On factionalism

James Madison, 4th President of the United States

Today's sermon shall be preached from Federalist No. 10. 

A short summary from Wikipedia:

No. 10 addresses how to reconcile citizens with interests contrary to the rights of others or inimical to the interests of the community as a whole. Madison saw factions as inevitable due to the nature of man—that is, as long as people hold differing opinions, have differing amounts of wealth and own differing amounts of property, they will continue to form alliances with people who are most similar to them and they will sometimes work against the public interest and infringe upon the rights of others. He thus questions how to guard against those dangers.

This essay was inspired by a conversation I saw on the blog yesterday. Our Anon posted this question that she had seen online:

OK, I have a random question

What is one thing you have learned about government since DT took office that you wish could still be so inside baseball that you didn’t have to know it

And you can’t say the Jan six vote certification that’s too easy

And Darksnark responded:

For me, the complete uselessness of the impeachment process was a depressing eye-opener.

Which, of course, got me to thinking about Federalist No. 10, and the general fear that the Founders had about "factionalism".

These fears were well-founded. 

Human beings, in general, value their most-immediate kin-group first. Then their "circle of trust" expands outward. But, let's be frank: that circle of trust doesn't expand, in general, to include "humanity" in the abstract. 

This is something I saw on Bluesky yesterday:

(Sidenote: There is another good reason to look side-eye at this poem. For more, read here.)

I would say that the majority of human beings don't dwell too much on oppression until it affects them personally. Therefor, the idea that factions would form in a Republic, and focus solely on their own goals rather than the larger commonwealth is borne out by reality.

The Founders saw the three branches of government as being in eternal tension, so that neither of them would accrue too much power. But that was a pipe dream. The American revolutionaries descended from the British political system, which had a political party system of long standing. The idea that this new country would escape that factionalism was a chimera.

A party which holds the reins of power both in the executive and legislative can behave any way it wants. The Founders hoped that men—and yes, it was only men at that time—of virtue would see beyond this rank factionalism. To the extent that this held, it held only during the administration of the first president. After that, the competition between three branches on which the Founders pinned their hopes evaporated in the bitter conflicts between John Adams' Federalists and Thomas Jefferson's Democratic-Republicans. We can see the troubles we have germinate in that initial conflict.

The Founders saw impeachment and conviction as the legislature's brake against executive overreach. But it has been anything but. 

The first impeachment was against Andrew Johnson, Abraham Lincoln's slave-holder-loving vice president who ascended to office after his president's assassination. He was impeached, but exonerated in the Senate by one vote. That would set the precedent for future impeachments. 

After Johnson, we had Bill Clinton, impeached out of Republican desires to seek vengeance after Richard Nixon was forced to resign upon threat of being removed from office. I wish Tricky Dick had dug in his heels and had been impeached and removed to send a salutary lesson to future presidents. But he wasn't, and with Bill Clinton the Republicans debased the solemnity of the impeachment process for score settling.

And then, of course, we have Donald Trump.

Twice he was impeached. And twice he wasn't convicted by the Senate out of purely partisan politics. His second impeachment should have been a foregone conclusion after his attempted putsch. But the factionalism which the Founders feared was fully in effect for that second trial. Senate Republicans should have honored their oaths to the Constitution. Instead, they honored their subservience to a putative dictator, and their own future political careers.

And, of course, the judiciary is an adjunct of both executive and legislative. The idea that it is beyond partisan concerns is laughable, when it is chosen solely upon partisan lines. When the partisans respect the Constitution, it's not a problem. When they don't, as now, well...

I'm not saying to excise political parties. That is impossible, and unconstitutional. But there is no denying that our system is broken, because one party, relying on a minority, has become nothing but a handmaiden to dictatorship. Legislators who should be guarding their own prerogatives are instead genuflecting to their authoritarian leader. They are throwing their own voters to the wolves, and, fitfully, those voters are noticing. Yet, they continue in their course. This isn't merely out of a fear of the leader's mob. This must be nothing other than they agree with the leader. 

The sad fact is that the founders tried to proof our system of rule against what we are living through now, and obviously failed. And I wish I had an easy solution. But we cannot find a solution without naming the problem. One of our political parties has devolved to being inimical to our freedoms. How we solve this problem is the work of a generation.

Postscript: Canada

I do want to address the election results in Canada.

The Liberal Party, which had been given up for dead only two months ago, stormed to a victory in Monday's elections.

However, Liberals did not secure an outright majority. They will, again, govern as a minority government.

One would think that Donald Trump's threats to Canada's sovereignty would have caused a groundswell of support for Liberals. And it did, to a degree. But too many still voted for the Tories, a party which would have negotiated Canada's annexation. And, again, too many still voted for third party spoilers. Because let's be clear: the New Democratic Party and Bloc Quebecois are spoilers. Liberals could have been in a much stronger position had those parties not been running.

Factionalism and tribalism are ideologies which will doom the West. We must recognize the enemies to domestic peace, and combat them. This is no time for purity politics. Our Western democratic values are under assault from within and without. And why? Because they bring the most good to the most people, and actors both internal and external see that as a threat. Those who want to rule in place of the liberal democratic order which the United States built after the Second World War want to demolish it. Canada scored a victory for that order. But it wasn't a clear-cut one. If you value your freedoms and rights, there's only one way to vote.