Federalists vs anti federalists
1 / 25

Federalists vs. Anti-federalists - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

  • Updated On :

Federalists vs. Anti-federalists. Madison (#10) v. Brutus Is democracy best served in large or small republics? Who is likely to be elected? What is the greatest danger to democracy?. Madison, Federalist #10 .

I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'Federalists vs. Anti-federalists' - Pat_Xavi

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
Federalists vs anti federalists l.jpg
Federalists vs. Anti-federalists

  • Madison (#10) v. Brutus

  • Is democracy best served in large or small republics?

  • Who is likely to be elected?

  • What is the greatest danger to democracy?

Madison federalist 10 l.jpg
Madison, Federalist #10

  • Faction: "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, adverse to the rights of other citizens, or to the permanent and aggregate interests of the community." Inherent characteristic of people.

Madison federalist 103 l.jpg
Madison- Federalist 10

  • Latent causes of faction are thus sown in the nature of man.

  • “the most common and durable source of faction has been the various and unequal distribution of property” p. 18

  • Pure democracy has no cure for the mischiefs of faction

  • Incompatible with personal security or the rights of property. P. 20

Madison s solution l.jpg
Madison’s Solution

  • Republican government to refine and enlarge the public views

  • Liberty is safest in large (extended) republics

  • many opinions and interests in large republic makes it harder for a tyrannical majority to form

  • coalition formed in large republic are more moderate

  • Liberty is threatened more by public passions and popular factions than by strong government

Brutus s reply l.jpg
Brutus’s Reply

  • In a republic, the manners, sentiments, and interest of the persons should be similar (or else) constant clashing of opinions

  • In a large republic “the people would be acquainted with very few of their rules, the people at large would know little of their proceedings, and it would be extremely difficult to change them. The consequence will be, they will have no confidence in their legislature, suspect them of ambitious views, be jealous of every measure they adopt, and will not support the laws they pass.”

Anti federalists l.jpg

  • small republic is best

  • People are animated by a concern for public good

  • strong national government would be distant from the people

Madison federal 51 l.jpg
Madison, Federal #51

  • Is a large republic enough to prevent tyranny of the majority?

Federalist 51 madison l.jpg
Federalist #51, Madison

  • Ambition must be made to counteract ambition. If men were angels, no govt would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on govt would be necessary

  • In framing a govt which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the govt to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself.

Separation of powers l.jpg
Separation of Powers

  • Madison- accumulation of all powers, legislative, executive, and judiciary in the same hands, may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny.

  • Legislature makes laws, executive administers, and judiciary interprets

  • BUT Separation is not enough.

Checks and balances l.jpg
Checks and Balances

  • #51, Ambition must be made to counteract ambition. The interest of the man must be connected with the constitutional rights of the place.

  • giving to those who administer each department the necessary constitutional means and personal motives to resist encroachments of the others

Different bases of support l.jpg
Different Bases of Support

  • House of Representatives= only directly elected officials; every two years

  • Senate= every six years; are selected by State legislatures until 1913

  • President= selected by electoral college; state legislatures; no popular vote

  • Judiciary= appointed by President, confirmed by Senate. Life-time appointment

Checks and balances12 l.jpg
Checks and Balances

  • Federalist #51

  • President

    • Congress- veto, propose, appeal to people, enforce laws

    • Courts- appoint justices, enforce law

Checks and balances13 l.jpg
Checks and Balances

  • Congress – “necessarily predominates”

    • Raise taxes, pass legislation

    • Impeach president and judges

    • determine number and jurisdiction of courts,

    • Senate confirms judges

    • House and Senate

  • Courts- “least dangerous branch”

    • can declare executive actions and laws unconstitutional.

Comparison with uk l.jpg
Comparison with UK

  • Prime minister chosen by majority party.

  • No judicial review

  • control and responsibility concentrated in legislature

  • Same electoral base

  • No checks and balances

Consequences l.jpg


  • difficult to act unless there is overwhelming sustained consensus about course of action.

  • 1994 GOP Revolution

  • Losers-- Efficiency and accountability

Continuing battle over cnb the war power l.jpg
Continuing Battle over CnB the War Power

  • Article I. Congress can “declare war”

  • Article II. President- commander in chief

  • How many declared wars?

  • Role of Courts

Separation of powers17 l.jpg
Separation of Powers

  • Limit the power of government

  • Limit democratic majoritarianism (aka Tyranny of the Majority)

  • Policy should not reflect majority public opinion

New republicanism l.jpg
New Republicanism

  • OLD- positive political engagement – civic virtue and small republics that required some degree of equality

  • NEW- negative limitations on government – the balance of interest based on the “invisible hand” of self-interest and on the equality of opportunity

Interpreting the constitution l.jpg
Interpreting the Constitution

  • Beard

    • Evidence

    • Conclusion

  • Roche

    • Evidence

    • Conclusion

  • Diamond

    • Evidence

    • Conclusion

Assessing the framers l.jpg
Assessing the Framers

  • Beard-- Elite Conspiracy

    • Federalists all wealthy planters and merchants trying to get rich

  • Roche-- Sound Politicians

    • political expediency is the driving principle

    • Electoral college

  • Diamond -- Brilliant Political Theorists

    • How to prevent tyranny of the majority