Why does the American form of government work? American exceptionalists and historical analysts alike claim that America's form of government was unique in its inception, and to this day, has a rather unusual quality: it was been ruled by a single regime since the beginning. Unlike many European nations and other nations in the world, America has maintained a single constitutional republic for over 200 years. Why is American's form of government is so stable and functional? In this blog post, I seek to answer that question by analyzing the Federalist Papers No. 10 & 51.
Federalist Paper 10:
"The effect of the first difference is, on the one hand, to refine and enlarge the public views, by passing them through the medium of a chosen body of citizens, whose wisdom may best discern the true interest of their country, and whose patriotism and love of justice will be least likely to sacrifice it to temporary or partial considerations. Under such a regulation, it may well happen that the public voice, pronounced by the representatives of the people, will be more consonant to the public good than if pronounced by the people themselves, convened for the purpose."
In this passage, Madison discusses the effectiveness of a republic over a pure, representative democracy. He claims that a republic would be more well suited for a large nation filled with varying opinions, as long as a medium of a chosen body of citizens is able to understand and relay the collective desire of their respective population. Madison also considers the fact that in this more efficient and streamlined manner of collectivizing opinions, the point would make it across in a much more fluid manner, rather than being corrupted by millions of people making similar demands individually. I having a single (or multiple) representatives give the collective opinion of a large group of people, the greater good of all the people is captured in a much more cohesive way.
"The influence of factious leaders may kindle a flame within their particular States, but will be unable to spread a general conflagration through the other States. A religious sect may degenerate into a political faction in a part of the Confederacy; but the variety of sects dispersed over the entire face of it must secure the national councils against any danger from that source. A rage for paper money, for an abolition of debts, for an equal division of property, or for any other improper or wicked project, will be less apt to pervade the whole body of the Union than a particular member of it; in the same proportion as such a malady is more likely to taint a particular county or district, than an entire State.
In the extent and proper structure of the Union, therefore, we behold a republican remedy for the diseases most incident to republican government. And according to the degree of pleasure and pride we feel in being republicans, ought to be our zeal in cherishing the spirit and supporting the character of Federalists."
In this final passage of Federalist No. 10, Madison claims that there is no perfect solution, but the Union is by far the most practical. Factions would lead straight to corruption and exclude the consideration of the minority. Unifying church and state would be unsafe and unpractical, because of the possibility, the inevitability, of a religious movement either falling apart or becoming a radicalist political movement. Madison also claims that in a republican body, such as the Union, corruption and greed are less likely to prevail over the people. I think Madison centers his opinion around staving off greed and corruption because he recognizes that as a new government, America has to succeed in spite of surrounding countries trying to bring it down to gain maximum profit from exportation of goods. Because Britain, at the time, is working to destabilize the American government through economic warfare, America must create a resilient government that can prevent rupture from within. The need for a representative government, I think, comes from American resentment of being kept out of British Parliament. At the time, America was trying to structure its government in such a way that there was no king figure that mirrored Britain's constitutional monarchy. This meant limited but considerable representation of the people in the government and the absence of any dominant figure. While this would soon change, this was the precursor for the legislative branch within the current American government. This helps explain why the American form of government works. The representative nature of the legislative branch considers the voice of every individual that is able to vote. Anyone with access to a ballot is able to offer their voice to the American government, where it is surely heard and considered. And, since equal power is delegated to the three federal branches, no voice is overlooked unless it is considered unconstitutional or vetoed by the president.
Federalist Paper 51:
"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 others. Were this principle rigorously adhered to, it would require that all the appointments for the supreme executive, legislative, and judiciary magistracies should be drawn from the same fountain of authority, the people, through channels having no communication whatever with one another."
In this passage, Madison outlines the separation of powers, originally postulated by Montesquieu many years earlier. He claims that there must be three separate branches of the government: executive, legislative, and judicial. He also claims that all members of each branch should be chosen by the highest authority in the nation: the people. This system helps explain why the American form of government works. The separation of powers originates in the explosion of Enlightenment ideals that rocked Europe and America in the 17th and 18th centuries. The system of checks and balances that arises from the separation of powers is essential to the way that the American government works. While each branch is individually extremely powerful, each branch has the power to silence the others, which is very important in handling matters of war and national security and constitutionality of laws and actions.
"It is no less certain than it is important, notwithstanding the contrary opinions which have been entertained, that the larger the society, provided it lie within a practical sphere, the more duly capable it will be of self-government. 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."
