Federalist 10 Essay

In: Other Topics

Submitted By DArvizu
Words 1377
Pages 6
During the ratification process of the United States Constitution, Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay published a series of anonymous articles in the New York Times. Published under the name Publius, "The Federalist Papers," as they were called, advocated for the ratification of the new Constitution by New York State. Each of the papers, therefore, outlines the benefits of one united nation, as well as the interests of, and supported by, the proposed government. Written by Madison, Federalist Paper No. 10, generally considered one of the most important articles, concerns itself with the problems of and plausible solutions for the formation of factions. Through multiple assertions concerning the dangers of factions and the benefits of a republic, Madison formed one of the major arguments in favor of the United States Constitution.
Federalist No. 10, titled "The Same Subject Continued: The Utility of the Union as a Safeguard Against Domestic Faction and Insurrection," expanded on dangers of factions outlined by Hamilton in Federalist No. 9. Defined by Madison 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),
factions are comparable to the modern day interest or lobby groups. That is to say, Madison defined factions as groups of people with a common self-interest. These groups, being involved with their own benefit, therefore, would be indifferent to the individual rights of other citizens as a whole, hoping only to further their ideas. Since, as many philosophers before him stated, humans are driven to action by their own self-interest Madison asserts that "the latent causes of faction are thus sown in the nature of man," as all…...

Similar Documents

Federalist Papers

...FEDERALIST PAPERS Ramon Chavez P5 Debates were going crazy throughout the United States about whether the new Constitution was an improvement or a disaster that will soon ruin the nation. Federalists were actually people who basically agreed with the Constitution and a strong government. The Federalists were basically way much wealthier and more educated Americans than the anti-federalist well most of them like John Adams, George Washington, Benjamin Franklin, James Madison, and Alexander Hamilton. Anti-Federalists were actually people who agreed with a weaker government, but liked a stronger state legislature. Yet not all of them liked the Articles of Confederation, but none of them wanted the new Constitution to be ratified so in a way they wanted to make their own document basically. Poor classes in the West also supported the patriots like Samuel Adams and Patrick Henry in which they were actually very good at influencing people, like they were very charismatic.Anti-Federalists feared that a stronger national government would one day destroy the liberties Americans had won in the Revolution. They also worried that the new Constitution didn’t list any specific rights for the people in which that was maybe one of the main reasons why they went against the federalist. Many of the smaller states quickly approved the Constitution because it gave them more way power in the new legislative branch than they had under the Articles of Confederation...

Words: 832 - Pages: 4

Federalist Articles

... monachical systems too. Jefferson expresses to Madison that he passionately feels confident that the constitution has been rightly framed and for the overall benefit and interest of the people. “After all, it is my principle that the will of the majority should always prevail. If they approve the proposed Convention in all it's parts, I shall concur in it cheerfully, in hopes that they will amend it whenever they shall find it work wrong”(Jefferson,1787). He (Jefferson) concludes his letter by putting an emphasis on education hoping people will be educated enough to sense and preserve their liberty as a result. The same emphasis is portrayed by Plato in the Republic,book VII. In the Federalist paper number 10, it points out “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 overbearing majority”(The Union as a Safeguard Against Domestic Faction and Insurrection,1787). This i find it true with our current government. Instead of them (republicans and democrats) finding solutions to the issues we are currently facing like unemployment and taxes, they are busy struggling for power by criticizing and blaming each others mess. John Locke in his book (Two treaties of Government,1690) states that the main objective of the government is to provide security for our property, which......

Words: 2742 - Pages: 11

Pros and Cons of a Federalist Society

...Democracy in the United States: A comprehensive look at the Pros and Cons of a Federalist Society and Individual Freedoms. What is democracy, do we really understand the concept and the implications of the freedoms that our society enjoys. Democracy by definition is a “government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised by them directly or indirectly through a system of representation usually involving periodically held free elections”.(1) The United States democracy in current times can be a difficult situation to grasp, due to the fact that we are operating off of the Constitution written over 200 years ago, and individuals modern interpretations of what the founding fathers of this country would have considered appropriate doctrine and methodology. Through the aforementioned definition and the perspective of current lawmakers are the tools with which we will define whether the United States has become more or less democratic throughout its history. So what then are the advantages of a democracy? The first point would be that it is better for the population, everyone having an equal part or say in the laws which govern them is advantageous for any group of people. Democracy is often seen as a fairer and less arbitrary form of government as it allows the "will of the people" to become the law. To some degree, this prevents scenarios like a small, powerful minority...

