** Friday update ***
Post your 5 top Qs below. If you have any clarification Qs, post or email them to me separately.
Original instructions:
You are to read actively, per the syllabus, all the Federalist papers in the packet. Apologies for the cut-off of p. 89, which below:
No need to Questions posted here yet. Write you Qs on the text and then we’ll go back to them after our class discussion tomorrow.
We’ll keep working on property later…
– Bromley
p. 89:
Just kidding. Here’s the text (scanned it on my phone which then translated it to text… bad!)
From The Federalist 51
In Federalist 10, an earlier selection, one of the Constitution’s designers, James Madison, explained his fear of “faction any single group that tries to dominate the political process—and why faction cannot be removed from politics. Madison’s solution was to accept factions, but control them. Federalist 10 offered a republican (representative) government and a large, diverse nation with many factions as effective controls. In No. 51 he continues, citing the structural features that characterize American government. Power will be separated among different departments, or branches, of government, independent from one another. Then, power will be divided between the national and state levels, a system called federalism. Madison’s philosophy for government is here in this essay too: “Ambition must be made to counteract ambition. ” Don’t miss that paragraph, since it contains warnings that resonate across the centuries.
No. 51.: Madison
To WHAT EXPEDIENT, then, shall we finally resort, for maintaining in practice the necessary partition of power among the several departments as laid down in the Constitution? The only answer that can be given is that as all these exterior provisions are found to be inadequate the defect must be supplied, by so contriving the interior structure of the government as that its several constituent parts may, by their mutual relations, be the means of keeping each other in their proper places. Without presuming to undertake a full development of this important idea I will hazard a few general observations which may perhaps place it in a clearer light, and enable us to form a more correct judgment of the principles and structure of the government planned by the convention.
In order to lay a due foundation for that separate and distinct exercise of the different powers of government, which to a certain extent is admitted on all hands to be essential to the preservation of liberty, It is evident that each department should have a will of its own; and consequently should be so constituted that the members of each should have as little agency as possible in the appointment of the members of the …
>> p 90 next.
I added the Revolution theories & timelines slideshows to the Powerpoints page, plus one on Federalist no. 10 and Madison that might help your reading tonight.
1. How is ideology related to property ? How does different opportunity lead to division? Is all division healthy, or can some be unhealthy?
2. Are factions fluid? If factions are fluid or rigid, how does this affect growth of ideology and Thoreau’s idea of society’s ridiculous imposition of consistency?
3. Can governments really control opinion, or do restrictive governments just control the application of it?
4. How is “public good” determined? Is it justice if the majority of the people get their will?
5. Are factions the only way an individual’s voice can be heard in large self-ruled governments? Do factions serve a greater purpose for the agenda of the individual or for the group?
The writers of the federalist papers used complex, deep sentence structure and terminology, would this have “gone over the heads” of the apolitical majority in which they were trying to appeal?
If so, would it have been in the Anti-Federalist’s interests to “dumb it down” to appeal to the majority?
Madison provides two instances for which to eliminate a faction, his description to them being impossible to destroy without the loss of fundamental rights, is there any way to eliminate a faction without infringing on peoples rights?
Can a faction exist without property?
At the time of the Federalist Papers, would have starting a direct democracy even have been possible considering the difficulties in transportation and mathematics? So in a sense, was the representative democracy necessary to overcome the communication barrier?
What did the Federalists plan to do to protect the “weaker individual” in society? Were these provisions framed directly in the Constitution?
1. In order to remove the causes of faction, liberty – an essential part of self rule – must be taken away, either through destruction or conformity. Is this not a tyrannical notion?
2. If the causes of faction are in our nature as humans, then why are they considered to be bad?
3. Can popular government truly exist? Don’t the ideals and goals of a group tend to change once they come to power, failing to keep them the popular opinion?
4. Why is intelligence always a factor in deciding who should lead? Does intelligence make an individual’s nature different?
5. Why do the “mischiefs of faction” require a cure? Isn’t the idea of competition among parties an essential part of politics?
How can democracy have no cure for factions while republics can?
Why does factious leaders “kindle a flame” in their States?
Is everything in government a reflection of human-nature?
Is the Constitution founded on the assent and ratification of the people or by the people or of the States?
Should the federal government be worried if the people grow an attachment for there State government over them?
What are some historic examples of factions leading to tyranny?
Is it possible for the two-party system to lead to these factions that Madison fears?
If there is equal distribution of property, does that eliminate factions?
Are factions the main cause of failed democracy in history? If not, then what?
Has the constitution been unquestioningly successful in controlling factions?
1. If there were separate factions in a society and one gained exponetial power over the other would it have the power to overthrow the government, or would the national government system stop the coup before it occured?
