The paradox of democracy and distrust in the Federalist Papers

Federalist Papers

According to the Constitution of the United States, this nation was founded under the principles of individual freedom and individual voice. America was designed to be a representative government by and for the people; a direct opposite of what the people had experienced when America was a British colony with no say in their government. If this was indeed to be a representative government, why then did the Founding Fathers put so much distrust into the American populous? Many of the processes of government in this nation are designed so that the influence of government people can interfere with the desires of the nation at large. The only logical explanation for this discrepancy is that the Founding Fathers believed in the principles of representative government but did not have faith that the citizens of the United States could make the proper decisions about policy.

It must be noted that at the time the United States Constitution was written, many men in America were uneducated. Particulary in the South, a man's focus was traditionally his business and his family. Education was not the priority it is in modern society. Consequently, much of the voting public was unlearned. Those who created the government feared putting the ability to make direct decisions in the hands of uneducated individuals. However, they also feared putting too much power in the hands of any one individual. In Federalist Paper No. 51, James Madison explains why it is necessary to have separation of powers in the United States government.[footnoteRef:1] Even those in the government, those intelligent enough to take part in the nation's business were not considered immune to human frailty. Everyone was considered capable of ignoring what was in the nation's best interest in order to claim more individual power. "The remedy for this inconvenience is to divide the legislature into different branches; and to render them, by different modes of election and different principles of action, as little connected with each other as the nature of their common functions and their common dependence on the society will admit."[footnoteRef:2] It was not only that the Founding Fathers had distrust for the common man; they understood that everyone can be lured by false promises and misinformation. If all the power is taken from the people and invested in a representative body, it must be assured that those representatives will serve the people and not their own self-interest. [1: Madison, James. (1788). "The Federalist No. 51: The Structure of the Government Must Furnish the Proper Checks and Balances Between the Different Departments." Independent Journal.] [2: Madison, James. (1788). "The Federalist No. 51."]

Madison was also concerned that if each individual person was given a vote, nobody would be satisfied. The rights of the majority must be met without ignoring the desires of the minority. "It is of great importance in a republic not only to guard the society against the oppression of its rulers, but to guard one part of the society against the injustice of the other part. Different interests necessarily exist in different classes of citizens. If a majority be united by a common interest, the rights of the minority will be insecure."[footnoteRef:3] A representative government ensures that the opinions of the minority get equally vocalized alongside those of the majority without those in the position to make decisions inundated by opinions. [3: Madison, James. (1788). "The Federalist No. 51."]

Also, sometimes it is the minority opinion that history shows was the correct one in terms of what was best for the United States. A large group can become swayed by propaganda too easily to always be rational. Madison was concerned by the potential for national discourse because of these factions. "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. There are two methods of curing the mischiefs of faction: the one, by removing its causes; the other, by controlling its effects."[footnoteRef:4] By this he means, the only way to deal with this abuse of popular opinion is to either limit the ability of people to make decisions or to give each person a voice. "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."[footnoteRef:5] If the ability to make decisions were taken away from the people, then the new nation would be no better than when it was under the rule of Great Britain. In the United States of America, every individual is allowed the ability to formulate opinions. However, it is a fallibility of man that ideas can become molded by savvy individuals and the popular opinion can be manipulated into a desire that is unsuitable. [4: Madison, James. (1787). "The Federalist No. 10: The Utility as a Safeguard Against Domestic Faction and Insurrection." Daily Advertiser. ] [5: Madison, James. (1787). "The Federalist No. 10."]