to stay because abolishing factions meant abolishing liberty.
AMONG the numerous advantages promised by a well constructed Union, none deserves to be more accurately developed than its tendency to break and control the violence of faction. The friend of popular governments never finds himself so much alarmed for their character and fate, as when he contemplates their propensity to this dangerous vice. He will not fail, therefore, to set a due value on any plan which, without violating the principles to which he is attached, provides a proper cure for it. The instability, injustice, and confusion introduced into the public councils, have, in truth, been the mortal diseases under which popular governments have everywhere perished; as they continue to be the favorite and fruitful topics from which the adversaries to liberty derive their most specious declamations. The valuable improvements made by the American constitutions on the popular models, both ancient and modern, cannot certainly be too much admired; but it would be an unwarrantable partiality, to contend that they have as effectually obviated the danger on this side, as was wished and expected. Complaints are everywhere heard from our most considerate and virtuous citizens, equally the friends of public and private faith, and of public and personal liberty, that our governments are too unstable, that the public good is disregarded in the conflicts of rival parties, and that measures are too often decided, not according to the rules of justice and the rights of the minor party, but by the superior force of an interested and overbearing majority. However anxiously we may wish that these complaints had no foundation, the evidence, of known facts will not permit us to deny that they are in some degree true. It will be found, indeed, on a candid review of our situation, that some of the distresses under which we labor have been erroneously charged on the operation of our governments; but it will be found, at the same time, that other causes will not alone account for many of our heaviest misfortunes; and, particularly, for that prevailing and increasing distrust of public engagements, and alarm for private rights, which are echoed from one end of the continent to the other. These must be chiefly, if not wholly, effects of the unsteadiness and injustice with which a factious spirit has tainted our public administrations.
During his entire life, James Madison, who is one of the founding fathers, contributed many dedications to the States, especially when creating the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. As the fourth president of the U.S, he consciously chose to create a new model of presidential power that he thought would fit better with the system of the separation of powers after seeing “the danger overwrought executive power poses to republican constitutionalism” (Kleinerman). Despite of having such good intention, some of his actions led the country through some significant suffers.
As Plato once said, whatever a “wise man [says]… ‘is not to lightly be cast aside’” (Phaedrus 53). A man we can apply this to is James Madison’s “Federalist 10” and “Federalist 51”. Madison’s ideas on factions and how government should run replaced the ideas found in the Articles of Confederation and balanced power between the people and the government. Another thing that helps make these letters significant in United States history is the way his ideas are presented in these two letters. In both Gorgias and Phaedrus, Plato illustrates Platonic framework—the idea of pursuing the true, the good, and the beautiful in one’s writings and speeches. This idea is demonstrated in James Madison’s “Federalist 10” and “Federalist 51”; both of these works
In Madison's Federalist 10, it is evident that he was not in favor of the formation of factions. He states, "…The public good is often disregarded in the conflicts of rival parties…" Madison made the point that the dangers of factions can only be limited by controlling its effects. He recognized that in order to abolish political parties from the government completely, liberty would have to be abolished or limited as well. For this reason, the government had to accept political parties, but it did not have to incorporate them into being a major part of the government. He says that the inclination to form factions is inherent, however the parties effectiveness can be regulated. If the party is not majority than it can be controlled by majority vote. Madison believed that in the government established by the Constitution, political parties were to be tolerated and checked by the government, however the parties were never to control the government. Madison was absolutely convinced that parties were unhealthy to the government, but his basic point was to control parties as to prevent them from being dangerous.
In Federalist No. 10, James Madison stresses that “measures are too often decided, not according to the rules of justice and the rights of the minor party, but by the superior force of an interested and overbearing majority.” Madison philosophized that a large republic, composed of numerous factions capable of competing with each other and the majority must exist in order to avoid tyranny of majority rule.# When Federalist No. 10 was published, the concept of pluralism was not widely used. However, the political theory that is the foundation for United States government was the influential force behind pluralism and its doctrines.
How well has federalism worked in the United States? This is all a matter of opinion. Federalism has indeed been an active structure for government that fits in quite well with the changing American society. This particular system of government has been around for over two hundred years, and under all those years the separation of power under American federalism has changed numerous amounts of times in both law and practice. The United States Constitution does allow changes and amendments in the Constitution have assigned miscellaneous roles to the central and state governments than what originally intended. The suitable equilibrium between national and state powers is repeatedly an issue in American Politics.