What Are The Arguments Against The Ratification Of The Constitution

The ratification of the Constitution can be said to be birthed out of necessity, therefore, not out of an earnest desire to create a federal system of government. The political discussion of that time is ironically, similar to the discussions of modern American society. How much is too much power? Is the government overreaching? Is the government doing enough to protect the vulnerable? James Madison, through his words, was able to articulate the dangers of not adopting the ratification of the Constitution, as well as emphasize the value of adopting the ratification of the Constitution. His writings in the Federalist Papers, served as a catalyst for changing the minds of many people during the Constitution’s ratification process (The Learning House, Inc., 2009). In 1787, James Madison argued that the adoption of a Constitution was necessary in order to protect individuals from, “factions”; whose interest may impede on the freedoms of minorities. In Federalist Paper (10), James clearly articulated that development and the dangers of factions. He also stated that; “The inference to which we are brought is, that the CAUSES of faction cannot be removed, and that the relief is only to be sought in the means of controlling its EFFECTS.” (Madison, 1787) James’ keen observation of group dynamics and its ability to impact those in the minority without
Sometimes knowingly, and other times only as a result of them seeking their own interest first. “Faction” groups in modern America include, but are not limited to religious groups, environmental groups, the NRA, Unions, technology firms, and even business leaders. While, James focused on the size of factions, in modern American society, a group’s access to cash is a powerful tool in wielding power, as well. James advocated for creating a government that had the ability to help “control” the influence and impact of