1. From what context does faction remind you? The modern idea of “faction” mentioned in Federalist #10 relates to social class divisions and economic interests. These two concepts are discussed by both Parenti and Beard. Beard believes that the Constitution was written by the wealthy elite for their purposes, and being a member of a political faction had something to do with being of a certain economic class. Parenti takes this one step further and argues that factions aren’t simply a group of people with different opinions— they usually symbolize a struggle between the rich and the poor. The upper class, consisting of landowners, bankers, and merchants, formed factions to protect their interests, while the working class and small farmers never had political power.

2. Where does this wealth (private property) come from, and why do some people have it and others not?

In Federalist #10, Madison claims that wealth (private property) arises from natural abilities or faculties that differ among men. However, according to Beard and Parenti, that is a convenient explanation that ignores real and obvious ways of acquiring wealth: privilege, inheritance, and law and policy benefitting the rich. 

Beard argues that many framers of the Constitution were already wealthy at the time the Constitution was written, and they passed the law conceiving the protection of their economic interests. The government gave them land; it enforced their contracts favoring the creditors versus the debtors; and it provided the conditions for the rich to remain in power. Parent argues against the prevailing notion that wealth is a result simply of hard work or even talent. He argues for a view that sees capitalism creating conditions for inequality because of the concentration of wealth in the hands of the few, on account of exploiting the labor of the workers. The rich remain rich not merely because of their ability, for the very maintenance of their position depends on keeping a system that keeps them in power. 

3. Do you go along with that understanding of wealth and poverty?

Beard and Parenti will scarcely agree with Madison because wealth is naturally linked to talent or intelligence. Instead, they will show how laws and policies favor one group against another. In reality, many members of the poor class work as hard as the rich do, but land, education, and financial resource access are things denied them.

Take, for example, the early U.S. government granting land and legal protection to wealthy men; poor farmers and workers had little political voice. Today, large corporations and well-to-do individuals influence government policy through lobbying and campaign donations to defeat lower-income people. It means the question of poverty is not just about individual effort; it is also about how economic and political systems are structured.

4. The core mission or first object of the U.S. government establishes what the government is. Madison, in Federalist 10, propounds that the government shall ensure the protection of private property. This is easily surprising for it seems today that one thinks of government in terms of protecting rights, enforcing justice, and enabling public services.

But then again, Beard and Parenti say, that is not all there is to property protection. That is simply another way of talking fair and just. It was keeping power in the hands of the wealthy. Many of the framers of this Constitution landowners and creditors could reasonably think that some degree of democracy would mean the poor could get at their wealth. That is why they created a government that, as far as they could, was to protect the economic elite.

Even now, according to Parenti, the government favors corporations and rich people in tax breaks corporate subsidies, or laws that weaken unions. This takes us back to the claim that the government was as good as it is now in protecting wealth, just as during the time of writing the Constitution.

5. Why does Federalist No. 10 oppose pure democracy and favor a republic?

Beard and Parenti would argue that, in his opposition to pure democracy, Madison is imagining a state in which the majority would possess political power-borrowing from the elite, even more so from the filthy rich.

One could vote for very taxing rates over the rich or a debt policy for farmers, given that it’s shaped by a simple majority. But that was just what the rich elites composing the Convention did not want. Instead, Madison supported a republic, where elected representatives make decisions. This was a method to filter power through elites who would act in their economic interests rather than in the interests of the majority.

Beard shows that many of these representatives were themselves wealthy landowners or merchants, so the system was set up to keep their interests safe. Parenti argues that this fear of democracy must still have an echo in our day. Today, even with more people entitled to vote, money still controls the apparatus of politics. Rich individuals and corporations use campaign donations, lobbying, and media influence on government policy to work in their favor. So, while the U.S. appears to be a democracy, it works in a way that protects the interests of the rich as Federalist #10 intended.