Democracy in America Final Paper

Menachem Bandel

December 7th, 2015

Pol 112b Democracy in America

Professor Woll

Democracy in America Final Paper

Democracy is defined, in the dictionary, as “a system of government by the whole population or all the eligible members of a state, typically through elected representatives.” Democracy, based on the pillars of freedom of speech and expression, comes in many different forms: there are various models of governmental systems, as established by early 18th century political thinkers. These great thinkers of democracy include founding fathers James Madison and Alexander Hamilton, as well as Sir Ernest Barker, a proponent of a more modern, 20th-century approach to democracy. Despite these various models, the model of government that best explains the democracy present in America is the more modern, more practical party-centered theory model exposed by Barker. However, one must also take into consideration the warnings given by Madison and Hamilton that continue to be relevant as well as the various interest groups that are present nowadays.

Madison and Hamilton gather their thoughts on the Constitution, democracy, and government in a collection of writings known as The Federalist Papers. Their ideas are very similar, but the differences in their style of writing are notable and display why their model of democracy is not the best illustration of democracy in America. The Madisonian model, outlined in The Federalist Papers 10, 47, 48, and 51, focuses on the importance of a structured separation of powers in order to avoid tyranny. On the other hand, the Hamiltonian model, outlined in The Federalist Paper 70, emphasizes the need and the benefits of having a strong executive branch. 

Madison, in Federalist 10, mentions that a government’s biggest threat is the threat posed by factions, defined as “a number of citizens… 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.” Madison believes that by “destroying the liberty which is essential to its existence,” and by “giving to every citizen the same opinions, the same passions, and the same interests” the government can solve the problem of factions. Factions are inevitable in a democratic government of free thought and speech, because everyone has different opinions; people have the liberty to think and live differently while those with similar opinions and ideas have the liberty and ability to flock together. Madison’s intentions are to form a good government, but his ideas are very naïve in nature and primitive. Even Madison acknowledges the ignorance of creating uniform opinions, interests, and passions, and therefore advocates for governments to be able to control the effects of factions, rather than try and prevent them.

Madison, aware of the creation of small groups that promoted their personal interests, mentions interest groups in a subtle manner. Interest groups, overall, threaten the existence of political equality in America. Interest groups, defined as “private organizations that try to shape public policies,” tend to promote and protect that specific interest they share by influencing the factions. Interest groups also threaten democracy since there are too many conflicting interests in society; these interest groups tend to seek benefits for a minority of people rather than looking at the greater good of all the citizens. On the other hand, interest groups also have the ability to fix the misbehavior of the factions that Madison mentions by: implementing various reforms, transparency and regulating the influence of money in certain factions.

Furthermore, in Federalist 47, 48, and 51, Madison describes the dangers of tyranny and the need for a separation of powers in a democracy. Madison states:  “The accumulation of all powers, Legislative, Executive, and Judiciary, in the same hands, whether of one, a few, or many, and whether hereditary, self-appointed, or elective, may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny.” Madison also expands on the idea of having these powers completely separated to prevent a major threat to democracy. Madison believes that written boundaries are not enough, and that to truly prevent the tyranny that will come out from the negligence in the separation of powers one must give to “those who administer each department the necessary constitutional means and personal motives to resist encroachment of the others.” This sentiment expressed by Madison demonstrates his capacity and understanding of democracy since that very same problem occurs in America’s democracy today. The three branches of government continuously argue over each other’s rights and abilities, which demonstrates Madison’s fear of not having a well-structured balance of powers.  

...