The Morality Of Epstein: The Federalist Papers

Federalist Papers are arguably some of the most important documents in constitutional history. But it’s easy to forget that these essays were written under extreme deadlines and dire circumstances. The Federalist Papers as we know them today were penned only in order to convince the citizens of New York to vote for a then unpopular Constitution. In his article Epstein attempts to critique the profound nature of the essays and the vision which allowed them to transcend from their political origins. In essence: what makes the Federalist Papers so special?
When studying the Federalist Papers, it is important to examine the individual principles brought to light in their creation. It is very likely that Hamilton wrote Federalist 1 in which he posits that with sound intelligence a group can create a longstanding set of political systems. However, this argument brings up another question that Hamilton never really answers: Who should create this government? The public people

couldn’t really be expected to act on an agenda that would benefit everyone, given that the nature of man is to act on one’s self-interests, and yet these are the people to whom the Papers are written.
And so when Madison’s voice is heard in Federalist 10 he must finally address the issue of the more virtuous of people who wish for the betterment of the national government and the less virtuous who will oppose the Constitution at every turn.
At this point it became more difficult to defend the new Constitution, but the Federalists saving grace was partially the simplicity in which it was formed. The delegates from each state detached from their individual governments; debating the issues until both sides could agree. Even though the delegates were still very much accountable to their own states the detachment proved to prevent the formation of extreme hostility early on.
Madison also addressed the issue of large and small states.

He concluded that a national government in the form of an extended republic would best fight the forces of corruption that are, and will always be involved in politics. He proposed that more morally outstanding political figures were likely to be formed in an extended republic than in a system where politicians from smaller states were grappling for more power over their neighboring states. But Madison also supposes that this system will cause various political groups to cancel each other out and force compromises that suit all parties involved. However, we know today that this is simply not true given that people will generally look for benefits for themselves. Basically, when self-interest and factionalism mix you get political problems no matter what system of government you have. And so, even Madison’s powerfully written Federalist 10, also called “Numerous Advantages of Union”, is no completely up to the task it was written to

remedy