- Is it truly possible to distribute power equally between various branches?
- How would the U.S. be different if checks and balances did not exist?
- Do you think the people of the U.S. would ever be united enough to make decisions on their own, instead of giving power to government too?
- Can the people "check or balance" the three branches of government?
- What happens if there is conflict within one of the three branches? Can it not be reviewed by another branch at all?
" It may be a reflection on human nature, that such devices should be necessary to control the abuses of government." Is this suggesting that it is human nature for people to want to have power (which may be why we created a democracy)? If Madison believes the government is a reflection of human nature, how so?
" If men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary." I don't think we wouldn't ever not have a government because wouldn't that make us Communists? Plus, I believe the U.S. population is too great for everyone to agree on how the country should be run/to contribute in deciding what should be done on a national level.
"We see it particularly displayed in all the subordinate distributions of power, where the constant aim is to divide and arrange the several offices in such a manner as that each may be a check on the other -- that the private interest of every individual may be a sentinel over the public rights." The U.S. government has stressed on dividing power between various offices, branches, etc. However, how would things get accomplished if we had a direct democracy, where all citizens would vote on every law?
"The different governments will control each other, at the same time that each will be controlled by itself." Here, Madison seems to describe our government as a cycle of power and decision-making, which in turn, has an effect on its own position. Is it beneficial for the government to "control itself"?
"Justice is the end of government. It is the end of civil society. It ever has been and ever will be pursued until it be obtained, or until liberty be lost in the pursuit." How does justice bring an end to government and civil society? If it does, would it be wrong for people to say "justice is served" after a court case?
Your question 3, which was "Do you think the people of the U.S. would ever be united enough to make decisions on their own, instead of giving power to government too?" is pretty difficult to conceptualize. Are you asking if we could potentially go back to a state of nature where government doesn't really exist? That's tough to answer. In my opinion, I don't think the people as a whole would be able to make a unified decision. With so many different cultures and beliefs people are always bound to disagree. What problems could arise if we suddenly got rid of our government? I think we need a higher force to keep us organized because sometimes people don't know what they want or would prefer a representative to handle the issues.
ReplyDelete