Factions and the Founders

A Deeper Look Into Our American Constitution and Federalist #10

Jun 25, 2008

One of the prevalent challenges in American government has been the problem of factions. This article explains the importance of factions in shaping the Constitution.

In answering the question, What is wrong with American politics, one of the quicker answers is to point fingers at political parties or interest groups and their alleged harm to the public good. What is to be done about this problem?

A quick look into the early constitutional debates and in particular, Federalist Paper # 10, will show how the constitutional framers understood this problem and made an important choice to mitigate the problems of factions.

Federalist # 10 and the Problem of Factions

In attempting to persuade citizens of New York to adopt this new governmental plan, the writers of the Federalist Papers faced serious challenges to this new governmental plan. The Anti-Federalists argued it would swallow up the power of existing state governments, was too far away from many states for representatives to remain in touch with their constituents, and over time would become a monarchy or an aristocracy (Storing 1981).

One of the underlying concerns with this untested governmental plan was its ability to destroy self-government, in wresting authority away from the people and giving it to a select few; another related concern was the real fear that such government would destroy the public good.

James Madison (author of Federalist #10) made factions a crucial part of his response to such charges. Madison was not a direct foe of people organized groups per se but only when they become a faction, a destructive force: “a number of citizens, whether amounting to a majority or 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.”

Madison argued that factions are a part of man’s nature and are inextinguishable: “As long as the reason of man continues fallible, and he is at liberty to exercise it, different opinions will be formed” and people will act on such opinions due to self-love (46). Taking away liberty from people makes as much sense as taking away air, and there is little sense in trying to brainwash people by teaching everyone to have the same opinions, passions and interests.

Because factions are simply a part of fallible man, Madison asserted, the best solution is to control the effects of faction through the establishment of a vast and populous republic. A pure democracy is a mistake, according to Madison: “democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property; and have in general been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths.” (49)

In contrast, within a republican form of government the people would choose a “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” (50). Further, by having an “extended republic” with a larger number of citizens, there would be not only a greater number of virtuous men to choose as representatives but personal factions (among citizens and representatives) would begin to cancel out each other because with a “greater variety of parties and interests” there will a lesser likelihood of dangerous majorities harming the public good.

Sources

Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay. 2003 [1787]. The Federalist Papers, ed. Clinton Rossiter. New York: Signet Classics.

Herbert J. Storing. 1981. What the Anti-Federalists Were For. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

The copyright of the article Factions and the Founders in American Affairs is owned by John Francis Ryan. Permission to republish Factions and the Founders in print or online must be granted by the author in writing.