Federalist Paper 10:
"The effect of the first difference is, on the one hand, to refine and enlarge the public views, by passing them through the medium of a chosen body of citizens, whose wisdom may best discern the true interest of their country, and whose patriotism and love of justice will be least likely to sacrifice it to temporary or partial considerations. Under such a regulation, it may well happen that the public voice, pronounced by the representatives of the people, will be more consonant to the public good than if pronounced by the people themselves, convened for the purpose."
In this passage, Madison discusses the effectiveness of a republic over a pure, representative democracy. He claims that a republic would be more well suited for a large nation filled with varying opinions, as long as a medium of a chosen body of citizens is able to understand and relay the collective desire of their respective population. Madison also considers the fact that in this more efficient and streamlined manner of collectivizing opinions, the point would make it across in a much more fluid manner, rather than being corrupted by millions of people making similar demands individually. I having a single (or multiple) representatives give the collective opinion of a large group of people, the greater good of all the people is captured in a much more cohesive way.
"The influence of factious leaders may kindle a flame within their particular States, but will be unable to spread a general conflagration through the other States. A religious sect may degenerate into a political faction in a part of the Confederacy; but the variety of sects dispersed over the entire face of it must secure the national councils against any danger from that source. A rage for paper money, for an abolition of debts, for an equal division of property, or for any other improper or wicked project, will be less apt to pervade the whole body of the Union than a particular member of it; in the same proportion as such a malady is more likely to taint a particular county or district, than an entire State.
In the extent and proper structure of the Union, therefore, we behold a republican remedy for the diseases most incident to republican government. And according to the degree of pleasure and pride we feel in being republicans, ought to be our zeal in cherishing the spirit and supporting the character of Federalists."
In this final passage of Federalist No. 10, Madison claims that there is no perfect solution, but the Union is by far the most practical. Factions would lead straight to corruption and exclude the consideration of the minority. Unifying church and state would be unsafe and unpractical, because of the possibility, the inevitability, of a religious movement either falling apart or becoming a radicalist political movement. Madison also claims that in a republican body, such as the Union, corruption and greed are less likely to prevail over the people. I think Madison centers his opinion around staving off greed and corruption because he recognizes that as a new government, America has to succeed in spite of surrounding countries trying to bring it down to gain maximum profit from exportation of goods. Because Britain, at the time, is working to destabilize the American government through economic warfare, America must create a resilient government that can prevent rupture from within. The need for a representative government, I think, comes from American resentment of being kept out of British Parliament. At the time, America was trying to structure its government in such a way that there was no king figure that mirrored Britain's constitutional monarchy. This meant limited but considerable representation of the people in the government and the absence of any dominant figure. While this would soon change, this was the precursor for the legislative branch within the current American government. This helps explain why the American form of government works. The representative nature of the legislative branch considers the voice of every individual that is able to vote. Anyone with access to a ballot is able to offer their voice to the American government, where it is surely heard and considered. And, since equal power is delegated to the three federal branches, no voice is overlooked unless it is considered unconstitutional or vetoed by the president.
Federalist Paper 51:
"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 others. Were this principle rigorously adhered to, it would require that all the appointments for the supreme executive, legislative, and judiciary magistracies should be drawn from the same fountain of authority, the people, through channels having no communication whatever with one another."
In this passage, Madison outlines the separation of powers, originally postulated by Montesquieu many years earlier. He claims that there must be three separate branches of the government: executive, legislative, and judicial. He also claims that all members of each branch should be chosen by the highest authority in the nation: the people. This system helps explain why the American form of government works. The separation of powers originates in the explosion of Enlightenment ideals that rocked Europe and America in the 17th and 18th centuries. The system of checks and balances that arises from the separation of powers is essential to the way that the American government works. While each branch is individually extremely powerful, each branch has the power to silence the others, which is very important in handling matters of war and national security and constitutionality of laws and actions.
"It is no less certain than it is important, notwithstanding the contrary opinions which have been entertained, that the larger the society, provided it lie within a practical sphere, the more duly capable it will be of self-government. 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."
Part of American history is understanding the obsession that the founding fathers had with self rule. In this final passage, Madison explains the integrity, the flexibility and the inevitability of a body similar to the Union and the importance of self rule. Madison prefaces this final passage with a proposition that if Rhode Island were to be removed from the Union, the state would need to establish its own form of government similar to the three-branch system in order to survive, because self rule and a versatile government are necessary to survive in the absence of a monarchical system. This is the central reason for the success of the American government. The ability of self rule and the assimilation of the people into a body that maintains stability and bars any group from becoming more powerful than any other are central qualities to the American government and are arguably reasons for the longevity of the government.
No comments:
Post a Comment