Federalist No.

10 is against a popular form of government which perish under instability,

injustice and confusion.

According to Madison, liberty does cause faction to occur. Being in a free society each is
entitled to express their opinion and have impulses and passions. Both minority and
majority have their opinions. And we can’t eliminate liberty even though it is the cause.

Removing the cause ( Liberty ) is worse than the “disease.”

If a faction consists of less than a majority, relief is supplied by the republican principal.
This enables the majority to defeat its sinister views, by regular vote. (Regular
vote can enable sinister views to emerge thru majority.)

If a faction consist of a majority the form of a popular government will enable a

sacrifice of the public good and private rights to its ruling passion and interests. BAD

Dilemma: How to preserve the spirit of a popular government BUT also secure the public
good? It is the great desire that this form of government be “rescued” from the
opprobrium under which it has so long labored.

How can this goal be attained?

1. To prevent the same passion and interest from building up in people at the same
time
2. The majority must be rendered unable to carry their schemes of oppression.
a. Religious or morals won’t do it. Never have.
CONCLUSION:

A pure democracy won’t admit a cure.

A common passion will be felt among a majority
Always a spectacle of turbulence
Have been as short in their lives and they have been violent in their deaths

SOLUTION: A REPUBLIC promises the cure

Points of difference between a REPUBLIC (and DEMOCRACY)

1. The delegation of the government to a small number of elected citizens
2. Has a greater sphere over which republic may be extended (?)

1. above allows views to be refined and enlarged by passing them thru a chosen
body, whose wisdom may best discern the true interest of the country.
a. The public voice will be more aligned with the public good
QUESTION: Will a small or big republic be able to “control factious tempers?”

Representatives must be limited to guard against the confusion of a multitude. (However

large)
Representatives must be raised to a certain number to guard against the cabals of a few.
(However small)

So, the proportion of fit representatives is not less in the large than a small republic.
“and consequently a probability of a fit choice.”

Also, in a large republic greater number of citizens will vote for a representative, it
would be more difficult for unworthy candidates to practice “vicious arts”

Too many electors, too little acquainted with local interests

Too few, they become unduly attached to only local interests, not fit to comprehend great
national issues.

The Federal Constitution forms a happy combination; the national (aggregate) interests
and the local (particular) interests of the State.

OTHER POINT OF DIFFERENCE:

With more land and citizens, in a Republic versus democratic government, factions are
less to be dreaded.

Why? Because the smaller the society, see fewer parties or factions. And the fewer the
factions and interests, the more frequently will a majority occur in same party. And they
will be less people forming that faction. And if they operate in a small “compass” they
can more easily execute plans of oppression.

SO: EXTEND THE SPHERE and you take in a greater variety of parties and interests.
Less probable a majority of a whole will have common motive to oppress or
invade the rights of others. Or it would be more difficult for those who feel it, to
discover their own strength and act in unison with each other.

The same advantage that a Republic has over a democracy in controlling effects of a
faction, [likewise] a large [federal] union enjoys the same over the States.

Greater security with greater variety of parties, means that no party can outnumber and
oppress the rest. Likewise the increased parties within the Union increases this security.