Federalist 10 by James Madison?
Many people had argued against the new Constitution claiming that the US would be too large to govern as a democracy (republic) and had too many groups, or “factions,” as political parties were then called. While Madison acknowledged that there were many differing factions, he also indicated that a democratic form of government, using the ideal of majority rule, would tame the factions and cause them to work together as much as possible. He claimed that the republican form of government created by the new Constitution would allow all the factions the room and venues to express themselves and to influence the workings of government by getting their members elected and/or appointed to offices. Minority groups would be protected because the factions would have to negotiate their differences. In this way, the republic would create a system of government in which the majority would rule but the ideas of the minority would have to be taken into consideration. Numerous factions would also mean that no one group would be able to take complete control of the government and this would give rise to what Madison called “politics,” namely, the art of governing.
Federalist Paper 10 by James Madison?
he is referring to "the public good disregarded in the conflict of rival parties" (like democrats v republicans) with the party in power not respecting the minority party and being overbearing- creating distrust for public participation and lessening of our rights. it is the nature of man- yes i think it does reflect today- people are just as polarized as ever- People still vote party line instead of each candidate on their merits madison says to deal with factions you need to remove the causes and control its effects remove cause 2 ways: by destroying liberties or giving everyone the same beliefs (obviously not happening) he says they cannot be eliminated but must control effects- through a republican form of government checks and balances, limited government,
In what ways does Federalism guard and protect against tyranny?
Federalism is a system of government in which political power is spread and shared about. In our contemporary world, this power is usually spread across nation states. A perfect example of federalism in action is the United States or Germany, where both countries have separate states but also a central or federal government. These central governments are highly limited because most powers are exercised by the states.This is unlike in unitary systems of government, such as in the UK (pre-devolution), where the central government has the supreme authority to implement any type of law, in any part of the country within the legal abilities of the government. There is no decentralisation of political power and only one supreme authority.Therefore, with such decentralisation, federations are less likely - though not immune - to fall to tyranny as it’s much harder for the head of government to exert themselves upon a particular geographical region within their country that may happen to be a state or part of a state.In many ways, the head of government of a federation does not, technically, hold complete power over his entire nation. Instead, it is the combined power of the head of government and governors of states that hold power across the entire nation. It’s not held by one single person but rather several.
Federalists No. 10 and 51?
Federalist Paper ten is the fifth in a series of five which focuses on the possible dangers of war between the States. The first four are written by Alexander Hamilton with the tenth and final one (of this series) written by James Madison. While Hamilton had opined in Federalist Paper six that “the weakness and wickedness of human nature” would lead to “frequent and violent contests. He then expands on this perspective in federalist Papers seven and eight. Then in the Ninth he makes the point that the size of the American Union would promote external security and internal liberty. To support this position he uses the writings of Montesquieu. However, Madison summarizes this subject in Federalist Paper Ten and provides an analysis of the nature, causes, and effects of factions (that is, that factions are primarily the root cause of dissention) but makes the point that said factions are the product of, and the price of, liberty. His approach is to develop the best way to control these natural urges and functions. For this he proposes that the best way is a system of representation and extended territory. Here he and Hamilton agree that the proper structure of Union is that of a republic. In this manner they provide that it is the best way to “combat a tyranny of the majority?”. It is also true that Federalist Paper Fifty One concludes a series of five Federalist Papers, that is Federalist Forty Seven through Fifty One. These are all written by James Madison and they address the subject of the separation of the departments of power. That is, Madison examines the separation of the legislative, executive, and judiciary departments. He reviews the natural tendency of the legislature to usurp the powers of the other branches and therefore the requirement of the checks and balances. By the time Madison writes Federalist Paper Fifty One you can make the case that he is picking up where he left off in Federalist Paper Ten. In short, he finds “security for civil rights” not in charters or in appeals to humanity, but rather in “the multiplicity of interests” that characterizes a free society concluding with, “ . . . And happily for the republican cause, the practicable sphere may be carried to a very great extent by a judicious modification and mixture of the federal principle. . . . ”
8 facts about Federalist No.51?
1 - Written by James Madison 2 - Addresses the checks and balances between the different departments of government. 3 - Madison addresses why it is NOT in the best interest of the people to elect the judicial branch 4 - Because the qualifications of being a judge are not easily understood. 5 - Because it is a permanent position, which should have no allegiances to any authority. 6 - He points out that the checks and balances will prevent one branch of government from abusing their power, because men are not angels and there needs to be a method of not only governing the people, but governing themselves. 7 - He says that it is not possible to give each branch of government equal power. He says that a Republican Government must rely on the legislative branch, but that to safe guard against the legislative branch from becoming too powerful, that they must be divided (House and Senate) and act autonomously with the same purpose. 8 - He points out that society is made up of many parts, interests, and classes of citizens. 9 - He points out that the constitution will safeguard the rights of individuals, and that the "minority, will be in little danger from interested combinations of the majority." 10 - He says, "In a free government the security for civil rights must be the same as that for religious rights" 11 - He does not explain what the checks and balances are. 12 - He shows that the proposed plan of government is guarded by the diversity of people and the divisions of the people's authority within the government.
Which are the most important Federalist Papers to read?
There are no best Federalist Papers to read. You need to read all the Federalist Papers and then read The Anti-Federalist Papers. After reading these papers you will have a feel for what was going on. But more importantly you can go to the constitution and figure out which side won on each battle. Then you will know what each part or amendment means. To be truthful you actually need to go beyond those two sources and research media accounts of what went on in debates, town hall meetings, ect.. People try to twist the amendments all the time but if you track down the sources at the time debate/passage/ratification you will know what was meant. Justices, Politicans and Powers have twisted even committed subversion of the Constitution by not adhering to what the winning founders wanted. Remember these issues were voted on with their meanings clearly known and those voting to pass agreed win or loose they would abide by the meaning put forth by the presenter. In other words if a amendment was put forward by a Anti-Federalist and it passed and was ratified, it does not matter what a Federalist said about it because he agreed to accept it if he lost. This is something very much lost in arguments to day over Amendments.
What is federalism?
Federalism is the process by which two or more governments share powers over the same geographic area.A principle of government that defines the relationship between the central government at the national level and its constituent units at the regional, state, or local levels. Under this principle of government, power and authority is allocated between the national and local governmental units, such that each unit is delegated a sphere of power and authority only itcan exercise, while other powers must be shared.The term federalism is derived from the Latin root foedus, which means "formal agreement or covenant." It includes the interrelationships between the states as well as between the states and the federal government.In the United States, the Constitution grants certain powers to both the U.S. government and the state governments.The History of FederalismThe strongest arguments for federalism were written during the ratification of the U.S. Constitution. the federalist papers,a set of 85 essays written by Alexander Hamilton ,James Madison,and John jay were originally published in 1787 in New York under the pen name Publius. They were meant to explain the advantages of the Constitution and to persuade New York citizens to ratify it.There are almost countries adopted federal system discussed in the following link :Federal Republic CountriesA good example would be the way that the Constitution is amended. Congress presents the idea and the state ratifies it. Congress can't by itself amend the Constitution. It needs to work with the state- federalism.Another example of a federal structure is the labor union organization of the American Federation of Labor, in which independent local unions band together into a national organization but exercise considerable autonomy regarding their operations and policies. What makes these organizations federations, as opposed to either unitary (like the U.K.) or confederal (like the U.N.) governments is that they depend upon the existence of autonomous subunits (states or local unions) as the basis for their national organization. The central government in each case must contend and bargain with peripheral subunits about the implementation of national policies instead of imposing them by universal mandate.