A comparison as to why a compound republic is effective as a form of government

I remember way back in 8th grade learning about the different branches of the American government.  In my class, we learned that there is a Judicial branch, a Legislative branch and an Executive branch, which work with equal powers as a team to run the USA. How they do this is with a series of what are known as "checks and balances", also known as separation of powers.  Checks and Balances provide each branch with a way to regulate the other two branches.  For example the senate must ratify all treaties with a two thirds vote, the President can veto a bill passed by congress, and the Supreme Court judges how closely a law follows or does not follow the Constitution.  In this way, if Congress decides they would like to pass a law that gives the right of freedom of speech to those who own a house and takes away the right of freedom of speech from people who do not own a house, the Supreme Court would be able to stop this oppressive law from passing by ruling it unconstitutional on the basis that it violates the first amendment.  In The Federalist No.10 and The Federalist No.51, James Madison argues the necessity of a system of checks and balances in a nations government, due to their ability to regulate factions within and between that government’s political parties.

To begin with, in order to asses the validity of James Madison’s statement, one must first examine those countries who do not have a system of Checks and balances in place, and asses their political stability and extent to which they are providing their people with their natural rights. 

First lets examine ancient Greece and their government of direct democracy.  In The Federalist No. 10, Madison states, that “Theoretic politicians, who have patronized this species of government, have erroneously supposed that by reducing mankind to a perfect equality in their political rights, they would, at the same time, be perfectly equalized and assimilated in their possessions, and their passions.” In this Madison points out the reason for the evolution of political parties and factions.  It is because men are not all equal in their possessions and passions that people disagree with one another.  In a direct democracy, there is no way to prevent the majority from passing an oppressive law or act, because there is no way to check their power.  While those theoretic politicians may argue that the separation of powers exists between each individual person, people are not perfect, and thus cannot be trusted to allow their actions merely to be guided with only the good of the state and of its people in mind. 

A second example of a government not without checks and balances, but without a balanced separation of power is the People’s Democratic Republic of Korea, more commonly known as North Korea.  While it is true that the North Korean government possesses a separation of powers through their government branches of the Cabinet, the Supreme People’s Assembly, the Central Court and the Korean People’s Army, they are a more Centralized government with only one party and numerous restrictions on their people’s natural rights.  Madison has been clear to define, that while faction cannot be left unattended it also provides “…various and interfering interests”…which fosters modern legislation because of the necessity of “the spirit of party and faction in the necessary and ordinary operations of the government”(No.10).  Thus North Korea, having only one party, has eliminated the issue of faction, but in doing so condemned its own government to fail because of the lack of differing opinions.  In the case of North Korea it is not so much the lack of separation within their government that causes the issue of a lack of liberty and thus a lac of differing political views, but the separation of government and people.  Because there is not a branch of power given to the people so that they may assist in regulating the government, the government has stopped regarding the people’s opinions and natural rights in favor of their own personal desires for power and prestige. 

Having asserted through these two examples of government that Madison is correct in his opinion that without equal separation of government both within the governing body and between the governing body and its people, let us examine thus why the government of countries such as the United States, Canada and England have succeeded in the endeavor to form a government in which people retain their natural rights to life liberty and the pursuit of happiness. 

The most important reason these three countries have been successful in setting up such a government is that they have provided that under their jurisdiction, the people have the liberty to decide, express and communicate their own ideas and opinions.  This basic freedom of speech and of the press (as it is called in the US constitution) allows for the spread of differing opinions and thus the formation of opposing political groups.  It is this idea of faction and its necessity in a republic to stimulate the government operations which is such a crucial piece of government in the US, Canada, and England.

In addition to the existence of factions the second most important piece of a republican government is a separation of powers.  In the US the separation of powers is very extensive, and begins with the separation between the federal government and the state governments.  This separation enables the country to regulate extensively any faction from gaining too much power, because while the faction may dominate the state, the nation as a whole is little affected by the state majorities interests and can still make a decision which is beneficial for the greater good of all the countries people.  Likewise, both the state government and the central government are further divided into the executive branch, the legislative branch and the judicial branch.  These branches check each other in multiple ways, and by doing so preserve the purpose of the government as a protection of the people’s rights and liberties.  As Madison says so eloquently “In the compound republic of America, the power surrendered by the people is first divided between two distinct governments, and then the portion allotted to each subdivided among distinct and separate departments.  Hence a double security arises to the rights of the people.  The different governments will control each other, at the same time that each will be controlled by itself” (No. 51).  In this way, the US has created a self regulating government that puts all branches on equal ground, and thus allows for the most efficient and reliable form of providing a just governing body.