Compare And Contrast A Large Republic Vs Small Republic

Throughout our country’s history, there have been many debates about how our government should be run and set up. One of the biggest debates was whether or not a large republic was better or worse than a small republic and vice-versa. This argument occurred when the new constitution came into play and the debate circulated around the federalists and the antifederalists. The antifederalists wanted a republic where the citizens or the people being ruled were able to check and view closely the small republic with its small amount of enumerated powers. They saw this as the best way to keep liberty. The federalists saw this the opposite way and wanted the large republic and felt that a large republic was the true way to protect liberty. The important

According to Madison, each of the governments branches should be independent of each other. The constitution is what implements this government which involves this separation of powers (Madison 1). This separation of powers and the system of checks and balances that will be imposed with a large republic will prevent any branch of the government from going too far in one direction without being checked. However, according to the constitution, these powers aren’t divided completely evenly. Within this separation, the legislative branch is what is the most powerful. In a large republic, the weaker parts of government are strengthened and the stronger parts of the government are weakened. Due to the fact of the legislative branch inherently being the most powerful, the Constitution imposed this branch being separated to the Senate and the House of Representatives with each separation having different criteria. These branches are also separated from each other because they all have different election methods. The executive branch has its elections differently from that of the legislative branch which includes the Senate and House of Representatives. The judicial branch and the Supreme Court are also

This is seen through the arguments made in Brutus which supported the anti-federalist view on government. Brutus supported the state’s rights that were seen in the Articles of Confederation. Because of this, Brutus had the anti-federalist mindset and therefore saw that the Articles of Confederation didn’t need much change to it. Having a good government only required having good-hearted people according to Brutus. However, Madison shut this idea down. People are inherently bad and therefore, relying on the fact of people being good won’t go anywhere. Individuals would naturally try to abuse the power given to them. Simply trusting in the good of people would cause the government to fall. Brutus then adds how this government which would be a large republic would result in the government having uncontrollable power. This power will in turn destroy the liberties of the people being ruled. According to Brutus, “This government is to possess absolute and uncontrollable power, legislative, executive and judicial, with respect to every object to which it extends” (2). Again, Madison and his explanation of large republics and federalism took down this argument of Brutus. The government of a large republic wouldn’t be uncontrollable due to the fact that a smart system of checks and balances and a separation of powers