Federalist No. 10 Analysis

1375 Words3 Pages

In Federalist Paper No. 10, Madison writes that “a well-constructed Union” has one especially important task to accomplish. This task is the ability to “break and control the violence of faction.” Through use of the word faction, Madison means, “a number of citizens, whether amounting to a majority or minority of the whole, who are united and actuated by some common impulse of passion, or of interest, adverse to the rights of other citizens, or to the permanent and aggregate interests of the community” (Madison p. 1). I fully agree with Madison’s assessment on factions. If a faction grows to acquire the power of majority, then it will have the ability to oppress the majority factions. In cases like these, the wishes and beliefs of everybody …show more content…

1). In my viewpoint, the mere thought of this proposal goes against the very nature of liberty and free thinking. Why have a form of government that is meant to incorporate the opinions of all its citizens if every person is taught to or forced to think the same way? This idea is more in line with tyrannical forms of government where the citizens do not truly have a say and also in line with Communistic governments that try and force everyone to be equal, which works well on paper, but fails miserably in actual implementation due to the easability that a ruler will be led astray towards corruption. My views once again agree with Madison’s however. He claims the second suggestion is, “impracticable as the first would be unwise.” He continues in saying, “As long as the reason of man continues fallible, and he is at liberty to exercise it, different opinions will be formed” (Madison, p. 1). He explains that people have this natural right to express themselves despite being wrong or right on any given issue. It is simply a “liberty.” With liberties come “different opinions” which is okay, because different opinions are the natural outcomes of the freedom of …show more content…

2). His remedy is in the formation of a republic. As long as a faction does not become the majority, then the wishes of everyone can be protected through voting down the changes that minority factions wish to implement. Here, I disagree with Madison’s assessment. I am a supporter of majority opinion, because it is in accordance with the favorably superior preferences. However, at the same time, why is it that the majority is not labeled a faction by Madison while the congregated minority beliefs are? In a perfect governmental system, everyone’s wishes should be heard equally. This should include the minority factions as well. If not, then the majority would be imposing their beliefs over the minority. In a way, the majority itself is a faction and Madison seems to be okay with this. In fact, Madison’s entire argument regarding a large republican government seems to really focus on keeping minority factions from being overruled by the dangers of majority opinion. Madison claims a republic in which delegates are used to represent the people is favorable over an absolute democracy, because, “…on the one hand, to refine and enlarge the public views, by passing them through the medium of a chosen

Open Document