American Pluralism In Federalist No. 10, James Madison stresses that “measures are too often decided, not according to the rules of justice and the rights of the minor party, but by the superior force of an interested and overbearing majority.” Madison philosophized that a large republic, composed of numerous factions capable of competing with each other and the majority must exist in order to avoid tyranny of majority rule.# When Federalist No. 10 was published, the concept of pluralism was not widely used. However, the political theory that is the foundation for United States government was the influential force behind pluralism and its doctrines. Pluralism comes from the political system that focuses on shared power among interest groups and competing factions.# A pluralistic society contains groups that have varying interests and backgrounds, including those of ethnic, religious, and political nature.# Differences like these are to be encouraged, with overall political and economic power being maintained. When a number of people, all sharing a common interest are threatened, a group is involuntarily formed in order to defend against competing interests. These pluralistic interest groups are free to operate and lobby in the political arena, fighting against the majority and other competing factions for voice in Congress. With the influence of multiple factions operating throughout the political system, a balance of power is created (Kernell 2000, 429). This is much like the international theory of sovereign states balancing each other’s power to create a political system that focuses on stability, yet is always in a constant flux of power. With this in mind, special interest groups are constantly contending for power by raising money, campaigning, and lobbying in Congress. When a special interest group is threatened by a competing policy, the group will organize efforts to balance, or transcend the power of the competing group. The pluralistic scholar David Truman notes that “the proliferation of political interest groups [is] a natural and largely benign consequence of economic development” (Kernell 2000, 429). That is, as American economic development increases, in the form of industry, trade, and technology, factions are produced in order to protect special interests. Factions have a large platform on which to find support from various political parties, committees, subcommittees, and the courts, as well as federal, state, and local governments (Kernell 2000, 429).
Federalist 10 is an article by James Madison and by far is one of the most famous. In the article Madison stressed that the strongest factor in the Constitution is that it establishes a government capable of controlling the violence and damage caused by factions. Factions are a group of individuals who gather together in a union or political party and are against government control. They are sometimes groups called ‘sub-factions’ and they were technically a party within a party. Factions try desperately to advance their agenda, special economic interests, and political opinions. Factions work against the public interest and infringe upon the rights of others. To put an end to factions is inevitable. Madison summed it up best by saying as long as men hold different opinions, have different amounts of wealth, and have different amount of property, they will continue to associate with those similar. In other words, those who had large amounts of money and owned land/property were the typical individuals who would be in factions.
This passage places emphasis on one of the three arguments James Madison makes in Federalist 10. Madison explicates the deficit of factions specifically factions that could cause nothing but “mischief” for the United States. In this particular passage, he explains how factions are inevitable in our country, however, controlling the effect of factions would diminish their “mischievous impact.” Thus, prohibiting factions assists in reducing the probability of “[a] weaker party or an obnoxious individual” from gaining power over the minority. These smaller factions that Madison hopes to avoid are a direct result of “pure democracy” that he accounts as have “general[ly]…short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths.” Therefore, this particular fragment from federalist 10 serves as the precedent to the introduction of a mixed Constitution of a democracy and republic, in this case, a large republic.
Madison speaks of the problems of the present attempts at a new government saying “our governments are too unstable, that the public good is disregarded in the conflicts of rival parties, and that measures are too often decided, not according to the rules of justice, and the rights of the minor party, but by the superior force of an interested and over-bearing majority”.
Supporters of the Constitution called themselves Federalists, a name referring to a balance of power between the states and the national government. They argued for a federal system as in the Constitution. James Madison claimed that the Constitution was less dangerous that it looked because the separation of powers protected people from tyrannical abuse. The Federalists compile a group of essays, known as The Federalist Papers. In No. 51, Madison insisted that the division of powers and they system of checks an balances would protect Americans from the tyranny of centralized authority. He wrote that opposite motives among government office holders were good, and was one of the advantages of a big government with different demographics. In No. 10, he said that there was no need to fear factions, for not enough power would be given to the faction forming people; thus, they wouldn't become tyrannical. Hamilton, in No. 84, defended the Constitution with the case that the Constitution can be amended by representatives, who are there to represent the citizens' interests.
