1. What concept that we have already discussed does “faction” remind you of?

The writer of section #10 of the Federalist Papers defines Faction as “a number of citizens..amounting to a majority or minority of the whole …united and actuated by some common impulse of passion or of interest” this definition sounds very similar to that of a political party and social class. Political parties are united by a common interest or passion or in their case a political view. Social classes aren’t an exact union they are connected through their position in society and experience mostly the same hardships or leisure if referring to the owning class.

2. According to Federalist #10 (written by James Madison), what is the source of wealth (private property)? What factor explains why some people get to possess wealth by owning private property, and others don’t (thus remaining poor)? This is a key question because it shows how the authors of the Constitution thought about the difference between different classes of Americans! HINT: focus on the passage that begins: “The diversity in the faculties (WHAT DOES FACULTIES mean or refer to?) of men, from which the rights of property originate, is not less….”

Part 1: According to James Madison in Federalist #10 What is the source of wealth?

At the time the primary source of wealth for the owning class was property wealth. Owning private property allowed business owners to profit heavily.-Especially since the United States was just starting to become a country.

This bought business owners a unique advantage to be the ones communities relied on for they were the first businesses to be established. This of course allowed the rich to become extremely rich and the poor to be solely dependent on their ability to create an opportunity for work and products.

3. Do you agree with this explanation of wealth and poverty?

Yes. Owning something that can be handy or provides a necessity puts you in a higher position than others. People become reliant on your service or business. This is beneficial to those who are gaining profit, but it can restrict those who are workers and those who are reliant on the product (or service). Given that this individual is in such a position of power, it can be played with and those who are reliant are toyed with. If the individual wants to gain more money he can lower their worker’s wages and raise the price of a service or product. This is the unfairness present in the system that divides the uneven distribution of wealth and why extreme poverty is present in societies where it shouldn’t be.

4. What is the core mission (“first object”) of the US government? Does this surprise you, does it sound different from what our society today seems to suggest the core mission of the government is? Explain.

The federalist papers reads in a way that it wouldn’t be the same political system present in England. It showed loyalty toward its citizens “Complaints are everywhere heard from our most considerate and virtuous citizens, equally the friends of public and private faith, and of public and personal liberty”. It showed an interest in the protection of citizens and highlight the injustice they experience by those abusing power. I was not surprised by this writing but it was interesting to read someone in a position of power to say something that pulls attention to those who are acting corrupt in their standing. Needless to say, it does sound drastically distant from the core mission of today’s society. Though the government has been changing and things are trying hard to progress. The misdistribution of wealth has been one of the most impacting forces in America’s society.

1. What concept that we have already discussed does “faction” remind you of?

Faction reminds me of the lesson we had on what is an ideology. The faction is similar to the conversation of liberals and conservatives. In the reading it talks about the views of the two groups of people. This is displayed in the reading when it states “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.”

1. According to Federalist #10 (written by James Madison), what is the source of wealth (private property)? What factor explains why some people get to possess wealth by owning private property, and others don’t (thus remaining poor)? This is a key question, because it shows how the authors of the Constitution thought about the difference between different classes of Americans! HINT: focus on the passage that begins: “The diversity in the faculties (WHAT DOES FACULTIES mean or refer to?) of men, from which the rights of property originate, is not les….”

Well in the reading J. Madison states “Those who hold and those who are without property have ever formed distinct interests in society. Those who are creditors, and those who are debtors, fall under a like discrimination. A landed interest, a manufacturing interest, a mercantile interest, a moneyed interest, with many lesser interests, grow up of necessity in civilized nations, and divide them into different classes, actuated by different sentiments and views. The regulation of these various and interfering interests forms the principal task of modern legislation, and involves the spirit of party and faction in the necessary and ordinary operations of the government.” Which indicates people who have money and land are ones who should run legislation. He also stated, “The effect of the first difference is, on the one hand, to refine and enlarge the public views, by passing them through the medium of a chosen body of citizens, whose wisdom may best discern the true interest of their country, and whose patriotism and love of justice will be least likely to sacrifice it to temporary or partial considerations. Under such a regulation, it may well happen that the public voice, pronounced by the representatives of the people, will be more consonant to the public good than if pronounced by the people themselves,” which to me means a person who is wise and holds knowledge is a person who would makes the best decisions.

