Introduction Johannes Althusius, , is known for his political philosophy from his book Politica Methodice Digesta (1604) Not so many have studied his work, however those who did went as far as to refer to him as the father of modern federalism, or , as in the words of E.S. Woldring: “One of the founding fathers of the liberal constitutional state.. and a pioneer of constitutional political economy..,as well as.. relevant for law and economic research (Woldring, 1998;132)” My Central thesis revolves around if Althusian thought can be applied in politics today. To find anwsers, I First will exract from specific texts written by Henk E.S. