Paper3

Jonathan Franco Mr. Nolan Pd. 9

__Summary of Paper__ Federalist Paper 3 is centered on the idea that the Constitution is essential in making the United States a commanding force and to defend the people in the case of a foreign attack. In his opening, John Jay argues that the best government for the people is a national government - one that has all the powers needed to govern over the States. Jay says, and repeats, that the safety of the people is the most important ideal to uphold. He claims that the number of wars throughout history will always be in relation to the number of “just causes.” Therefore, a Union will preserve the country’s state of peace, as it will limit the number of causes for war. The “just causes” mentioned above generally arise, according to Jay, from violations of treaties or violence, leading him further to believe that in order to maintain such peace with other governments, one national government must be formed. A united government has an opportunity to gather the “best men of the country” for a universal cause. Because of this gathering, the branches of government’s decisions would be more sensible and produce a safer environment in the sense of foreign affairs. The fact that there will be one national government will eliminate the differing executions of the law in different states. As one nation, treaties will be made according to the states as a whole, as opposed to certain states differing from the general consensus of what to do. He sums up his argument by stating that the national government will offer less just causes for war and will be more capable of settling such disputes. __Main Objective__  Publius, or in this case John Jay, had one main idea in mind when writing this essay: to explain the reasoning behind the need for a national government. He means to convey the message that in order to help avoid war and keep peace among the Union and foreign nations, the states must unite as one in the form of a national government.

__Strongest Arguments__  The main argument used in order to support the meaning of the essay is the example given. John Jay shows that there have been no Indian wars waged by the national government, however many wars have been provoked by the States. These wars led to the killing of many innocent people. Also, similar to this, he ends the essay with an example of something similar to his hopes for the States. Lastly, when he states the idea that the “just causes” will be severely reduced with a national government, he almost sums up his case, while also relating to the wants of the people.

__Opposing Arguments of Anti-Federalists Being Countered__  The Anti-Federalists were afraid of the national government gaining too much power. They believed, in a general sense, that such a strong and powerful central government would resemble the previous aristocracy from Britain. Therefore, they favored the idea of separating power among the states. However, in order to counter this argument of the Anti-Federalists, this essay talk all about how important it is to centralize the power of the United States, and create one national government. John Jay seems to make a valid and convincing argument in favor of the national government.

__Validity__  John Jay’s argument in this essay is very convincing. It is applicable to the country as a whole as it explains the advantages to certain aspects of the government. There are not many flaws in the essay as it simply presents the reasoning that a national government will provide more for the general welfare and well-being of the people of the United States. He further validates his arguments by citing specific examples showing how separate states can differ greatly in opinion, sometimes leading to widespread slaughter and war, while a national government would help eliminate such differences among the country.

__Relation to Today__  After September 11th, New York citizens felt violated and unsafe. They were scared of what to do and what could happen. If we had separate state governments, New York specifically could have reacted too harshly, making mistakes that could have had a lasting affect. However, because we have one national government, we were able to wait and think the situation through clearly. We therefore were able to decide on a rational reaction to the catastrophe because the majority of the members of the government weren’t personally affected created, eliminating any bias.