So overall the source of wealth is to have money, property and smartness.

1. Do you agree with this explanation of wealth and poverty?

I somewhat agree with this explanation of wealth. A person who has property and money but does not have knowledge as to how to maintain it can lose it all and fall into poverty. A person who has all three possesses the knowledge to maintain wealth. Now where the somewhat agreeance comes in is that there are many smart people who does not own property or money. I guess than do we really have the knowledge needed in order to gain wealth.

1. What is the core mission (“first object”) of the US government? Does this surprise you, does it sound different from what our society today seems to suggest the core mission of the government is? Explain.

Based on the reading the core mission of the government is to protect faculties. Yes this is similar to our society today. The rich gets rich and the poor stays or become poorer. There are many rules and regulations in place that help protect the rich and their property. They receive many tax breaks and are not taxed as much as the poor people. Also when it comes to placing people in government they always talk about helping poor communities but you never see a change. Instead you see gentrification and the rise in prices of the cost of living mean while people are working for a minimum rate that cannot pay the bills. The corporations makes the profit.

1. Given the discussion in questions 1-4, are you surprised that Federalist #10 is not in favor of democracy, and supports a Republican (representative) form of government? Why would d the author dislike a (pure) democratic form of government? Hint: think about how this question connects with the social classes…

The author of the Federalist 10 appears to have an interest in the government being run by people that possess knowledge and has wealth and property. He believes that if the government remains republic then there is a way to keep a control on the factions. With democracy it provides all with a voice and he believes people cannot govern themselves .

1.) “Factions,” as written about in Federalist #10, remind me of the working class. More specifically, they call to mind the owning class’ view of the working class, class consciousness, solidarity, and rebellion; something that must be contained and controlled, for the benefit of the owning class.

2-3.) According to Federalist #10, the source of wealth is a person’s mental faculties. The only people who can become wealthy are those who are intelligent enough to find ways to do so. Intelligence was viewed as genetic, and heavily determined by race and sex.

I profoundly disagree with this explanation of wealth and poverty. It is inherently classist, racist, and sexist. It has no basis in science whatsoever. Many people are born into wealth and are not intelligent. Additionally, many wealthy people are intelligent only in that they are good at finding ways to exploit people. There are many different types of intelligence, and such a broad explanation is false and harmful.

4.) Governments first objective, according to Federalist #10, is “the protection of different and unequal faculties of acquiring property.” That is, the protection of the rich’s (who are of superior intelligence) abilities to get rich, stay rich, and grow wealth. Protected, of course, against the interests of the poor, working class, viewed as inherently less intelligent. While this did sort of shock me at first, as it sunk in I was less surprised.

Society does not acknowledge this as the purpose of our government. Politicians commonly sell themselves as allies of the people. However, outside of some progressives, many of the establishment democrats and republicans often try to convince the public that the ultra rich (and subsequently their interests) are allies of the people, and that the pursuit of wealth is most important over everything. Because of the donations of corporations and billionaires, ultimately our government does work to protect their interests and their ability to grow more wealthy.

5. ) Federalist #10’s aversion to democracy is no surprise given the beliefs laid out in the text. A democratic government gives everyone, the working class included, the right to vote. Because of Madison’s classist belief that the working class were inherently unintelligent, it makes sense that he would not want them to have the power that they would under a democracy. Madison believed that democracy could not control the “mischief” of a faction. A republic “refines” the views of the public through elected officials, who posses their idea of intelligence, and who “best discern their country’s true interests.” Through a republic, the wealthy (who are smarter) are still allowed to have a disproportionate control of the government.

