"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."
Madison then goes on to write that faction is as integral to liberty in a modern democracy as air is to fire. Faction is the sign of a healthy political state, as long as faction does not become implacable ideology. No two individuals should have the exact same opinion on everything, or they cease being individuals. It is my belief that the more people who you ask for their opinions on any given subject, the more diversity you will discover in their answers. Eventually, you will discover that this broader, more inclusive worldview, is also most likely to give you, by consensus, the best, long-term answer to a given problem. (See James Surowiecki's 2005 book The Wisdom of Crowds, which is all about the untapped power of the collective in solving many problems, for more on this subject.)
Madison explains his opinion why everyone having identical opinions is not only improbable, but unwise:
"As long as the reason of man continues fallible, and he is at liberty to exercise it, different opinions will be formed. As long as the connection subsists between his reason and his self-love, his opinions and his passions will have a reciprocal influence on each other; and the former will be objects to which the latter will attach themselves. The diversity in the faculties of men, from which the rights of property originate, is not less an insuperable obstacle to a uniformity of interests. The protection of these faculties is the first object of government. From the protection of different and unequal faculties of acquiring property, the possession of different degrees and kinds of property immediately results; and from the influence of these on the sentiments and views of the respective proprietors, ensues a division of the society into different interests and parties."
So in Madison's opinion, faction is a necessity in a modern democracy, and it is a problem that cannot be eliminated, merely controlled.
Controlling the negative effects of faction in a modern democracy has never been easy, nor should any system that has a direct effect on a democratic government ever be easy. Here in the United States, we have made the mistake over the last century of attempting to control factionalism by making the creation of a third party, as a viable alternative to the Democrats and the Republicans, all but impossible. While this reduced factionalism for a time, it has also created a political landscape where there was little if any difference between the two major parties. The reactionary Tea Party faction of the GOP is breaking this centrist log jam by adopting such extremist philosophies--and forcing the GOP as a party to do so as well--that they are scaring away the small business, cloth-coat Republicans that have been the party's base since the time of President Eisenhower. The Tea Party extremists--who have nothing to offer but fear, lies, intimidation, character assassination, and a past that never was--have only succeeded in frightening the Republicans and Independents of the center-right with their extremist policies. This means that in November the Tea Party will discover that they are lacking the electoral support they need to get their candidates elected, providing those of us on the left and center left actually make it a point to go out and vote.
Senator Barry Goldwater once stated that "Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice." But the Senator from Arizona forgot that when extremism becomes irresponsible, it is worse than a vice. It is an insidious pipe dream that leads to fascism at home, and tyranny abroad--just ask the Germans. This is the path that the Tea Party--as well as many libertarians--either knowingly or unknowingly wish to lead us down: where a two-tier state of irresponsible wealth and the voiceless poor, the later so burdened by carrying the nation's responsibilities on their backs that they lack the strength to complain. These two groups, existing in the actualized dream of Edmund Burke's 1756 essay "A Vindication of Natural Society" of haves and have nots, struggle in an ever increasing atmosphere of enmity and despair, as the middle classes of the Western Democracies march in commercially driven lockstep to what appears to be their inevitable destruction.
We have reached a point in our history where a merely political Bill of Rights is no longer sufficient to protect "We the People" from the political AND economic oppression of would-be tyrants in our country. We no longer have a new frontier where we can escape and get a fresh start away from our creditors, the long arm of corporate lawyers, previous employers, and bad credit scores. The world we live in has shrunk to Marshal McLuhan's "Global Village," where only the inhospitable cold of Alaska, the Yukon, and Siberia, or the stifling heat of the Amazon Basin, the Kenyan Highlands, or the Australian Outback offer any real hope for a fresh--and possibly anonymous--new beginning.
Next Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
2
2
2
