Factions in society and tyranny of the majority were two things that Madison and Tocqueville expressed concerns for in the United States. The difference between a majority and a faction is how you divide and break down groups on a particular basis. The majority defines the difference between the two. The majority is a significant part of a group, where as a faction is the division of a group and not necessarily the majority.
The concern of the two is how these groups will have influence in the system and society. In a society when the “tyranny of majority” plays in affect, the majority will have the power in society and the minority will go unspoken for. The tyranny of majority can be seen in many societies. The example that comes to mind is a government formed by direct democracy. In a direct democracy, citizens of that area will vote directly for a certain politician to be the leader of the area.
Unlike the United States, every vote counts and goes directly to the politician and does not have an electoral college. Sometime in a direct-democracy there will be a lot of candidates so the winner could have a small amount of votes since there are so many candidates. Even if the vote count is low, the majority will take play and that candidate will win even if a vast amount of people didn’t vote for them.
For example, there could be five candidates and one hundred twenty voters that will be involved in the election. The winner receives fifty votes. Second place gets twenty votes, third place gets seventeen votes, fourth place gets eighteen votes, and the fifth place candidate gets fifteen votes. Although the winner had fifty votes it neither means they were the most qualified nor the desired candidate in office. Only fifty of those voters will be spoken for while the remaining seventy will not be spoken for while that politician is in office.
The concern with the “tyranny of the majority” is the lack of representation in government and the fear that society as a whole will lose certain rights and eventually resort to a strong central government and weak individuality. On the other hand by having this majority, society can move along at a faster rate and be more productive with certain protection and unity. James Madison was a huge supporter of a strong central government and believed if factions were prevalent in society it would cause too much of a divide in a nation.
Factions have been seen as a way to support individual’s rights and to ensure equality among citizens. By having factions, there is a better chance that citizens will be represented, but could cause delay or controversy within that society. The use of factions is very prevalent in the United States. For example, during a presidential election citizens do not get a direct vote to the President of the United States. Instead, American citizens vote and the representative in the Electoral College votes corresponding to the number of votes that candidate gets.
If the majority of the representatives for that state vote for a particular candidate, then the candidate wins that state and gets those votes. Another example of factions and the power of sovereign states in the United States is local government. The local government of each state usually has a decent amount of power for its state. The legalization of marijuana is very good proof of the power of factions. Although marijuana is illegal on a national level, it is legal in the state of California. Some see this as beneficial and a way to promote individual rights in California. At the same time it causes many issues with the federal government as well as other states who might not agree with it, which would further divide the United States as a whole.
The most prevalent example of factions within the United States is the political parties within the United States. By having republican and democrat parties in the United States, it creates a faction and a divide within American society. It causes many disputes because many people will simply support their party regardless of who the candidate is and also causes the best interest of the people to not be met, but rather the faction that is being represented. This is something that Madison stated as a problem in the federal papers.
The differences between the two theories is having a majority and having a faction. The majority can be seen as tyranny and disruptive to society by not having the minorities represented in politics and could very well lead to a form of dictatorship. Factions can be seen as disruptive by trying to represent minorities and being very slow in how demands are met in society and could further divide a nation by trying to meet the demands of everyone instead of trying to do what is absolutely best for society as a whole.
There are blatantly obvious differences in perception between Tocqueville and Madison, but believe it or not there are some similarities too. In United States government, factions and majority go hand-in-hand in a few ways. By having a faction for states, counties, and cities most people can be well represented for. As representatives of those factions, politicians will meet in caucus to determine what laws will be passed. The majority of the representatives who voted will pass the bill to the next branch for a similar process to undergo and allow that bill to be law. The Electoral College is also a good example of balancing factions and majority. The way it does so is by having representatives in the Electoral College represent a particular faction. When that faction votes, the majority of it will be represented by a member of the electoral college and whatever candidate receives the most votes will win the votes of that state.
The similarities is that both will be used highly in society and create great alterations to society. The biggest similarity is that both of these are obviously not perfect and by putting both hand-in-hand creates a more perfect society that fights for liberty, freedom, and equality.
No comments:
Post a Comment