Words: 1241 - Pages: 5

Federalist and Anit-Federalist

... citizens and states would be more fully protected. The Federalists focused their arguments on the lack of the quality in national government under the Articles of Confederation and on the benefits of national government as formed by the Constitution. They were also much more favorably disposed toward importing and exporting than were the Anti-Federalists, and they argued that a strong central government would foster the trading growth of the new country. Moreover, the Federalist vision of society was more pluralistic than the Anti-Federalist vision. That is, the Federalists did not see society as made up principally of farmers, as did the Anti-Federalists, but instead viewed it as comprising many different and competing interests and groups, none of which would be completely dominant in a federalist system of government. The Federalist Papers makes a persuasive case for the necessity of federal government in preserving order and securing the liberty of a large republic. In doing so, it asserts that a weak union of the states will make the country more vulnerable to internal and external disagreements. Despite Anit-Federalists and Federalists differences, they wanted a strong federal government. By 1791, in response to Anti-Federalist sentiments, state legislatures voted to add the first ten amendments to the Constitution. Those ten amendments are also called the Bill of Rights, and they have become an important part of the Constitution and its heritage of liberty....

Words: 489 - Pages: 2

Federalist

...FEDERALIST The Federalist Party was in favor of the newly formed constitution. One of the main objects of the federal constitution is to secure the union and in addition include any other states that would arise as a part of the union. The federal constitution would also set its aim on improving the organization of the union. Which would include improvements on toads and interior navigation. The Federalists believed that each state should find an inducement to make some sacrifices for the sake of the general protection. Americans were very suspicious of the government, but the Anti-Federalist was very distrustful of the government in general and strong national government. The mistrust was the foundation of their opposition to the constitution. The Anti-Federalist argued that the constitution had many flaws. Anti-Federalists feared that because of the flaws in the constitution, that the new national government would be a threat to their national rights. They also thought that the constitution had been developed by a privileged group to create a national government for the purpose of serving its own selfish interest. They thought the only safe government that if it had a local and closely linked with the will of the people, as we have yearly elections and replacing people in key positions. The Federalist knew that many members of Congress and the state governments were against the new constitution, because it reduced their powers. So the Federalists decided not to ask the......

Words: 283 - Pages: 2

Anti-Federalist

...By: Normandie Lovince I am a supporter of the anti-federalist party. The anti-federalist took some of the ideas that the federalist had into consideration. Instead of abolishing or ignoring these ideas, they wanted to improve them. The anti-federalist and the federalist share two very opposing views. As you read this essay, you will gradually start to see just how my ideas are being supported as to why I've chosen to become an anti-federalist. The anti-federalist party was the first out of two political parties of the U.S. This party was led by Henry, George Mason and Samuel Adams alongside Richard Henry Lee who wanted the president and the senate to have the entire executive and 2/3 of the legislative power. As an anti-federalist, I believe that the constitution should not be ratified. I feel like the best way, that the U.S citizens should be protected is by being kept safe from the Government and the bill of rights will do that because of the freedom and liberty that it gives us. "The greatest importance for Freemen to retain themselves are the liberties given to us in the bill of rights", which is why it's so important that we'd add it to the constitution. In order to get the bill of rights to be in the constitution we'd need to sacrifice part of our natural rights, for the good of others around us. The anti-federalist believed that the constitution should have a bill of rights. The Anti-federalist opposed the constitution, while the federalist themselves...

Words: 836 - Pages: 4

Federalist 10 Essay

...During the ratification process of the United States Constitution, Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay published a series of anonymous articles in the New York Times. Published under the name Publius, "The Federalist Papers," as they were called, advocated for the ratification of the new Constitution by New York State. Each of the papers, therefore, outlines the benefits of one united nation, as well as the interests of, and supported by, the proposed government. Written by Madison, Federalist Paper No. 10, generally considered one of the most important articles, concerns itself with the problems of and plausible solutions for the formation of factions. Through multiple assertions concerning the dangers of factions and the benefits of a republic, Madison formed one of the major arguments in favor of the United States Constitution. Federalist No. 10, titled "The Same Subject Continued: The Utility of the Union as a Safeguard Against Domestic Faction and Insurrection," expanded on dangers of factions outlined by Hamilton in Federalist No. 9. Defined by Madison 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), factions are comparable to the modern day interest or lobby groups. That is to say, Madison defined factions as groups of people...

