Fed. No. 51

But the great security against a gradual concentration of the several powers in the same department, consists in giving to those who administer each department the necessary constitutional means and personal motives to resist encroachments of the others. The provision for defense must in this, as in all other cases, be made commensurate to the danger of attack. Ambition must be made to counteract ambition. The interest of the man must be connected with the constitutional rights of the place. It may be a reflection on human nature, that such devices should be necessary to control the abuses of government. But what is government itself, but the greatest of all reflections on human nature? 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. In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself. A dependence on the people is, no doubt, the primary control on the government; but experience has taught mankind the necessity of auxiliary precautions.

---

To discuss why the governments exists to exhort power can be very controversial, even more to explain why it is even existent. However, The Constitution set out to control the concentration of power throughout the several departments that make up the government branches. Ambition is by human nature an agent of survival. However, the interest of men must be in relation to the constitutional right according to the branches of the government. If mystical forces were to govern men there would not be a need for any sort of control to exist within the government nor the governed, hence this is not the case the challenge consist in equally governing men and governing the government that is governing. These are co-existent and the both need a balance within each other. 

I chose this passage because today, amongst our communities the word "oppressive" government can be used to intend the wrongdoings of their actions and how oppressed they may feel as a result. However, no government there would imply a chaotic society of anarchy. Of course that as mentioned the power of government and power of people must be in intact balance in order to function within society in order to avoid uprising. By creating a system of checks and balance they must be functioning even until present day. It leaves me to wonder if the internal controls of government are actually undergoing a check point of when is has deliberately exhorted much to power over an issue, policy, or ruling. However, as the Federalist No. 51 continues to mention under a society where the weaker individual is not secured against the violence of the stronger anarchy may result for the government is to protect the the weak as well as the more powerful.

Fed. No. 10

The latent causes of faction are thus sown in the nature of man; and we see them everywhere brought into different degrees of activity, according to the different circumstances of civil society. A zeal for different opinions concerning religion, concerning government, and many other points, as well of speculation as of practice; an attachment to different leaders ambitiously contending for pre-eminence and power; or to persons of other descriptions whose fortunes have been interesting to the human passions, have, in turn, divided mankind into parties, inflamed them with mutual animosity, and rendered them much more disposed to vex and oppress each other than to co-operate for their common good. So strong is this propensity of mankind to fall into mutual animosities, that where no substantial occasion presents itself, the most frivolous and fanciful distinctions have been sufficient to kindle their unfriendly passions and excite their most violent conflicts. But the most common and durable source of factions has been the various and unequal distribution of property. 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.

---

Madison carries on to further explore the different reasons behind the vested interests of men. The position of ideas carried out in their daily interactions within society, be it religious, governmental or civil, they carry about and identify with parties where ideologies are shared. However, this is the same double edged sword that may divide and conquer a group that has objections far to powerful to turn into a peaceful mutual agreement. Far from the cooperation of the "idea" of "common good" for everyone, this can be a reason behind oppression from one party to another. However, Madison touched upon the most common conflict of division, the unequal distribution of property. Everyone stands along a pin point of society and their roles from which they make a living can further divide the factions, per se the creditors in contrast to the debtors. Their interest vest a much larger conflict for not all can be satisfied nor shifted to the "common core ideology". This results in the principle of the modern legislation which operated for the necessary goals of the government, hence the special interest of a faction can be neither destroyed nor purposely completely satisfied.


I chose this passage because it spoke to me about the reality of why there is even a political system in place. Men and women alike all have different interests that are vested in their daily lifestyles or association with a particular group, party or institution. To want to convey to the needs of the individual's special interests of a faction would be nearly impossible as well as wanting to diminish them alike. To have a system that not only addresses these impracticable satisfactions of common division between unity, but that also seeks to involve them in the operations of government, is up to the factions to convey their interest in making their own representations.

Bourne

The non-English American can scarcely be blamed if he sometimes thinks of the Anglo-Saxon predominance in America as little more than a predominance of priority. The Anglo-Saxon was merely the first immigrant, the first to found a colony. He has never really ceased to be the descendant of immigrants, nor has he ever succeeded in transforming that colony into a real nation, with a tenacious, richly woven fabric of native culture. Colonials from the other nations have come and settled down beside him. They found no definite native culture which should startle them out of their colonialism, and consequently they looked back to their mother-country, as the earlier Anglo-Saxon immigrant was looking back to his. What has been offered thee newcomer has been the chance to learn English, to become a citizen, to salute the flag. And those elements of our ruling classes who are responsible for the public schools, the settlements, all the organizations for amelioration in the cities, have every reason to be proud of the care and labor which they have devoted to absorbing the immigrant. His opportunities the immigrant has taken to gladly, with almost a pathetic eagerness to make his way in the new land without friction or disturbance. The common language has made not only for the necessary communication, but for all the amenities of life.

