factions as various and unequal distribution of property.” (Fed. and according 10) “…the Stanley Elkins’s he also believed that factions could form due to The Age of Federalism, differing opinions regarding class and religion. In short, Madison adopted his ideas concerning faction from the works of both Hume and Aristotle, and his education and political experience would have placed both sources at his disposal. Now, regarding these factions within government, Madison recognized that the people were concerned about the public good being ignored the conflict of rival “…in parties” (Fed. and that congressional measures would be passed by a corrupt or 10) extravagant majority rather than by justice. In response, Madison states that a minority faction is of little or no consequence because the republican principle holds that they will be outvoted and thus defeated. He then presents the Aristotelian concept of a separation of powers in viewing it as a means by which to avoid a majority Federalist No. 47, faction’s unchecked domination in the passage of legislation and execution of good government. In Aristotle stated that advocates of good government recognize Politics, and lay out the three elements of each state: the first part being one that deliberates public affairs (legislators), the second having the power to execute authority (officers), and the third part having the judicial power (judges). In Madison declared that Federalist No. 47, combining the powers of these same three branches into one body justly be “…may pronounced the very definition of tyranny.” (Madison, Federalist 47) In Faber also holds that both Madison and Aristotle The Aristotelian Federalist, were concerned about government being in a manner contrary to the “…administered intentions of the writers.” (Faber, 5) and thus, not necessarily proving strong enough to promise the constant separation of these powers into different branches. To firmly secure
factions as “…the various and unequal distribution of property.” (Fed. 10) and according Stanley Elkins’s The Age of Federalism, he also believed that factions could form due to differing opinions regarding class and religion. In short, Madison adopted his ideas concerning faction from the works of both Hume and Aristotle, and his education and political experience would have placed both sources at his disposal. Now, regarding these factions within government, Madison recognized that the people were concerned about the public good being ignored “…in the conflict of rival parties” (Fed. 10) and that congressional measures would be passed by a corrupt or extravagant majority rather than by justice. In response, Madison states that a minority faction is of little or no consequence because the republican principle holds that they will be outvoted and thus defeated. He then presents the Aristotelian concept of a separation of powers in Federalist No. 47, viewing it as a means by which to avoid a majority faction’s unchecked domination in the passage of legislation and execution of good government. In Politics, Aristotle stated that advocates of good government recognize and lay out the three elements of each state: the first part being one that deliberates public affairs (legislators), the second having the power to execute authority (officers), and the third part having the judicial power (judges). In Federalist No. 47, Madison declared that combining the powers of these same three branches into one body “…may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny.” (Madison, Federalist 47) In The Aristotelian Federalist, Faber also holds that both Madison and Aristotle were concerned about government being “…administered in a manner contrary to the intentions of the writers.” (Faber, 5) and thus, not necessarily proving strong enough to promise the constant separation of these powers into different branches. To firmly secure
1ASchumacher.docx