"But the most common and durable source of factions has been the various and unequal distribution of property. Those who hold and those who are without property have ever formed distinct interests in society. Those who are creditors, and those who are debtors, fall under a like discrimination. A landed interest, a manufacturing interest, a mercantile interest, a moneyed interest, with many lesser interests, grow up of necessity in civilized nations, and divide them into different classes, actuated by different sentiments and views. The regulation of these various and interfering interests forms the principal task of modern legislation, and involves the spirit of party and faction in the necessary and ordinary operations of the government."
Today, we tend to criticize the colonists for failing to unite during the Albany Conference and the Revolutionary War. However, it really should come as no surprise that the colonists failed to collaborate because everyone has different interests. Madison adequately illustrates that while we are Americans, we all have different lives. Some people have more wealth and property than others. Some people such as creditors and banks might prefer acts that keep the currency stable while debtors might support acts that cause inflation. The idea is that each person has self - interests, many of which may conflict with other people's interests.
In some countries, such and Britain and Germany, the power was held in the hands of a few wealthy men. This meant that laws passed would probably benefit the wealthy men instead of the entire population. On the other hand, in America, political representation is open to all citizens. This means that even the poor farmers or the religious minorities could have their interests met. With America's system of parties and factions, there is a much better chance that each group of people will have their interests satisfied.
"In the first place, it is to be remarked that, however small the republic may be, the representatives must be raised to a certain number, in order to guard against the cabals of a few; and that, however large it may be, they must be limited to a certain number, in order to guard against the confusion of a multitude."
The United States Congress currently has 535 members who actively try to pass the bills. However, after explaining Madison's logic, it will seem that we have too many members in the legislature. Madison initially argues that having too few members, no matter how large the republic, is a detriment as the fate of the entire state is in the hands of just a few representatives. One of just a few members can make an impetuous decision that could potentially shake the whole republic as there would not be enough members to counteract. It is also easier for the few individuals to conspire and meet only their own interests. The obvious solution seems to be increasing the amount of members. However, even this is a problem because too many people with conflicting interests won't be able to get anything passed. I personally believe that Madison's latter warning is coming to life in modern day America. With the myriad of Congressmen, often split into different factions, it appears that very little progress is being made in terms of passing legislation. I feel that we should at least cut the numbers of representatives down to 500 members.
"In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself. A dependence on the people is, no doubt, the primary control on the government; but experience has taught mankind the necessity of auxiliary precautions."
James Madison attempts to learn from the mistakes of past governments. He first acknowledges that a government must have enough power to control the masses. Realizing the failure of the weak and decentralized power provided by the Articles of Confederation, Madison emphasizes the need for a government that has the power to control its citizens. However, the caveat to this is that the government can't have too much power that it fails to control its self as it becomes too oppressive. Madison saw this with the growing power of King George III and realized that the U.S. government must take a middle ground. While the best prevention of absolute power is getting the people's consent, Madison believes that auxiliary precautions are needed as well.
"In a single republic, all the power surrendered by the people is submitted to the administration of a single government; and the usurpations are guarded against by a division of the government into distinct and separate departments."
This idea of the separation of powers is probably the primary reason why America has not fallen into a state of tyranny. The governments three major departments, the judiciary, the legislative, and the executive, split up the governments immense amount of power. For example, the president, a part of the executive branch, can veto laws passed in the legislative branch. This privilege prevents the legislative members from passing self-serving laws that might harm the country. The president is also checked by the legislative and judiciary branch in fields such as war and the economy. Unlike Charles I who ruled without Parliaments consent, the American government ensures that no politician gains too much power. This essential safeguard has prevented America from tumbling into a dictatorship.
Today, we tend to criticize the colonists for failing to unite during the Albany Conference and the Revolutionary War. However, it really should come as no surprise that the colonists failed to collaborate because everyone has different interests. Madison adequately illustrates that while we are Americans, we all have different lives. Some people have more wealth and property than others. Some people such as creditors and banks might prefer acts that keep the currency stable while debtors might support acts that cause inflation. The idea is that each person has self - interests, many of which may conflict with other people's interests.
In some countries, such and Britain and Germany, the power was held in the hands of a few wealthy men. This meant that laws passed would probably benefit the wealthy men instead of the entire population. On the other hand, in America, political representation is open to all citizens. This means that even the poor farmers or the religious minorities could have their interests met. With America's system of parties and factions, there is a much better chance that each group of people will have their interests satisfied.
"In the first place, it is to be remarked that, however small the republic may be, the representatives must be raised to a certain number, in order to guard against the cabals of a few; and that, however large it may be, they must be limited to a certain number, in order to guard against the confusion of a multitude."
The United States Congress currently has 535 members who actively try to pass the bills. However, after explaining Madison's logic, it will seem that we have too many members in the legislature. Madison initially argues that having too few members, no matter how large the republic, is a detriment as the fate of the entire state is in the hands of just a few representatives. One of just a few members can make an impetuous decision that could potentially shake the whole republic as there would not be enough members to counteract. It is also easier for the few individuals to conspire and meet only their own interests. The obvious solution seems to be increasing the amount of members. However, even this is a problem because too many people with conflicting interests won't be able to get anything passed. I personally believe that Madison's latter warning is coming to life in modern day America. With the myriad of Congressmen, often split into different factions, it appears that very little progress is being made in terms of passing legislation. I feel that we should at least cut the numbers of representatives down to 500 members.
"In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself. A dependence on the people is, no doubt, the primary control on the government; but experience has taught mankind the necessity of auxiliary precautions."
James Madison attempts to learn from the mistakes of past governments. He first acknowledges that a government must have enough power to control the masses. Realizing the failure of the weak and decentralized power provided by the Articles of Confederation, Madison emphasizes the need for a government that has the power to control its citizens. However, the caveat to this is that the government can't have too much power that it fails to control its self as it becomes too oppressive. Madison saw this with the growing power of King George III and realized that the U.S. government must take a middle ground. While the best prevention of absolute power is getting the people's consent, Madison believes that auxiliary precautions are needed as well.
"In a single republic, all the power surrendered by the people is submitted to the administration of a single government; and the usurpations are guarded against by a division of the government into distinct and separate departments."
This idea of the separation of powers is probably the primary reason why America has not fallen into a state of tyranny. The governments three major departments, the judiciary, the legislative, and the executive, split up the governments immense amount of power. For example, the president, a part of the executive branch, can veto laws passed in the legislative branch. This privilege prevents the legislative members from passing self-serving laws that might harm the country. The president is also checked by the legislative and judiciary branch in fields such as war and the economy. Unlike Charles I who ruled without Parliaments consent, the American government ensures that no politician gains too much power. This essential safeguard has prevented America from tumbling into a dictatorship.
A very concise and to the point article Ashwin, I commend you. Through out your writing you have a nice comparison between British and American government that helps illustrate your point. However, I feel that the power of election in the common people is too strong of a point to keep out of your argument.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Andy in my admiration for the way you used examples from what we are learning about now, such as the Albany congress, to back up your points. It makes a nice tie between the more complicated text of the Federalist document and what we are more accustomed to thinking about and interpreting. Under your section about a separation of powers I would like to hear more about what would happen if the different branches of the government weren't there to check one another, and what America or any country with a separation of powers for that matter, would look like without one.
ReplyDeleteDarn you posted your comment before mine.
Delete