James Madison wrote The Federalist No. 10 to inform the people about the problems and possible solutions for the formation of factions. Through multiple statements concerning the dangers of factions and the benefits of a republic, Madison’s major argument was in favor of the United States Constitution. Madison defined a faction as "A number of citizens, whether amounting to a minority or majority of the whole, who are united and actuated by some common impulse of passion or interest, adverse to the rights of other citizens or to the permanent and aggregate interests of the community." (Madison p. 1) Factions can be compared to the modern day lobby group; or as groups of people with a common self-interest. These groups are only involved for their own benefit and would be indifferent to the individual rights of other citizens as a whole, only hoping to further their own ideas. Madison believes that factions are inherent to human nature, making it unavoidable that people are living under a state of liberty. Madison argues that "the most common and durable source of factions has been the...
In The Federalist Papers by James Madison, Madison discuses various aspects of government and how the government must be organized in order to better represent the people. In The Federalist, No. 10 Madison discusses the nature of political factions and parties and how they can affect the government and its practices. The Federalist, No. 51 discusses instead how the government being in branches helps maintain liberties and better protect the American people. The topics mentioned in The Federalist Papers continue to explain and structure our government today.
The Madisonian model, which was first proposed by James Madison, is a structure of government made to prevent either a minority or majority group to build up enough power to dominate the others. The Constitution made this possible. One of the principles was to separate the powers of the government into three branches: executive, legislative, and judicial. The separation of powers allowed each of the three branches to be independent with the exception of working together in order to govern. Congress passes laws, the president applies and manages the laws, and the courts elucidates the laws in distinct conditions. Madison clarified his beliefs in Federalist Paper No. 51 saying that in order for a government to exist it was necessary for there to be a balance in power. By giving each branch administer constitutional means, they'll avoid intrusions of the others. The constitutional means are a system of checks and balances, where each branch of government has the right to inspect the conduct of the others. Neither branc...
In Madison's Federalist 10, it is evident that he was not in favor of the formation of factions. He states, "…The public good is often disregarded in the conflicts of rival parties…" Madison made the point that the dangers of factions can only be limited by controlling its effects. He recognized that in order to abolish political parties from the government completely, liberty would have to be abolished or limited as well. For this reason, the government had to accept political parties, but it did not have to incorporate them into being a major part of the government. He says that the inclination to form factions is inherent, however the parties effectiveness can be regulated. If the party is not majority than it can be controlled by majority vote. Madison believed that in the government established by the Constitution, political parties were to be tolerated and checked by the government, however the parties were never to control the government. Madison was absolutely convinced that parties were unhealthy to the government, but his basic point was to control parties as to prevent them from being dangerous.
Madison begins perhaps the most famous of the Federalist papers by stating that one of the strongest arguments in favor of the Constitution is the fact that it establishes a government capable of controlling the violence and damage caused by factions. Madison defines that factions are groups of people who gather together to protect and promote their special economic interests and political opinions. Although these factions are at odds with each other, they frequently work against the public interests, and infringe upon the rights of others.