1. “Faction” is the number of people whether it be the majority or minority who have certain commonalities and stick together to promote and protect their interests. Factions reminds me of the government that we have today and the past topics of the working class and the capitalist who are able to stay wealthy. It reminds me have how the capitalist who are the 1% and the amount of power they have in not only maintaining their power and wealth but making sure that it stays generational.
2. According to the Federalist #10 the source of wealth (private property) is the unequal distribution of property and maintaining the factions or making sure that the country’s interest comes before those who have their own self interest. Those who are in a position to make laws will continue to stay wealthy because those laws are best suited for them and not those who are poor. The poor will remain poor because there is always that threat of the government that will continue to restrict them from gaining wealth.
3. This explanation of wealth and poverty is correct and I do agree with it. It very evident in today’s society in how the governments works in protection liberty and those who have property. Those who are in the working class are staying a the threshold that keeps them at the very social class that they started at.
4. The core mission of the government was to keep properties and wealth were it is at and continue to protect those who have property. Those who are born in the class that already have wealth and property will continue to be in that class. The governments mission is also to protect liberty and to protect the republic over democracy.
5. I am not surprised that the Federalist #10 is not in favor of democracy and supports a republican form of government. The government even in today’s society is about looking at factions as problematic, and seeing democracy as a threat. A strong government can protect liberty and find ways to eliminate factions which is inevitable because as its states in Federalist #10 “There are two methods of curing the mischiefs of faction: the one, by removing its causes; the other, by controlling its effects.”

1. What concept that we have already discussed does “faction” remind you of? 

In James Maddison’s Federalist Paper #10, it states that “AMONG the numerous advantages promised by a well-constructed Union, none deserves to be more accurately developed than its tendency to break and control the violence of faction” (Maddison). Madison describes the term faction to signify a group of people in disagreement. These arguments were presumably not for the rights or wellbeing of the community but for those who held similar views. Each faction symbolizes different ideas that generally result in debate. This term is similar to what we would call a political party, therefore this is comparable to the lesson we had on ideology. Resembling factions, an ideology is a collection of beliefs and opinions of an individual or group of people that influences the world they live in. Ideology is also used to define the common interests and goals of a particular political party, as well as philosophies followed by a particular cultural group or religious background.  

2. According to Federalist #10 (written by James Madison), what is the source of wealth (private property)? What factor explains why some people get to possess wealth by owning private property, and others don’t (thus remaining poor)? This is a key question, because it shows how the authors of the Constitution thought about the difference between different classes of Americans! HINT: focus on the passage that begins: “The diversity in the faculties (WHAT DOES FACULTIES mean or refer to?) of men, from which the rights of property originate, is not les….” 

According to Federalist #10, the source of wealth through property ownership was due to “superior intelligence.” Naturally, intelligent people were able to gain their wealth through owning land, having a lucrative business, or anything that creates wealth due to the “faculties of men.” The faculties of men according to Madison is our capability to be intelligent human beings due to genetics or being born within a presumed “superior race.” In short there is a classist and discriminatory view on intelligence. The writers of Federalist #10 believed that those lucky to be born into a particular class of people were intelligent enough to figure out how to obtain wealth from the land they were provided with. Essentially there is a key difference between the intellectual ability of white people and black people, as well as poor white people and wealthy white people. People are poor because they were born that way and are intellectually inferior due to their genetics, or race. It is not within their nature to use their faculties to become rich. This gives the impression that the Founding Fathers are justifying slavery. This is because they found a way to use their property (slaves) to make money and thus thought of themselves as a more intelligent, talented, and superior human than the people they captured and turned into slaves.  

3. Do you agree with this explanation of wealth and poverty? 

I do not agree with the explanation given by James Madison about wealth and poverty. A person’s level of intelligence has nothing to do with their genetics, race, or social class. There is no “superior race” who is more likely to obtain wealth. If intelligence is defined as the capability to apply knowledge, skill, and talent, then someone with a superior intellect can help them accumulate wealth. However, there are many people who are in the working class, who are educated and worked hard, only to find that their pay is average or even below average. Additionally, being smart does not protect someone from experiencing financial difficulties.  

