Federalist No. 10

Federalist No. 10 makes a statement that really rings true for me at both the federal and the state level of my government.

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. However anxiously we may wish that these complaints had no foundation, the evidence, of known facts will not permit us to deny that they are in some degree true.

Of course, the important thing is not the statement of the problem, but the analysis of the available solutions. The primary solution offered is that the form of government being proposed in the Constitution would be supportable over a larger republic and thus would be less susceptible to factions (as it would be harder to form a majority) and that the multi-level structure of government would allow for issues of local concern to be solved at a local level with only “the great and aggregate interests being referred to the national.”

In theory the advantages of a larger nation controlling the influence of factions is good, but that advantage breaks down when large groups of people abandon their own thinking in favor of adopting the thinking of someone else – as Frank Staheli suggested yesterday.

Likewise, the advantages of a multi-level governmental structure evaporate when the vast majority of issues are presented as falling into the category of “great and aggregate interests.” Because of our propensity to elevate everything to the level of national importance the state governments are often left in the position of simply administering programs which are not within their control.

About David

David is the father of 8 extremely organized children (4 girls / 4 boys) who is constantly seeking answers to tough questions related to parenting, education and politics while moonlighting for 40 hours each week as a technology professional. He also enjoys cooking, gardening, and sports.
This entry was posted in politics and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.


2 Responses to Federalist No. 10

  1. Reach Upward says:

    I discuss the reason why we are centralizing government power in this post: http://reachupward.blogspot.com/2008/05/idol-worship.html . In short, as we demand that the president take increasing (imperialistic) responsibility, we must necessarily transfer to the federal government power equal to that responsibility.

    It’s not just that we have power hungry politicians. We have an electorate that increasingly demands a messiah-like president that is responsible for our personal wellbeing. The politicians are only delivering what Americans want.

  2. David says:

    I agree wholeheartedly with what you said in Idol Worship. The fault for our increasing centralization of power (both to the federal level from the states and to the Executive branch from the Legislative and Judicial branches) lies with the voting public. It is easy for us to play the victim role and claim that politicians are making power grabs, but we really do expect them to do things that require them to have more power than they were even intended to wield.

Comments are closed.

Loading Facebook Comments ...