1. What concept that we have already discussed does “faction” remind you of? The concept of “faction” in Federalist #10 is closely connected with social class contradictions and economic inequality which were discussed earlier in connection with the adoption of the Constitution. A faction is a group of persons, having common interest, the type of group which has interest that may be incompatible with that of other persons. This is especially so in the case of economic class, for instance, the rich against the poor. This is in harmony with the earlier discussions of how the Founding Fathers established the government in a way that hindered the power of the ordinary people and protected the power of the wealthy. 2. In Federalist #10, 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)? In Federalist #10, Madison explains that the source of wealth and private property is the difference in the natural abilities of individuals, their talents, and faculties. The passage states: “The source of this inequality of property (unlike that of moral equality) is not so simple as to admit of a precise definition. In this case, ‘faculties’ means people’s natural intellect, zeal, and talents. According to Madison, since every individual is created different in intellect and zeal, some will accumulate wealth and others will not. This explanation tells us that economic disparity is a natural and inevitable occurrence in society. Nevertheless, this also tells us about the views that the authors of the Constitution had towards wealth and poverty – they thought that the wealthy had their property coming to them because they were more gifted, and the poor did not have property because they did not have the same faculties. This view does not consider other factors like systemic barriers, lack of education, or inherited wealth that are also causes of economic disparity. 3. Do you agree with this explanation of wealth and poverty? Madison’s explanation is only correct to some extent and, at the same time, incorrect. It is true that, to a certain extent, the talents and efforts of people can lead to financial success. However, economic status, social equity, education, and the availability of resources are also a major determinant of who gets rich and who stays poor. For instance, someone from a high income family has a better chance of attending better schools, having contact with professionals and financial support than someone from a low income family who will be faced with more barriers even with the same intelligence. Furthermore, other social factors like race, gender, and workplace harassment also affect economic outcomes. Hence, there is no doubt that talent helps, but wealth is also a function of social and structural factors that Madison did not consider. 4. What is the primary purpose (first object) of the U.S. government? Does this surprise you? Does it vary from what our society today believes to be the primary purpose of the government? From Federalist #10 we can see that the primary purpose (“first object”) of government is to protect property. To this end, Madison argues that since economic inequalities are inherent in society, the role of government should be to shield the property owners’ interests and not to equalize the economy. This perspective may be surprising because today, the government is often seen as having a broader role — to protect not only property but also individual rights, the general welfare, and social justice. We live in a modern democratic society and we value freedom, equality, and protection of civil rights. Nevertheless, in practice, the government remains biased towards economic concerns, for instance, supporting business, cutting taxes for the rich, and having the latter influence politics through lobbying. This shows that although the public debate on democracy and equality has developed, the government’s economic focus is still in line with Federalist #10. 5. Are you surprised that Federalist #10 is not democratic and favours a Republican (representative) form of government, and the author is against (pure) democracy? Why would the author not want a (pure) democratic form of government? It is not surprising that Federalist #10 is against direct democracy and prefers a Republican (representative) form of government. This was because Madison was worried that in a direct democracy the majority of people (who were predominantly poor and without property) would use their power to influence the passage of laws that would risk the wealth and property of the elite class. He regarded democracy as a threat to property owners because the low income people would demand the sharing of wealth or other changes in the economy that would erode the power of the rich. Rather, Madison supported a kind of representative democracy in which the decision-making process would be made by elected politicians, who were likely to be from the higher income and education bracket. This system guaranteed that the elite would keep the power while giving the appearance of citizen participation. This dislike of direct political power for the masses was further encouraged by the fear of mob rule and lower class uprisings such as Shays’ Rebellion. This goes back to our discussion on social classes: The authors of the Constitution created the government to safeguard the rights of the elite, and to prevent the lower classes from exercising too much influence. This idea is still present in the American politics of today, as the economic elites and corporations still exert a disproportionate influence on the laws and policies.