If freedom means the right to do pretty much as one pleases, so long as one does not interfere with others, the immigrant has found freedom, and the ruling element has been singularly liberal in its treatment of the invading hordes. But if freedom means a democratic cooperation in determining the ideals and purposes and industrial and social institutions of a country, then the immigrant has not been free, and the Anglo-Saxon element is guilty of just what every dominant race is guilty of in every European country: the imposition of its own culture upon the minority peoples. The fact that this imposition has been so mild and, indeed, semi-conscious does not alter its quality. And the war has brought out just the degree to which that purpose of "Americanizing," that is, "Anglo-Saxonizing," the immigrant has failed.

For the Anglo-Saxon now in his bitterness to turn upon the other peoples, talk about their "arrogance," scold them for not being melted in a pot which never existed, is to betray the unconscious purpose which lay at the bottom of his heart. It betrays too the possession of a racial jealousy similar to that of which he is now accusing the so-called "hyphenates." Let the Anglo-Saxon be proud enough of the heroic toil and heroic sacrifices which moulded the nation. But let him ask himself, if he had had to depend on the English descendants, where he would have been living to-day. To those of us who see in the exploitation of unskilled labor the strident red leit-motif of our civilization, the settling of the country presents a great social drama as the waves of immigration broke over it.

_________________________________________________________________________________

Bourne, touches upon the generations of past migrant groups and those forthcoming. To acknowledge that the first migrants were anglo-saxon and they carried no burden but to create a land that they would shape with their own previous upbringings from their mother lands is controversial as new waves of migration continue to enter the United States, under the circumstance that they have paved. However, Bourne argues that if these already established leaders are founder of institutions such as needs of institutionalized schools, settlements, or organizations to improve the way of life of the immigrant it absorbs him into believing that they are almost a blessing, therefore should love his “new land” without objection. Continuing to support his arguments as to how despite America being the land of freedom, the anglo-saxon as imposed their own culture upon the minority masses.

Bourne discuses “a melting pot that never existed” only to transcend into the hyphenated identity of the american looking to fit into a culture alienated from his own. The hyphenated American has claimed their own experience a valid form of “Americanization”. However, he critiques the Anglo-Saxon, for perhaps believing that without the migration waves that flooded at a time of a dire need of boosting the brittle economy of the nation, these waves are what shaped it. However, as Bourne suggest that exploitation of unskilled labor are recurring patterns which have constantly been the cause of turmoil in the nation.

I chose this passage because in my opinion, as the closing sentence states the exploitation of unskilled labor are extremely dependent pillars to the economy of the nation. even as the migration movements continue to overwhelm the United States, the idea of the hyphenated-American still stands as more and more immigrants settle in the nation. The Americanization process has not changed much, as newcomers are expected to learn english and participate in the institutions which are already established to “empower” themselves through the benefits that were inaccessible in their homeland, at least it is thought that way. However, in exchange the immigrant loves his “new land” without objection.

Issue Areas

In their article, Two Faces of Power, Bacharach and Baratz, touch upon Robert Dahl's examination of "three different 'issue areas' in which important public decisions are made", while using Dahl's focus on New Haven, the three areas are subject to affect any party directly or indirectly involved. Those three different issues which Dahl focuses on are, “nominations by the two political parties” , “urban redevelopment”, and “public education”. Bacharach and Baratz explain Dahl’s focus on the distribution of the key decision making process and note that influence of public officials are greatly weighed in on the three areas of activity. However, they’ve taken into consideration that the notables or elitist party are not directly affected by these issues, however, they are more directly involved in the decision making process. Nominations by two political parties involves the decision of who will hold office under a leadership role. Urban redevelopment measures costs and potentials of the future of a land, making the process of redevelopment an issue which may involve a particular party. Public education is perhaps a factor of crucial importance, however,  elitist party may not particularly invest interest hence, their children attend private schools, they do however measure the amount of budgeting and tax dollars which will allow for the public education to continue to run on. Though these are three issues which are discussed under the example of New Haven, Bacharach and Baratz continue to examine the mobilization of bias. The political agenda which is directly influenced by a particular influential group appearing to benefit communal power. Here an individual must analyze the participation in decision making of particular concrete issue. vested in their interest.

Bacharaz and Baratz’s section on Dahl’s focus of three different issues areas of particular interest. Given that the three areas, although refers to New Haven, is something which can be issue areas that may affect any other city or community.  I’ve made the connection that these issues may directly become of political, economical and educational interest. Precisely, because these issue areas are of importance that may affect a community daily. The idea of power is understood to become part of a larger picture and use our voice to become part of the decision making process. Specifically, when the small decision such as who can represent you, or who can say what is to be developed in your home area, and who decides which schools remain open or closed, are what may affect communal life. There is a large amount of energy invested into this decision making process and to make presumptions about power is to conclude the amount of power one may personally have.