Number 10
"There are again two methods of removing the causes of faction: the one, by destroying the liberty which is essential to its existence; the other, by giving to every citizen the same opinions, the same passions, and the same interests.
It could never be more truly said than of the first remedy, that it was worse than the disease. Liberty is to faction what air is to fire, an aliment without which it instantly expires. But it could not be less folly to abolish liberty, which is essential to political life, because it nourishes faction, than it would be to wish the annihilation of air, which is essential to animal life, because it imparts to fire its destructive agency."
In this Madison discusses how factions can undermine the government and should therefore be destroyed by means of taking away their liberty. However taking away the peoples liberties will not solve the problem but rather takes away the liberties of everyone else and that would be bad. Therefore a government in which the liberties of people in factions are taken away would not work. This is unlike the American government because the American government handles factions but in a way that is proactive and doesn't take away liberties. This ability allows the government to function because the people who undermine it are eliminated without hurting the whole country.
"The two great points of difference between a democracy and a republic are: first, the delegation of the government, in the latter, to a small number of citizens elected by the rest; secondly, the greater number of citizens, and greater sphere of country, over which the latter may be extended.
The effect of the first difference is, on the one hand, to refine and enlarge the public views, by passing them through the medium of a chosen body of citizens, whose wisdom may best discern the true interest of their country, and whose patriotism and love of justice will be least likely to sacrifice it to temporary or partial considerations."
In this Madison says that a government that is a republic is better because it can minimize the effects of factions. It does this by having all the wants of the people go through one enlightened person who will then think and act for the greater good. Meanwhile Democracies are not as good because then you run into the risk of the a faction becoming the majority which can lead to laws that benefit the members of the faction rather than for the greater good.
Number 51
"Some deviations, therefore, from the principle must be admitted. In the constitution of the judiciary department in particular, it might be inexpedient to insist rigorously on the principle: first, because peculiar qualifications being essential in the members, the primary consideration ought to be to select that mode of choice which best secures these qualifications; secondly, because the permanent tenure by which the appointments are held in that department, must soon destroy all sense of dependence on the authority conferring them."
Number 51
"Some deviations, therefore, from the principle must be admitted. In the constitution of the judiciary department in particular, it might be inexpedient to insist rigorously on the principle: first, because peculiar qualifications being essential in the members, the primary consideration ought to be to select that mode of choice which best secures these qualifications; secondly, because the permanent tenure by which the appointments are held in that department, must soon destroy all sense of dependence on the authority conferring them."
This talks about the necessity of having appointed Judiciary judges. It is easier and faster to have one person appoint people to the positions because the person picking knows the qualities needed better than if the average people were voting for the appointed. It is also better because due to the position being life long the appointed judge will not feel allegiance to the person who appointed them. This is like how in America the president will elect the supreme court judges.
"It may be a reflection on human nature, that such devices should be necessary to control the abuses of government. But what is government itself, but the greatest of all reflections on human nature? If men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary. In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself."
"It may be a reflection on human nature, that such devices should be necessary to control the abuses of government. But what is government itself, but the greatest of all reflections on human nature? If men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary. In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself."
This argues that the way in which we set up our government (3 branches) demonstrates human tendency towards corruption. By having a government at all we are saying that humans can not function without the direct control of others. We then took this government and broke it up as to assure that no one person would try and take too much power showing the human tendency to selfish and corrupt ways. We realized that the government was controlled by men and therefore we had to split up power because men are human who need to be checked. Just as the government checks the people it must also check itself.
No comments:
Post a Comment