Words: 1377 - Pages: 6

The Federalist Papers

... of 1787. The people would be able to  rest in peace, leaving their problems and concerns in the hands of the Constitution rather than the  Articles of Confederation because unlike the Articles of Confederation, they're extremely stable,  dominant, and dependable.  The significance of being in a Union, by having a Constitution would protect individuals  against external and internal threats. James Madison, who was considered as a well­known  Federalist, discusses the complications of the factions conflicting and dividing a nation apart.  Factions are groups of citizens with interests contrary to the rights of others or the interests of the  nation as a whole. In Article No.10, Madison responded that large nations actually restrain  special interest groups from taking control. Likewise, large nations would be an exceptional  defense against these threats than smaller nations, for example, the individual states. In terms of  Madison, as stated in Article No.10, that in a large republic, “ you take in a greater variety of  interest…you make it less probable that a majority...will have a common motive to invade the  rights of other citizens..”  (Article No.10). In other words, in a large nation, these special interest  groups balance one another. Article No.10 primarily focuses on the predicaments of maintaining  a government based on popular ​vereignty​ s​ o , and addresses the question of how to protect one’s  nation against factions. Madison believes that the advantages of...

Words: 1423 - Pages: 6

Federalist Paper 10 by James Madison

...In Federalist paper number 10 James Madison explains why there should be a concern over majority and minority factions and solutions to lessen the dangers of these factions. When our goverment first started it was made originally to help and be closely tied to the citizens of the United States. Some aspects of this has changed since the beginning of the constitution resulting in some majority and minority rule change. When the Consititution was first written it was made to simply limit majority rule and give eqaul amount of power to the minority. The national goverment was originally built closely tied to citizens because of the House of Repesentatives. The House of Representatives was made to give citizens an equal say in the legislation of the United States. Unlike in the Senate, members of the House are elected by the people of the United States giving citizens a say in govenment affairs. One of the major aspects of the national goverment that is tied to citizens is the short term lenght and frequency of elections of people holding an office in the goverment. With the short term lenght and frequency of elections citizens are constantly contributing to what is going on in the nation by voting on who will be the best candidate for a certain office. A third reason the national goverment is closely tied to citizens is that the House of Representatives represents small member districts. This causes there to be close to equal say for everyone in a state to elect someone to...

Words: 940 - Pages: 4

Federalist V Anti

...OPINION ARTICLE I as a Floridian always have Florida’s best intentions in mine because I want to maintain living somewhere safe and economically secure. And when it comes to who should be the one in charge of making big changes or passing law, it should be someone that really knows about politics and the economy, someone that will not be biased. And that would be federalist; they are true politicians, people who truly have the knowledge to direct Florida and all the other states to a better place with a strong central government in charge. I see it like this you don’t want a garbage man that has no knowledge as your doctor, you want someone that has knowledge in that field, it’s the same with politics. John Adam stated that “government is instituted for the common good; for the perfection, safety, prosperity, and happiness of the people and not for profit, honor, or private interest of any one man, family or class of man….” Federalist were business men, and wanted a central government because of equality they wanted the states to all have the same right not one be more powerful because of their size or any other quality. By Adams saying this he also was saying that sometimes people want to lead to have an advantage and for their own good, but by having a central government that wouldn’t happen. Anti-federalist believed that anyone could be a representative but if you really think about it that incorrect because people that really don’t know about......

Words: 394 - Pages: 2

2.03 Anti Federalist

...Federalism In a monarchy, the people have no say in the government, while the anti-federalists wanted to keep our government as it is. They both are most likely alike. This would cause chaos and hostility amongst the citizens of the nation. The federalists believed in a strong central government. They wanted some of the state powers for itself. Also, the supported the division of the government into three branches Anti-Federalist and Federalist The federalist were for the people and not just in favor for the ruling class. Federalists wanted a strong, central federal government, a central bank, and an army. Stated in the federalist paper in No.3 "it is essential to such a government that it be derived from the great body of society, not from an inconsiderable proportion or a favored class of it; otherwise a handful of tyrannical nobles, exercising their oppressions by a delegation of their powers, might aspire to the rank of republicans and claim for their government the honorable title of republic." The federalist also wanted to separate the powers of the government into different branches so that the government could be kept under control. The Anti-federalists wanted to stay with the British government. The British was a monarchy at the time. It would be a corrupt government since only the rich could have a say in the government but the poor couldn't. The united states did not approve of it. " And are by this clause invested with the power of making all laws...

