March 20, 2012 at 6:39 am, by Carl

James Madison is considered by most historians to me the finest constitutional mind of all the Founding Brothers. Certainly he stands equal to John Adams in that respect, and so it is no surprise to see the “Father of the Constitution” eagerly defending it.  As you may remember from your history studies, the effort to change our government was met with strong opposition.  From one point of view, Madison et al were really committing treason in their efforts; men like Patrick Henry and Sam Adams certainly saw it that way.

 

So, when the Constitution went forward to be ratified, it was not done easily.  Thus, in Virginia, Madison took the lead in defending their actions, working to get the new government ratified by Virginia.  During the debates, Patrick Henry was among the loudest proclaiming that the new document was fraught with peril, putting far too much power into the hands of a central government.  During the debates, Henry suggested that it would endanger the public liberty.  Read Madison’s eloquent defense:

 

Since the general civilization of mankind, I believe there are more instances of the abridgment of the freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments of those in power, than by violent and sudden usurpations; but, on a candid examination of history, we shall find that turbulence, violence, and abuse of power, by the majority trampling on the rights of the minority, have produced factions and commotions, which, in republics, have, more frequently than any other cause, produced despotism. If we go over the whole history of ancient and modern republics, we shall find their destruction to have generally resulted from those causes. 

Madison’s point is that certainly in history, power corrupts and through the corruption of the leaders, the people do suffer.  BUT, note how he says corruption happens.  It does not come from too much wealth.  It does not come from too much power in the hands of too few people.   Rather, it comes from “the majority trampling on the rights of the minority” and through that, “ factions and commotions” arise to cause despotism.

 

In other words, if the majority are allowed to run unchecked, that “Democracy” will lead to quashing the rights of the minority.   Worse, as the majority argues and complains, factions (what they called the idea of political parties) would merely work to stir up commotion.

 

Madison’s solution was to be found in his document, the Constitution he helped frame.  Within it, he argued, both the majority and the minority (and here, he isn’t necessarily referring to race, but the minority viewpoint on any issue) will be protected.  He told the Virginians, “it will appear that the only possible remedy for those evils, and means of preserving and protecting the principles of republicanism, will be found in that very system which is now exclaimed against as the parent of oppression.”   The “only remedy” is “that very system,” the new Constitution, which is being attacked by men like Sam Adams and Patrick Henry as “the parent of oppression.”

 

So, what does this mean for us in 2012?  First, it clearly is an argument to RETURN to Madison’s view of the Constitution.  A great example of how we have abandoned his view is how we treat the Senate.  In Madison’s view, the Senate was to be the voice of the state as an entity, almost like foreign ambassadors, removed largely from the direct vote of the people in order for the Senators to be able to protect the minority, even if the minority on an issue were the wealthy or the landowners.  Look at his statement the year previous, in 1786, about the Senate:

 

Landholders ought to have a share in the government, to support these invaluable interests, and to balance and check the other. They ought to be so constituted as to protect the minority of the opulent against the majority. The senate, therefore, ought to be this body; and to answer these purposes, they ought to have permanency and stability.

Today we find that sense of “turbulence, violence, and abuse of power” that Madison warned of.  We must take his warning seriously; we have already drifted too close toward a democracy.  It is time to move back towards the government that Madison proposed.