Nevertheless, these racial disparities presented in Madison’s Federalist #10 still exist today because we live in a fundamentally racist society. Poor black and Latino people who possess intelligence are less likely to find success than white people who are poor and intelligent. People of color consistently experience discrimination in the housing market. Although several prejudiced and discriminatory laws were abolished by the end of the civil rights movement, they were soon replaced with more subtle methods. One example is that real estate agents deny black people the opportunity to purchase houses in affluent areas. Living in these locations would offer their children better education and more opportunities to expand their knowledge. Often real estate agents decline to show properties to black customers who happen to be more qualified than their white counterparts. They possess higher incomes and have more impressive credit scores, or more money in savings. Additionally, when black people are placed in subpar neighborhoods it gives them insufficient banking options which can lead to financial illiteracy. Most people start businesses by using home equity, and therefore, black businesses have less of a chance to take off due to their lack of homeownership and general wealth. In summary, racial biases are depriving black people of the opportunities to grow their wealth, limiting them from achieving their full potentials. James Maddison’s general idea of wealth and poverty still exists in the fibers of American society where black people are considered a minority faction.  

4. What is the core mission (“first object”) of the US government? Does this surprise you, does it sound different from what our society today seems to suggest the core mission of the government is? Explain. 

In Federalist #10, James Maddison affirms that “the protection of these faculties is the first object of government” (Maddison, Federalist #10). What I believe he means by this statement is that the first initial function of the government is to protect the wealth of the wealthy people in the United States, along with separating the intelligent from the less intelligent people. In essence, the first objective of the government is recognizing the fundamental differences between the social classes because those help indicate who is intelligent and who is not. This is another racist mission in Federalist #10 because it is about who is more or less skilled, talented, capable, and intelligent within society. This predominantly is the reason behind colonization and slavery because it was believed that people are naturally and intellectually unequal by birth. For example, when Maddison says “from the protection of the different and equal faculties” he means that this unequal society is acceptable because it is the natural way of things and is supposed to be protected.  

This is not surprising to me because even today society protects the wealthy, especially when it comes to the supreme court. Today, people with access to justice are the people who can pay their way to it. Those who are poor are treated worse than people who have great wealth, and people who do not have the finances remain in jail for months before their trial because they are not able to afford bail. A wealthy person can pay for their freedom, can even maintain their career, and prepare at home for their trial. Those who cannot afford to pay off their debt from court will likely have their licenses revoked, which causes a pattern of unemployment, homelessness, and other financial difficulties. The poor who have their licenses suspended are even more inconvenienced by not being able to take care of their children, look after their health by going to the doctor, are unable to go food shopping, or cannot commute to work. Without a driver’s license people are forced to pay for expensive forms of transpiration to take care of their basic needs. It is clear that the government, while protecting the rich, is keeping people stuck in a never-ending cycle of poverty. We have two separate justice systems, the one that safeguards the rich, and another one for those who are not so lucky.  

5. Given the discussion in questions 1-4, are you surprised that Federalist #10 is not in favor of democracy, and supports a Republican (representative) form of government? Why would the author dislike a (pure) democratic form of government? Hint: think about how this question connects with the social classes… 

I am not surprised that Federalist #10 is not in favor of democracy, and rather supports a republican form of government. This is because a pure democracy is when the power is held by the people rather than through government representatives. Whereas a republican system of government is when the state is ruled by representatives of the state population. The United States can be defined as a republic simply due to the way we carry out elections. Each state is awarded a specific amount of votes due to the number of senators and representatives it has, two votes for the senators in the state, along with votes equivalent to those in its congressional districts. Not only does the electoral college chose the president, but the sitting president selects the Supreme Court Justices, and previously the senators were elected by their respective state legislatures. Therefore, this concludes that the United States is based more on a Republican government with state representatives than a pure democracy governed by the people.  

