Paper9

Summary:

Federalist Paper number 9 is describing how the new government would be run. It describes the type of government, a Republic, and how it works. It is stated in the paper that the past Republics in Ancient Greece and Italy were failures, that they didn’t work. Although it is stated that past ones were failures, the author of this paper said they were starting points for the Constitution, and that this Constitution would be the starting point for other countries making a new type of government. He also states that the new system of government would have a system of “checks and balances” and a “separation of powers” so one branch of government wasn’t stronger or abusing their power. This was to prevent tyranny and to protect the rights of man. The author also states that people misinterpreted Montesquieu’s theory of an area being too large for a Republic. The author compares the states to the planets of the solar system. He says that the National Government would keep the states in order, and would be their source of life, while the planets need the sun in order for survival. This whole paper was all on how the Republic would not fail and the different examples on how it wouldn’t, such as the checks and balances.

Main Objective:

Publius’ main objective in Federalist Paper number 9 was to convince the people of New York that the Republic is a safe bet. The Republic they would create wouldn’t have the same flaws most other governments have, and it wouldn’t fail like Greece and Italy’s did. He explains that those two governments were starting points for the Constitution, and that this time it would succeed. Publius wants to get New York to agree to this because it would separate the New England region from the rest of the states if New York didn’t agree. So Publius is trying to state how New York would fail just like a planet would without the sun.

Strongest Arguments:

One of the strongest arguments made by Publius in Federalist Paper number 9 is the analogy he made of states and the planets in the solar system. He states how without the sun, a greater force, the planets wouldn’t have anything to give them life for survival. For the states, if they didn’t have a national government, there would be no order, protection, and basically no survival if there was a war. Another strong argument Publius made is the strength of the Republic. He states that the past two popular Republics are stepping stones for theirs, and that political science has vastly improved since their time, making the Republic a valuable choice for the United States.

Opposing Arguments of Anti-Federalists:

Anti-Federalists believed that the Constitution wouldn’t work. One of the reasons they stated why it wouldn’t was the immense size of the States and the diverse population. They believed a Republic would fail with the enormous size of the States and that it was pointless to even try it. Publius believed that wasn’t true. He believed that it doesn’t matter the size of the country, that a Republic could succeed under the right circumstances. He believed the system of checks and balances would keep the threat of a tyranny hidden away, and that a Federal Government controlled indirectly by the people would be the most successful. By stating how the Anti-Federalists misinterpreted Montesquieu’s theory and that it isn’t impossible to create a Republic with a large area.

Validity of Arguments Presented by Publius:

The validity of the arguments being made in this paper can be seen as valid, but with a few flaws. People can agree with the fact that if the states don’t come together as one, they will not be able to prosper into successful states. The analogy made between the states and the national government and the planets and the solar system can be considered valid as well. If there isn’t a stronger force helping the states survive, they won’t be able to live very long. Meanwhile, the argument about misinterpreting Montesquieu’s theory can be considered invalid. The Federalists could have been stating their point of view of his theory, which may not have been true. Therefore, their mentioning of his theory can be considered a flaw.

Argument Exists Today:

In the United States, there is no argument over this Federalist Paper. The Republic still stands after over 200 years, and is as strong as ever. The arguments made in this paper were very accurate with how a Republic would succeed and how it would be used as a stepping stone for other countries in the future. In America, the Republic still stands, and there hasn’t been any major conflicts over it. The system of checks and balances is working to perfection, and there isn’t a branch stronger than the other. So this Federalist Paper has no arguments that still exist today over a Republic unable to rule such a large territory.