Professor’s name

Author’s name

Due date

Topic: political science Publius and factions.

A number of citizens amounting to either a minority of a majority of the whole population, who are united and have a common interest, purpose or passion, contrary to the rights of other citizens or the permanent and aggregate likes of the community. They are considered to be a destructive group in the United States of America government. Faction is as a result of liberty in the society as long as liberty is there people will have different interest. An example is when members of the police department have factionalized officers, the officers do not report or follow the government but their own interests which maybe destructive to the civilians and their rights.

Publius’s solution: Publius found the main source of faction was the diversity of opinion based on political life; however the most durable source was the unequal distribution of property. Those that have and those that do not share very separate interest. He argues that there are two ways to reduce the faction damage; remove the causes or control the effects of faction. The first being to remove liberty as a cause of faction but it would be impossible because liberty is essential for political life CITATION Publius10 p 638 t l 1033 (Bessette & Pitney Jr., 2012, p. 638). The other solution would be creating a homogenous society with people having a common interest which is not practicable.

Publius finally concludes the only best way to limit the damage caused by faction would be to control its effects. Causes of faction are based on human nature so the best cure is to control the effects. He says this is possible in a republic where a society votes for representatives who will vote for the laws. A voice of people is more conformable to the interest of the community through the representatives who reduce the effect of contradicting interests in large number of people. This would be impossible in a democratic system where all members vote for the laws as people would vote according to their personal interest.

Separation of powers:

This is a political doctrine in which the government is segregated into three branches, that is, the executive that implements the law, the Judiciary that interprets the law and finally the legislature that formulates the law. Each of the branches would have powers to monitor the other branch’s power. In the United States the branches of the government are kept distinct in order to prevent abuse of power.

Publius’s argument: Publius pointed out that the interior design of the government be separated and by their mutual relations they would be able to monitor each other and keep each other in check so as not to abuse power. This suggested that he felt that the arms of the government need to be separated so to control each other.

However he felt some deviations would be seen in the principle. The judicial branch could not hold on to the principle since the members require distinct qualifications and the prime objective is to select members holding these specific qualifications CITATION Publius10 p 638 t l 1033 (Bessette & Pitney Jr., 2012, p. 638). The other controversy is that judges allegedly disregard statutes and procedural rules. The judiciary is untouchable and independent of the other two branches. Publius supported the system of check and balance that promoted control of each arm by the other two arms. Although each branch stands alone with distinctive powers, it cannot stand alone. He viewed that separation was significant as it prevented abuse of power as would be the case in one power ruling the country.

References:

BIBLIOGRAPHY l 1033 Bessette, J. M., & Pitney Jr., J. J. (2012). Boston, MA: Wadsworth. Retrieved Nov 29, 2012