James Maddison would dislike a pure democracy because they did not want the poor man’s opinion to affect the laws that they implemented. He was a property-owning wealthy class citizen and felt that only the white, intelligent property-owning class were capable of making the proper decisions. They believed that if the poor unintelligent class had too much power, they would make decisions that were detrimental to the country. Most of the voting laws came with many restrictions that often required the voters to have a specific amount of property. Maddison and the other Founding Fathers believed that if someone were to vote on a particular matter that affected others’ wealth and property, they should also have a substantial amount of land to understand what it was like. It appears as if they were concerned for the safety and interest of the wealthy, wanted their fellow landowners to stay in control, and remain the superior race and class that dictated over everyone else. 

1. What concept that we have already discussed does “faction” remind you of?

Faction reminds me of the House Of Representatives because a political faction is a collection of people who support the same political cause but differ from the majority of the group in some ways. Parties within a party are fragmented minor parties that can exist within a larger group or political party.

2. According to Federalist #10 (written by James Madison), what is the source of wealth (private property)? What factor explains why some people get to possess wealth by owning private property, and others don’t (thus remaining poor)? This is a key question, because it shows how the authors of the Constitution thought about the difference between different classes of Americans! HINT: focus on the passage that begins: “The diversity in the faculties (WHAT DOES FACULTIES mean or refer to?) of men, from which the rights of property originate, is not les….”

James Madison argued that possessing real estate is a sign of affluence. The founding fathers believed that those who did not own land had their own interests and viewpoints, which helps to explain why some individuals are able to own riches while others are not. They contend that those who already control wealth do not share their interests or viewpoints. As a result, the wealthy do not think that those from lower social classes are capable of making choices that are in their own best interests.

3. Do you agree with this explanation of wealth and poverty?

In today’s world, those who own significant property, like a corporation or a firm, can ensure their wealth remains, so I agree with Madison’s interpretation of wealth and poverty. Because they hire people of lower class to work for them for wages that do not reflect the amount of work they do, many of their enterprises continue to grow. They are unable to really locate a simple way to acquire their own home because these individuals are still working to assure their accomplishment.

4. What is the core mission (“first object”) of the US government? Does this surprise you, does it sound different from what our society today seems to suggest the core mission of the government is? Explain.

According to Madison in Federalist #10, “The fundamental goal of the government is the protection of these talents.”  In fact, the government’s first goal is to understand the basic disparities between the social classes since they help distinguish between people who are bright and those who are not. This doesn’t surprise me because the wealthy are still protected in society today, particularly when it comes to the highest court, why? Because they are the wealthy and only individuals who can afford to access justice today are those who have access to it. People who are impoverished are treated worse than those who are extremely wealthy, and those who lack the means to post bail spend months in jail before their case is heard. A wealthy individual may afford their release, keep their job, and get ready for court at home while a poor person wouldn’t have the same resources.

5.Given the discussion in questions 1-4, are you surprised that Federalist #10 is not in favor of democracy, and supports a Republican (representative) form of government? Why would the author dislike a (pure) democratic form of government? Hint: think about how this question connects with the social classes…

Given the current political climate, it is not surprising to me that federalist #10 opposes democracy. Because he is from the upper class, the author James Madison is opposed to democracy. Consequently, a democratic system of governance would not be advantageous to his business ambitions. True democracy terrified the founding fathers so if the people banded together, it would imply that they would not be able to hold as much power. They favored a republican representative far more.

1. What concept that we have already discussed does “faction” remind you of?

The definition of faction according to the reading is “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, adverse to the rights of other citizens, or to the permanent and aggregate interests of the community.” What this reminds me of would be social class which we have learned before the reason for this is because in society everyone wants to be wealthy and have money or even own some type of property but are we all rich? The answer is no in society there is many different social classes and based on what class youre in is the amount of power you have. Although all classes are aiming for the same thing and interest not all can have and achieve.

2. According to Federalist #10 (written by James Madison), what is the source of wealth (private property)? What factor explains why some people get to possess wealth by owning private property, and others don’t (thus remaining poor)? This is a key question, because it shows how the authors of the Constitution thought about the difference between different classes of Americans! HINT: focus on the passage that begins: “The diversity in the faculties (WHAT DOES FACULTIES mean or refer to?) of men, from which the rights of property originate, is not les….” According to the reading federalist #10 source of wealth is based on what you already know about wealth based on what you own and if you were born into the wealthy family. Someone who wasnt born or is in the wealthy class would have no knowledge or know anything about wealth or being a property owner. The wealthy people are most likely to stay wealthy while the poor people would stay poor and not be able to work their way up. 