2. Is the body of citizens that Madison is appealing to part of the political strata or the apolitical strata?
3. Does faction have the power to create anarchy?
4. Is the balance of federal power and national power the most effective way of providing America with a government that channels the peoples’ voice? Have federal and national governments turned aside from giving the people their Constitutional rights in order to gain power over one anther
5. In a democracy do the weak parties always sacrifice for the majority? Is this better than suppressing peoples’ passions, possessions, and opinion by forming a republic and not allowing any factions to exist?
Questions on Federalists 10, 39, 46, and 51
1) Montesquieu said that “It is natural to a republic to have only a small territory, otherwise it cannot long subsist.” Therefore, why did Madison, who learned from thinkers including Montesquieu, decide that a large republic would better serve the people?
2)The primary interests of the states was industry, commerce for the northern states and plantations for the southern states. Therefore, why would it be more beneficial to have a union sized republic as opposed to a state sized republic?
3) Does Madison’s proposed structure actually support the protection of minorities? How about the common good?
4) It is evident that the framers did not intend for the politics of this country to be partisan. In fact, parties ranked very high on the list of bad things. How would the framers react to the politics of today?
5)Has the concept of the separations of power actually protected the rights of the people?
1. How can a governemnt regulate the results of factions fairly and equally?
2. Is it human nature to defy authority, even if the authority of a government is serverly limited?
3. Since it is the duty of the constituents to regulate the leaders who represent them, what happens if the citizens of a country do not know exactly what they want in their leaders, but want to change the status quo?
4. Since the legislative branch in the U.S. has less authority than those in other countries, is that diffence in the power of the legislative branch a major determining factor between a democracy that works and one that does not?
5. How can a government still function, if the society has gone so far away from its founding priciples and the laws lag far behind the change in society?
Do Madison’s idea of using the check and balance system to control the effects of different factions, still apply to today’s two-party system?
How do we separate those who determine the law from their self-interests and insure they do not try elevate the wishes of their own faction?
What factors determine different factions. How do we categorize people if they share similar but not all of the same political values?
If a main goal of the government is to make sure no one faction gains too much power, why then are decisions still made based on majority vote?
Madison argued that factions are the key to our liberty and the key to self-government. Yet they are harmful since they allow for the power in the majority. But what are the draw-backs of majority rule.
1. If there are truly only two ways to “cure the mischiefs of faction,” can Democracy ever truly exist in our society? The reason being that the factions would have to either be controlled or removed (defeating any real voice to be had)?
2. Does having more money or more people behind a certain cause lead to more power, and what becomes a larger voice for that power?
3. Is it feasible to say that a “majority” within a specific group (the wealthy) hold the power, and as such the minority (bottom 99%, or 90%, etc.) be insecure; even though the majority of the people are within that collective minority?
4. Now that the two party system is so engrained into our political culture, can we say that either party truly represents our interests at all?
5. Is having a mixture of different systems (ex. federal and national government) something that slows our system down and creates tension, or the groundwork that helps keep this country thriving?
1. How can Madison conclude that differences in interests will immediately lead to differences in political groups?
2. Is the delegation of the government to a small number of citizens elected by the rest be bad because the public vote will be more consonant to the public good than if pronounced by the people themselves?
3. Is a government “derived from a great body of the society,” the only essential component necessary for self rule?
4. Can a country or nation prosper with just a republican form or federal form of government?
5. Overall, do factions help or degenerate the process of creating a well run government?
Page 47 Question 1
Is the reason that Madison considers the American Constitution to be the best form of democracy (republicanism) and government because it is aimed at controlling (regulating) factions rather than attempting to destroy it or allow one faction to reign supreme over the rest?
Page 48 Question 2
In addition to controlling faction, does Madison believe that the constitution (centralized government) will be better equipped to preserve and protect the rights of the people?
Page 91 Question 3
If Madison states in Federalist 10 that, “in a republican government, the authority necessarily predominates ” then is he not stating that Congress ultimately has more power than the president, because they both write the laws and have the ability to overturn his veto? If this is so, then why do we always look to the president AND NOT CONGRESS when the country is experiencing rough times? Moreover, when Madison follows said statement with “The remedy for this inconveniency is to divide the legislature, by different modes of election and different principles of action” is he justifying why the house of Representatives only can propose revenue and taxation bills and determine whether a government official can be tried for crimes against the United States in addition to serving 2 year terms and the Senate only can confirm treaties, and confirm or reject presidential appointees as well they can conduct a trial against government officials for crimes against the U.S (permitted the House allows it) while serving 6 year terms. Is this also why the President has executive privilege?
