Federalist 10: James Madison

Improved Essays
A simple fact of nature for humans is their desire to compete and win, the true can be said for minority and majority groups. James Madison foresaw this problem when writing Federalist 10. He discusses the problems with factions and their threat they posed to the new government, as well as the naturally ambitious nature of humans and how that can be used to control power. Lastly, Madison claims that pluralism and the ambition of people are the solution to factions. The Madisonian majority is the idea of small factions, groups of either minority or majority looking to bend public interests in their favor. These factions pose a threat to public good should they have adversarial interests to what the community wants. However, through a representative …show more content…
The detractors to granting such power to a federal government feared the creation of tyranny, but Madison rebutted with the system of checks and balances that sought to play on the naturally ambitious nature of people in power to maintain their power. In Federalist 51 Madison says, “Ambition must be made to counteract ambition” (Federalist 51, P.1), meaning that the drive of people to keep power will act as check on those trying to over extend their power and establish itself as superior. This was Madison’s solution to the problem of a powerful government, each branch will work to make sure the other ones don 't gain more power than granted as well as branches having to work together to stop the other branch from overreaching. Not only would it work between branch’s but also within them, for example the bicameral nature of Congress serves as a check on each house. Issues can arise from this such as a deadlock in Congress. A system of checks and balances was essential in creating a functioning power structure within the government that limited the ability of one branch to become more powerful than the …show more content…
The idea of the Madisonian Majority is a lot of small interest groups who have shifting interests. These competing groups would serve as a check on themselves order to bring about compromise allowing for harmful groups to be sifted out. Another issue came from the placement of a vast amount of power in the federal government, but a system of checks and balances that would use the ambitious nature of people to act as a monitor on the other branches. This ensured a system that didn’t allow for one branch to become superior to the

Related Documents

  • Improved Essays

    One of the main functions of state governments is to establish a sense of political efficacy and duty among its inhabitants. If states did not exist, citizens would not have the same sense of duty instilled within them, because federal governments are often perceived as impersonal entities. Similar to state governments, Alexis de Tocqueville describes the importance of the decentralized institution of localities by stating, “Of all forms of liberty, that of the local community, which is so hard to establish, is the most prone to the encroachments of authority.” Assuming Tocqueville is correct, the abolition of states would result in an infringement of the citizens’ “spirit of liberty” all the way to a local level. While the states exist to enhance the civic virtue of citizens and offer an institution to bring concerns to, it also exists to protect the civic liberty among its inhabitants. Tocqueville writes, “Without local institutions a nation may give itself a free government, but it has not got the spirit of liberty.” Although he is referencing townships and local governments, the same is true for states.…

    • 1465 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    Unfortunately, Madison feared that elites would become too powerful and take over the government. Madison stated that: “There are two methods of curing the mischiefs of faction: the one, by removing its causes; the other, by controlling its effects. There are again two methods of…

    • 1168 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Great Essays

    Marmor's Argument Analysis

    • 2212 Words
    • 9 Pages

    Indeed, there are several more arguments I would like to have made to defend my stance, but I think the arguments I have made in this paper are the ones that cut closest to the true danger of removing judicial supremacy. Essentially, my argument is this. We need an institution responsible to set the boundaries for the legislative playing field. It does not make sense for the legislature to be the one to set its own boundaries because it will pervert the playing field to favor itself, perhaps by shifting boundaries to favor constituent majorities or by making the boundaries optional so it can cease more power for itself. Instead, we should have an impartial court to referee the legislative game we collectively…

    • 2212 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Great Essays

    The American state has become an overly complex bureaucracy. The myriad of checkpoints needed to go through in order to get anything done dissuades citizens from participating actively in politics. And participatory governance being a crucial aspect of a prospering democracy makes the problem of kludgeocracy ever the more pressing. The inevitability of this has its roots in the founding fathers’ concern over the limits of a central government and the responsibilities a truly representative democracy should have. Their pragmatism has shielded the American people from many of the overreaches a government can impose on its citizenry, but at the price of turning our government into a kind of a labyrinth.…

    • 1331 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Improved Essays

    It is human nature to naturally be evil and we must have government to maintain and regulate society, in order to prevent citizens from trumping others rights. Ideologies is a “prescription for society based on personal values.” A truly objective political ideology is almost impossible, but if it can be sensitive to the individual and best promotes their cooperation towards mutual ends. Ronald Reagan was a modern conservative who proposed many changes to how he thought…

    • 1738 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    It is not always possible to vote out a government every time a population disagrees with it. It is in these times of disagreement where it is up to the people to step up in protest. It becomes further justified when a government is not only incompetent, but when it actively oppresses its people from exercising their rights. This is where revolutionary thinkers like Karl Marx and Slavoj Zizek are important. Marx, for example, believed that the best way to re-balance society was through the ballot box.…

    • 1777 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    According to Tilly, the government claims to protect its citizens from outside threats, but the threats may have been created because of the actions of the government. By creating real or fictitious threats of war, the overall welfare of the people within society is threatened. Another way that the government shapes the state is by controlling violence. This control could be asserted through various ways including harm of people or property and the violation of desires and interests (Kivisto 245). By the government using war and violence to shape a state, Tilly believed that it could lead to democracy because their rights as citizens were not readily available to them.…

    • 928 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    It needed to be able to be an actor for other countries. It needed to exert some control with states that were not acting amicably with other states. A fear of the Anti-Federalist was that the central government would be too powerful. As such, wanted a Bill of Rights. The debate on the Bill of Rights was a major conflict in the passing of the new constitution.…

    • 1295 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Anti Federalist Analysis

    • 1222 Words
    • 5 Pages

    Federalists argued for a stronger executive, which gives context to why they don’t want the public directly voting for him. However, this doesn’t mean the president is not accountable to the people. The President still has to represent the public good of the country, and promote unity and it is ultimately the people who decide if they think the president is doing a good job or not. The Federalists are more concerned with the accountability of the legislature, which has “intrepid confidence in its own strength; which is sufficiently numerous to feel all the passions which actuate a multitude…” (Federalist 48, 238). People should be more concerned about the accountability of the legislature because according to the Federalists, they are the most likely to abuse…

    • 1222 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    In this sense, proponents argue that the process “somehow preserves federalism or small states ' legitimate interests” (Edwards 2005, p. 11). One concern of the democratic process is developing methods for maintaining equal representation across all states despite their size. Imbalances due to the weight given to states, the potential for the winner to lose the popular vote, and disproportionate advantages are all cited as major failures of the Electoral College in adhering to democratic principles. Proponents for direct elections cite these implications as a source of criticism of the current system. The national attention on those states that have the variability for political competition can cause an imbalance in issues that candidates consider (Grofman & Feld, 2009).…

    • 1854 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Improved Essays