3. Do you agree with this explanation of wealth and poverty?

I don’t agree with this explanation of wealth and poverty by James Madison because he’s basically trying to say that you’re wealthy based on your intelligence, gender or social class and that can be true but not in all cases there can be some working-class people who are smart as well but due to the fact that they have no money they might not get the same amount of opportunities and someone with money which can lead to them staying in that same social class. They can be very smart but have a regular low-paying job which doesn’t help with much other than just to survive and maintain what they have while the wealthy people are already rich and just stay there.

4. What is the core mission (“first object”) of the US government? Does this surprise you, does it sound different from what our society today seems to suggest the core mission of the government is? Explain. The core mission of the US government is to protect wealthy business owners and help them stay on top. The goal is to keep everything the same and not let the poor/non-wealthy interfere with their wealth. The government wants to protect them and their properties. This does not surprise me because even today the wealthy people only get wealthier while the rest stay in the same spot forever. Its harder for someone to get on top but easier for the wealthy people to get wealthier.

5. Given the discussion in questions 1-4, are you surprised that Federalist #10 is not in favor of democracy, and supports a Republican (representative) form of government? Why would d the author dislike a (pure) democratic form of government? Hint: think about how this question connects with the social classes… No, I am not surprised that Federalist #10 is not in favor of democracy because they fear that if all people and different classes that are lower fight for equal rights then perhaps it can actually happen and the wealthy people would come out affected. The wealthy people don’t want this to happen and fear it, therefore, I am not surprised that they are in favor of republicans since money, wealth and property is important to them and staying on top with power.

1. When I hear the faction concept, I automatically think of James Madison and how he defines it as a number of citizens (political party) where the two parties the democratic and the republic are organizing to for example work government out or work to win elections. 

2. For example the source of wealth (private property) includes business owner interests, it was stated in the reading Federalist Paper #10 “the rights of property originate, is not less an insuperable obstacle to a uniformity of interests.” This factor explains why some people get to possess wealth by owning private property, and others don’t because of interests, unequal faculties, and from the influence of these on the sentiments and views of the respective proprietors. 

3. I do not agree with this explanation of wealth and poverty because of how the poor remain poor and how wealthy people keep increasing their wealth by possessing wealth by owning private property. 

4. “The diversity in the faculties of men, from which the rights of property originate, is no less an insuperable obstacle to a uniformity of interests.” When these faculties are protected, it is considered to be the first object. 

5. Given the discussion in questions 1-4, I’m not surprised that Federalist #10 is not in favor of democracy, and supports a Republican form of government because of the fact that if Federalist #10 was a democracy then the authority would be a major problem. The author disliked a purely democratic form of government because the author knows that the people will fight who will be at the top. Going back to faction, the citizens that Madison referred to will argue not just for their rights but for what will benefit them. This is why the citizens did not do the decision-making because he knows what will happen then.

1. A concept that we have already discussed that fraction reminds me off is
2. According to James Madison wealth is owning property. The factor that explains why some people get to posses wealth and others don’t is that the founding fathers view the non land owing class as having their own interest and views. They believe these interest and views do not align with the people who already have a hold of wealth. Thus the wealthy do not believe people from a lower class could make decisions that are in the best interest of the wealthy class if they came from no wealth.
3. I do agree with this explanation of wealth and poverty because it is still present in todays society. Many wealthy people own land and many wealthy people do not believe people who are non land owners have the same interests and desires as them. This leads to the wealthy pushing for laws that benefit them just as the founding fathers did.
4. The core mission of the US Government or the first object is to protect the property owning class from having different and unequal individuals obtain or take their land. It is to protect the wealthy class from being intruded by the non wealthy class. It is very different from what todays society suggest the core mission of the constitution is. Todays society’s suggest the constitution was made to established justice and freedom for all. In reality it was created to do the exact opposite. It was designed to protect the individuals who created it and to keep the people who did not create it as outsiders.
5. I am not surprised that the Federalist #10 is not in favor of a democracy. The founding fathers were very afraid of a true democracy. It would mean they would not be able to hold as much power if the people came together. They much more supported a republican representation. They supported this because it made it easer for them to bend the rules in their favor and keep them in charge of the masses. A pure democratic government would give to many people a voice, allowing for the masses to adjust the constitution in ways that would not benefit the people it was created for.

