MAY
28, 2004 --
George F. Will
preceded his May 26 Washington Post column with this quote
from Federalist No. 51, attributed to James Madison: "The
interest of the man must be connected with the constitutional rights
of the place."
Will's last paragraph
included this:
"You must
first,' Madison said in Federalist 51, 'enable the government to
control the governed; and in the next place, oblige it to control
itself."
The column, called "Mr.
Madision's War," in the Post, suggested that the
essence of the speech given by President Bush, May 24, was about
establishing a viable government in Iraq-- as the aim of the Federalist
Papers was to get support for a viable federal/national government
here, in 1787, with ratification of the then-proposed constitution
drafted in Philadelphia, the spring and summer of 1787. (We did
that drafting by ourselves, though, didn't we?)
Perhaps, however,
No. 51 was primarily concerned about accumulation of too much power
in a single office, and of protecting "the society against
the oppression of its rulers," and also guarding against injustice
of one part of society on another part.
The quotes used
by Will appear in No. 51 in the following paragraph:
"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 necesssary constitutional means and personal
motives to resist encroachments of the others. The provision for
defence 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 of 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."
No. 51 goes on
to note, among other things: "In republican government, the
legislative authority necessarily predominates." What would
Madison have to say about a predominating presidency, today?
As this writer
reads No. 51, Madison's aim was shielding the people from oppression--
at the hands of government and at the hands of powerful elements
in society. "In a free government the security for civil rights
must be the same as that for religious rights. "This statement
appears in the concluding passage of No. 51 which, a bit further
on, observes: "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."
The aim, it seems,
in No. 51, is liberty-- with viable government the means, recognizing
the need of the people to be vigilant against threats upon their
liberty at the hands of others in society-- and government. Madison,
in No. 51, saw "security" dependent on "the number
of interests and sects... and number of people comprehended under...
a government which will protect all parties, the weaker as well
as the more powerful." No. 51 also notes, in the concluding
passage, "In the extended republic of the United States, and
among the great variety of interests, parties, and sects which
it embraces, a coalition of a majority of the whole society could
seldom take place on any other principles than those of justice
and the general good..."
Okay. Can this
happen in Iraq? Is this desired by the people of Iraq? Should Federalist
51 be translated and distributed throughout Iraq?
*
* *
LPR did not catch
all of Ralph Nader's appearance on ABC's "This Week with George
Stephanopoulos," May 23, but it did hear some comments that
appeared somewhat testy towards the Government of Israel. LPR does
not recall if Al Gore, in the 2000 race challenged Nader's coolness
towards Israel. Indeed, had Nader participated in the debates and
been challenged to state his views on Israel, might Al Gore have
gotten more votes in Florida?
LPR wonders what
Senator John F. Kerry has to say about Ralph Nader's apparent view
that we distance ourselves from Israel.
|
|