Page 92 Question 4
How is a republic better equipped to handle injustice than any other form f government?
Page 112 Question 5
How does the Constitution make the federal government and the states interdependent?
Page 47 Question 1
Is the reason that Madison considers the American Constitution to be the best form of democracy (republicanism) and government because it is aimed at controlling (regulating) factions rather than attempting to destroy it or allow one faction to reign supreme over the rest?
Page 48 Question 2
In addition to controlling faction, does Madison believe that the constitution (centralized government) will be better equipped to preserve and protect the rights of the people?
Page 91 Question 3
If Madison states in Federalist 10 that, “in a republican government, the authority necessarily predominates ” then is he not stating that Congress ultimately has more power than the president, because they both write the laws and have the ability to overturn his veto? If this is so, then why do we always look to the president AND NOT CONGRESS when the country is experiencing rough times? Moreover, when Madison follows said statement with “The remedy for this inconveniency is to divide the legislature, by different modes of election and different principles of action” is he justifying why the house of Representatives only can propose revenue and taxation bills and determine whether a government official can be tried for crimes against the United States in addition to serving 2 year terms and the Senate only can confirm treaties, and confirm or reject presidential appointees as well they can conduct a trial against government officials for crimes against the U.S (permitted the House allows it) while serving 6 year terms. Is this also why the President has executive privilege?
Page 92 Question 4
How is a republic better equipped to handle injustice than any other form f government?
Page 112 Question 5
How does the Constitution make the federal government and the states interdependent?
1) In the modern American world is public conflict often measured upon the superiority of the majority and not under the rules of justice and the rights of the minor party?
2) Has the government created factions under its regulation policies.
3) Do people actually have a “choice” to not be part of politics or the federal system? And if they are not, do they become part of a faction?
4) Would giving every citizen the same opinions or the same passions or the same interests ever be possible, perhaps in the future? If yes, “how” and if not, “why not”?
5) Why do people oppress others? If humans are selfish; are humans born into it, born with it or grow with it?
1. How is it possible for a faction to be removed if there are always going to be some sort of group wanting to have things their own way?
2. Do we even need factions? Why?
3. If so, we wouldn’t have to worry about curing or removing a certain faction in the first place. If it were actually necessary, then a provocation of how to remove or cure a faction shouldn’t be present.
4. What would have to be done to properly regulate the factions so that one faction wont be able to dominate over the others?
5. Does either party care for what we truly want?
1. Have there been any factions which benefited society as a whole?
2. Would there have been any power balances between factions?
3. What purposes do factions serve in the government?
4. How are individuals economically affected by the clash of these factions?
5. How did Madison come up with factions needing liberty?
1. How does the government give it’s officers the same interests and motives that promote the constitution instead of those that conflict with it for personal benefit?
2. If Madison’s argument holds true, doesn’t the two party system only enhance factions?
3. Which of Madison’s ideas did the anti-federalists oppose, not considering the bill of rights?
4. Madison says the chief magistrate is appointed by the people, but isn’t he chosen by the president and checked by congress today?
5. When did the original republican and democratic party affiliation begin within the people and the states?
1) Would it be hard to dominate a faction within society?
2) Does enlarging the number of electors renders the loss in interests?
3) Is there any other way that the executive magistrates or judges have to be more dependent towards faction?
4) For the nation to be self-defending, does having more power help strengthen the government along with society?
5) Why is it that several State constitution do not correspond with the federal Constitution?
Did founders try to conceive a form of government other than democracy?
In page 48, it is mentioned that under the Articles of Confederation. the public good is often disregarded in the conflicts of rival parties. Doesn’t this happen today?
Isn’t a societal division necessary to not have a tyranny? Wouldn’t denying this division require brainwashing to work?
Even if everyone had an enlightened point of view, wouldn’t other enlightened minds have different views on what needed to be done for the greater good of America?
Aren’t deviations necessary in order to push society forward through competition?
Is social factions a contributer to government failure? Why were factions causing such a big problem?
If man can not judge himself accurately how can the government govern itself accurately? How can there be a judicial system when its just one imperfect man judging another imperfect man?
Why were the American colonies having such a hard time balancing?
Which political party has a better historical and social standing, Democrats or Republicans?
How can a minority overpower majority of votes?
Why was the American Union so divided? Would a government that doesn’t communicate with other branches of the government actually become successful?
1. If Madison saw the current government system as flawed, how does he want society to change to be better?
2. Does Madison see diversity within society as an advantage or disadvantage?
3. IS it possible to eliminate factions within society?
4. Does Madison think that the government has evil motives?
5. Considering Madison’s view on the social structure, are human beings born good or evil?