1. What concept that we have already discussed does “faction” remind you of?

Faction is by definition a grouping of individuals, especially within a political organization, such as a political party, a trade union, or other group with a political purpose. A group formed to seek some goal within a political party or a government. Faction remind me of the concept ideology which is a set of beliefs or philosophies attributed to a person or group of persons. Some times in the faction there is conflict between members of the same organization. The conflict divide these members based on distinct interests.

1. According to Federalist #10 (written by James Madison), what is the source of wealth (private property)? What factor explains why some people get to possess wealth by owning private property, and others don’t (thus remaining poor)? This is a key question, because it shows how the authors of the Constitution thought about the difference between different classes of Americans! HINT: focus on the passage that begins: “The diversity in the faculties (WHAT DOES FACULTIES mean or refer to?) of men, from which the rights of property originate, is not les….”

By definition faculties mean abilities for a person, natural or acquired, for a particular kind of action. Per Madison some people get to possess wealth because of their faculty. They get to acquire land because of their power, intelligence. On the other hand, those who stay without property do not have the abilities that the ones who own have. The text of Michael Parenti stated that from colonial men of influence received vast land grants which make them become property owner. Therefore, all property owner became the wealthiest in the country and the ones almost no property became the poor. Now, with the Constitution the Federalist proposed laws the were explicitly defending their interests. This format consistently increase the gap because the owning class and the laboring class.

1. Do you agree with this explanation of wealth and poverty?

I agree in the sense that faculty is an inherent capability, power, or function. Because if you were born Indians, African descent, women, indentures servants, you have no right of having property. In other words, it is like God created you to be poor. It is like people that are wealthy they have a talent for that. People that are poor don’t have this talent.

1. What is the core mission (“first object”) of the US government? Does this surprise you, does it sound different from what our society today seems to suggest the core mission of the government is? Explain.

The core mission of the US is the right to life, liberty, economic freedom, and the “pursuit of happiness.” It is the purpose of government to protect these rights, and it may not place unfair or unreasonable restraints on their exercise. Many of these rights are enumerated in the Bill of Rights. The Federalist suggest that the core mission is to resolves problems among the citizens, protect commercial interests, defend the wealthy class against the others. Nowadays, the US tend to favorized more the wealthy comparing to the labor class. In reality, however, policy has mostly gone the other way. Tax rates on corporation and high income have gone down, unions have been crushed, the minimum wage, adjusted for inflation, is lower than it was in 1960.

1. Given the discussion in questions 1-4, are you surprised that Federalist #10 is not in favor of democracy, and supports a Republican (representative) form of government? Why would d the author dislike a (pure) democratic form of government? Hint: think about how this question connects with the social classes…

In democracies where the majority rules, people make decisions by majority power and while the majority knows what the right thing to do is. The majority places its own immediate wants above what is right.  For a society to protect the public welfare the society must be able to do what is right, which the majority cannot do in other words the working class. “No man is allowed to be a judge in his own case because his interests will certainly bias his judgment and corrupt his integrity”. Therefore a republic is better than a democracy per the Federalist.  It controls all factions while democracies can only control small and inconsequential factions.  It protects the public’s integrity by letting representatives make mistakes while leaving the public free to punish the representatives for the consequences of the mistakes the representatives make that are not consistent with the general and public welfare. The Federalist would never support a democracy because In a Democracy, the individual, and any group of individuals composing any minority, have no protection against the unlimited power of the majority. It would be impractical to administer an entire country if people had to have a direct vote on every issue.