Words: 458 - Pages: 2

Bill C-10 Essay

...SOCI 2450 A Prof. Darryl T. Davies Bill C-10: Issues of Interest Nidhal Abubakar 100896803 Bill C-10: Issues of Interest Nidhal Abubakar 100896803 2015 2015 There are many issues surrounding the content of Bill C-10. This essay will examine issues that affect the criminal code and provide evidence that the Bill is not progressive for Canada to deal with crime and the judicial process. By looking at the issues such as mandatory minimum sentences and the proposition of the bill we will look at the challenges that will be faced and met. The bill also introduces eliminating conditional sentences and eliminates double credit for time already served as well as introduces changes to the Youth Criminal Justice Act to impose harsher sentences for young offenders. This essay will delve into information that will bring the various issues to light. Firstly an explanation of Bill C-10 will be provided to understand what changes will be made to the Criminal code and who it affects. The dissection of the Bill will open the dialogue for this essay for appropriating topical issues with the concept of progress in a manner that reflects the trouble that this Bill brings to Canadian society. Bill C-10 was introduced by the Minister of Justice on the 20th of September 2011. The Act includes the enactment of the Justice for Victims of Terrorism Act and amendments to the State Immunity Act, the Criminal Code, the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act, the Corrections and Conditional Release Act...

Words: 3926 - Pages: 16

Federalist or Antifederalist

...Choose whether to argue as a Federalist or as an Anti-Federalist. Review the lesson to make sure you understand their main points. Using quotes from the Federalist and Anti-Federalist Papers, write an opinion article for a newspaper, or create a speech podcast to convince people in your state to agree with your position. Include the following in your speech or article: teens shaking hands after playing a game of tennis © 2012 Polka Dot/Thinkstock introductory paragraph that clearly states your position as a Federalist or Anti-Federalist at least two paragraphs describing differences between the Federalist and Anti-Federalist points of view. Use at least two quotes from each of the Federalist Papers and Anti-Federalist Papers. If you would like to explore more of the Federalist Papers and Anti-Federalist Papers to find your own quotes, these sites will be helpful. Federalist Papers American Studies at the University of Virginia The Avalon Project at Yale Law School The Law Center at the University of Oklahoma Anti-Federalist Papers Document Library by Teaching American History at least one paragraph to explain why you disagree with the opposing stance. For example, if you have chosen to argue as a Federalist, you will explain why you disagree with the Anti-Federalist position, using quotes from the documents to support your argument. strong concluding paragraph that summarizes your argument and encourage others to support you Your argument should be...

Words: 382 - Pages: 2

Anti Federalist vs. Federalist

...Both Federalists and Anti-Federalist was both established from Washington’s cabinet. Jefferson who was an anti-federalist, was the secretary of state and hamilton, who was a federalist, was the secretary of the treasury. both parties thought presidents should be voted in by the public, (white males to specific). they based their ideas from the Enlightenment. Overall, they both wanted to keep the liberties of the people protected and wanted representative government. it is important to understand the two opposing view because the two groups untimely forged our nation, and they also created the basic of today two party political system. Opposing Views Federalists Anti-Federalist they were the supporters of a larger national government. they were a group of people that opposed the ratification of the proposed constitution in 1787. Federalists felt like the Bill of Rights addition was not necessary, because they believe that the constitution as it stood only limited the government not the people. propose and supported the Bill of Rights addition because they claimed the constitution gave the central government too much power, and without the bill of rights the people would be at risk of oppression. felt that the states were free agents that should manage their own revenue and spend their money as they say fit. felt that many individual and different fiscal and monetary policies led to economic struggles and national weakness. favored dividing the power among different...

Words: 380 - Pages: 2

2.03 Federalist vs Antifederalist

...If you were to ask me whether I sided with the anti-federalist or the federalist, you might be surprised at what I would say. Maybe not for the reasons you think. In my opinion, I side with the federalist. I’m all for order and I don’t like change so much but to make a country better you need to change some things. Things will constantly be changing and that is fine. A strong central government is very important. The federalist wanted to see a change to improve the country as a whole whereas the anti-federalist wanted to keep the monarchy ways. The anti-federalist and federalist had different views as to how a country should be ran. Both did have ideas to help the country and make it better. Federalist wanted a central federal government, a central bank, and an army. They cared about the governed and not just the ones who govern. In federalist paper no. 39 it says “It is essential to such a government that it be derived from the great body of the society, not from and inconsiderable proportion or a favored class of it; otherwise a handful of tyrannical nobles, exercising their oppression by a delegation of their powers, might aspire to the rank of republicans and claims for their government and honorable title of republic.” Not only did the federalist care about giving too much power to the important people, they also wanted to have control of the government. It states this in federalist paper no. 59: “It is evident that each department should have a will of its own and...

Words: 545 - Pages: 3