Who's plan for free, democratic government does a better job of balancing majority will and minority rights; Madison's large, diverse republic? Or Brutus' confederation of small, homogeneous states? Explain Why
Who's plan for free, democratic government does a better job of balancing majority will and minority rights; Madison's large, diverse republic? Or Brutus' confederation of small, homogeneous states? Explain Why
Related questions
Question
Using the details from the article.
Who's plan for free, democratic government does a better job of balancing majority will and minority rights; Madison's large, diverse republic? Or Brutus' confederation of small, homogeneous states? Explain Why
Transcribed Image Text:Excerpt #1:
Brutus #1
Brutus #1
To the Citizens of the State of New-York.
...The first question that presents itself on the subject is, whether a confederated government be the
best for the United States or not? Or in other words, whether the thirteen United States should be reduced to
one great republic, governed by one legislature, and under the direction of one executive and judicial; or
whether they should continue thirteen confederated states, under the direction and control of a supreme
federal head for certain defined national purposes only?
If respect is to be paid to the opinion of the greatest and wisest men who have ever thought or wrote on
the science of government, we shall be constrained to conclude, that a free republic cannot succeed over a
country of such immense extent, containing such a number of inhabitants, and these increasing in such rapid
progression as that of the whole United States. In a large republic, the public good is sacrificed to a thousand
views; it is prone to mistakes and depends on accidents. In a small one, the interest of the public is easier
perceived, better understood, and more within the reach of every citizen; abuses are of less extent, and of
course are less protected.
Of the same opinion is Marquis Beccaria."History gives us no example of a free republic, anything like the
extent of the United States. The Greek republics were of small extent; so also, was that of the Romans. Both
of these, it is true, in the process of time, extended their conquests over large territories of land. The
consequence was, that their governments were changed from free governments to those of the most
tyrannical that ever existed in the world."
ublic?
Transcribed Image Text:0
fo
ney
Federalist Papers: No. 10 - James Madison
The Union as a Safeguard Against Domestic Faction and Insurrection
Excerpt 1:
To the People of the State of New York:
AMONG the numerous advantages promised by a well constructed Union, none deserves to be more
accurately developed than its tendency to break and control the violence of faction...
...By a faction. I understand a number of citizens, whether amounting to a majority or a minority of the
whole, who are united and actuated by some common impulse of passion, or of interest, adversed to the
rights of other citizens, or to the permanent and aggregate interests of the community.
...Complaints are everywhere heard from our most considerate and virtuous citizens, equally the friends
of public and private faith, and of public and personal liberty, that 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 overbearing majority...
Expert Solution
This question has been solved!
Explore an expertly crafted, step-by-step solution for a thorough understanding of key concepts.
Step by step
Solved in 3 steps