In Federalist Paper Number 10, Madison sees Factions as being inevitable. Humans hold differing opinions and are all living under different circumstances, and are likely to group together with those most like themselves. Some groups of people will attempt to work together to benefit themselves even if it goes against public interests and even if it infringes upon the rights of others. In the Federalist Paper Number 10, Madison feared that Factions could be detrimental to the common good and in order to minimize the effects and control the effects of Factions, the best form of government would be a large republic. According to Madison, to minimize the negative consequences of Factions, they must either be controlled or the causes of Factions must be removed. Since he describes the causes of Factions being the different interests and living conditions between individuals, it can be argued that this solution is not very feasible. It would be impossible to make sure every single person makes the same amount of money, has the same goals, and even goes through similar life experiences. The greatest source of Factions, the deepest and biggest cause of Factions, according to Madison, is the unequal distribution of property. The acquisition of property or lack of property creates class divisions the foster differing interests. Since it is not possible to
In discussing the problems surrounding the issue of factionalism in American society, James Madison concluded in Federalist #10, "The inference to which we are brought is that the causes of cannot be removed and that relief is only to be sought in the means of controlling its effects." (Federalist Papers 1999, 75) In many ways, the nature of American politics has revolved around this question since our country's birth. What is the relationship between parties and government? Should the party serve as an intermediary between the populace and government, and how should a government respond to disparate ideas espoused by the factions inherent to a free society. This paper will discuss the political evolution that has revolved around this question, examining different "regimes" and how they attempted to reconcile the relationship between power and the corresponding role of the people. Beginning with the Federalists themselves, we will trace this evolution until we reach the contemporary period, where we find a political climate described as "interest-group liberalism." Eventually this paper will seek to determine which has been the most beneficial, and which is ultimately preferable.
This essay defines the theory of “elitism” and “pluralism” and how these two theories compare. First, this essay describes the theory of “elitism”. Then, it provides some historical events that we’ve studied in class that support the theory of “elitism” in the political process. Next, this essay describes the theory of “pluralism”. Then, it provides some historical events that we’ve studied in class that support the theory of “pluralism” in the political process. Finally, this reading response explains how these two theories compare.
Political Interest Groups take to activities such as political action, provision of materials, exchange of information, and Cooperation. Any form of political action is the most direct method, they can force from voting and campaign to influence of the selection and action of political authorities. Provisioning of material resources provide greats to political actors, this way is illegal depending on the greats and services offered to the political personnel for a desired outcome. Information exchange is also used by private groups for those in the political system helping obtain special information they probably couldn’t receive on their own. Cooperation plays a major role with interest groups and the political system. Policies are more acceptable to the affected group if they ap...
“ (Christiano) This is a point that is closely related to the previous point. As the political machine rolls on and becomes larger and more powerful, citizens become hopeless to changing the status quo. In the best of situations, an individual has a hard time accounting for small actions making a big difference. In Texas, many districts have only one party to vote for, so there is no chance for your vote to make a difference if you are of the opposing party. “I 'm definitely not super political and I know I 'm sitting in a red state that 's probably going to stay red for a long time," says Harrison, who leans left. But I still want my vote to count." (qtd. Schleifer) This lack of individual power is the reason for interest group pluralism. The group empowers people that might not otherwise be able to make change. In a perfect world these groups would debate, initiate conversations and compromise to support candidates that would stimulate potential voters. I think what has happened is that the people naturally attuned to running large organizations have found a structure in politics that suits their skill set. They have made the individual vote less powerful and the ordinary person has to overcome psychological barriers to voting along with the institutionalized barriers to
Interest Groups “Interest groups organization of people sharing common objectives who energetically attempt to influence government policymakers through direct and indirect methods”. J. M. Molins and A. Casademunt, "Pressure Groups and the Articulation of Interests", in West European Politics, No. 4, 1998 This structure is designed so that interest groups would be a device of public influence on politics to generate changes, but would not intimidate the government much. Whether this is still the case or not is a significant question that we should find out. Interest groups play numerous different roles in the American political system, such as depiction, participation, education, and program monitoring. Representation is the purpose that we see most frequently and the function we routinely think of when we think of interest groups. Involvement is another role that interest groups play in our government, which is while they facilitate and support the contribution of their members in the political process. Interest groups also educate, by trying to enlighten both public officials and the public at large concerning matters of significance to them. Interest groups also keep way of how programs are functioning in the field and endeavor to influence government to take action when troubles become obvious when they monitor programs. The conventional interest groups have been organized around several form of economic origin, be it corporate interests, associates, or unions. The number of business-oriented lobbies has developed since the 1960s and continues to grow. Public-interest groups have as well grown extremely since the 1960s. Liberal groups started the trend, but traditional groups are now just as common, though some groups...