Two Methods Of Removing The Basis Of The American System

James Madison’s Federalist 10 was written amid criticisms that a republican form of government had never been successful on a large scale. Madison’s argument was that a well-constructed union could control factions. He argued that in order to control factions from their causes, we would need to either give up liberty or free thought. Since we cannot infringe upon these two natural rights, we must move on to controlling the effects. A republic, Madison argues, would be able to do this because the people choose the representatives, and they choose representatives who they feel best represent their opinions.

There are also many other reasons a faction may exist, as long as there is a common idea among a group of people there will be a faction. He believes in order to limit factions you must do it in one of two ways; by removing the cause or controlling the effect. Madison explains the only way to remove the cause is to take away liberties or have everyone think the same way, both of which are more dangerous than the faction themselves. Because removing the cause won’t work the only

Federalist No. 10 by James Madison addresses the framers’ fear of factions that naturally come from a democracy. He begins by defining what a faction is, referring to the institution of factions in government as “mortal diseases under which popular governments have everywhere perished…” Factions, he says, are the biggest danger to governments everywhere because of the problem that arises from any group gaining power over any other group, destroying the democracy so sought after and replacing it with rule by the majority group. An obvious solution to solving the problem of factions is to abolish them in government.

Perhaps the most famous Federalist paper, Federalist 10, starts off by saying that one of the biggest arguments that favors the Constitution is that it creates a government suited to minimize the harm caused by factions. Faction, in this case, is defined as a group of people whether a minority or majority based on class, race, and profession that all share a common interest. It was inevitable that factions would occur and perhaps the defining characteristic was the unequal distribution of property. This would ultimately lead the poor without property to become the majority in a “tyranny of the masses.” Madison believed that there were two solutions in preventing majority factions, 1) Remover the causes, and 2) Control the effects.

Madison rhapsodizes at length about the dangers of factionalism under majority rule; he claims that “popular government [...] enables [the majority] to sacrifice to its ruling passion or interest, both the public good and the rights of other citizens”, thus insinuating that popular rule in a system where “the causes of factionalism cannot be prevented” will ultimately devastate both the working class’s public good and the elite class’s private right (10). This fear mongering over majority rule acts as a ringing endorsement of the alternative: minority, or elite, political dominance. To ease the minds of his readers, Madison then declares that the working class of the new republic will be too spread out and otherwise divided to oppose the just government established by the upper class–or, in his words, lower classes will be “rendered, by their number and local situation, unable to concert and carry into effect schemes of oppression” against the elite (10). In this way, Madison promotes upper class rule as a means to protect American liberty, believing that the people at large were unfit to establish this protection themselves–and that they had neither the intelligence nor the unity to carry out their corrupt schemes under properly conducted elite

May 1787. 55 delegates, one long, sweaty conference. The Constitutional Convention was a huge event for the United States. During this convention, the 55 delegates from all states except Rhode Island met up to change their Articles of Confederation. Instead of editing, however, the 55 delegates rewrote the whole thing into the Constitution, which is still used today.

Madison is analyzing the way to deal with the growing faction problem. He begins his essay by defining factions for the reader. “By a faction, I understand 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, adversed to the rights of

Factions and Federalist Essay No. 10 The federalist papers were a series of 85 essays written to convince the citizens of New York to ratify the constitution. Federalist essay No.10, written by James Madison, discusses political factions and their effects. Madison’s definition of a faction is clearly stated in the essay.

James Madison wrote Federalist 51 over 200 years ago, yet its words still impact today’s government in 2016. When writing Federalist 51, Madison had two main objectives in mind; he wanted a government with a separation of powers, and he also wanted minorities to be protected. Both of his objectives have been accomplished and continue to be present in today’s American government with the latter objective being more present in today’s government even more so than in the past. To begin with, power is separated in today’s government, preventing a single person or group from having absolute power since, “Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely,” according to John Dalberg-Acton. The American government is composed of three branches which power is separated amongst.

Madison’s essay reflects the fear many had of a tyrannical government and the desire to ensure that the country didn’t revert back to that which it had just escaped from. He notes the necessity to prevent any one faction or group from gaining too much power and oppressing those in the minority. The separation of powers was set in place to ensure that this could not happen. Even if one group decides they want something, the other two have the equal authority to prevent it should it not represent the country as a whole.

The Federalist #10 paper was the first contribution that James Madison did to the Federalist essays. His warnings and concerns were that the when a number of people rules whether it is by majority or minority, it can become dangerous to the republic. These people will ruled by their own interest not to all the citizens of the country. He described it as "faction". A faction is an organized group within a bigger one.

Federalist 51 is a primary source from the time of the creation of the constitution. It was written by James Madison on February 8, 1788. It is an essay describing the Constitution 's usage of checks and balances system and why it was needed. At the time, the constitution was newly written. So, under the pseudonym of Publius; James Madison, Alexander Hamilton, and James Jay: three federalists (people who supported the constitution and favored a strong central government with power shared between states), wrote the Federalist Papers.

In Federalist 51 Madison claims, “In the extended republic of the United States, and among the great variety of interests, parties, and sects which it embraces, a coalition of a majority of the whole society could seldom take place upon any other principles than those of justice and the general good.” In addition, the Constitutional separation of powers also helps avoiding the mistakes of swiftness and passion. Moreover, freedom of speech and press permit everybody who does not agree with a piece of legislation to make is views known, and to criticize unscrupulous legislation and bad

USH 1. Why was the Bill of Rights written? 2. What is the purpose of the “American System”? 3.

Madison proposes that factions themselves are the staple chaos of the ideal government as the only way to eliminate factions is “by destroying the liberty which is essential to its existence” or “by giving to every citizen the same opinions, the same passions, and the same interests.” He shows these solutions to be flawed as he thereafter notes that they are impractical and immoral. Marx, alternatively, has the staple chaos as the revolution of the proletariat to overthrow the bourgeoisie. He avoids acknowledging the problems and suffering that are associated with revolution and goes to great length to not label this as an “evil.” He paints revolution to be ideal and noble for the sake of his argument to convince the proletariat to