Federalist No. 10 Pros And Cons

The debate between Federalists and Anti-Federalists before the ratification of the United States Constitution centered around a number of controversial issues such as equal representation of the people, defense from the majority, and the balance of power between the states and the national governments. Federalist and Anti-Federalist Number 10 discuss the concerns with factions, their role in government, and how much power they should wield. While both suggest that large, clashing factions are detrimental to the United States, Federalist No. 10 promises that the government can protect from and reduce the growth of factions, and Anti-Federalist No. 10 argues for balancing of many larger groups, claiming that total lack of conflict in opinions leads to tyranny. While both papers make excellent points, Federalist No. 10 is more applicable to modern issues, although society does not fully follow its ideas either.
Federalist No. 10, which was written by James Madison, explains the dangers of factions in the government and claims that the new government is able to properly guard against these dangers, even though it cannot prevent them completely. Madison defines faction as “a number of citizens, whether accounting to a majority or

10 appears to apply more to modern representation and politics, there are still some aspects of faction power that Madison did not appear to consider. The United States is not run by the passions of the people living in it. Minority factions are not running the government in that they are not pushing through legislation based entirely on their own views. Factions that have a majority do not always manage to force their own views on everybody either. For example, the use of the filibuster has slowed a number of pieces of legislation that had a simple majority, but not a two-thirds majority. In this way, Madison accurately pinpointed how the setup of government under the Constitution restricts the effects of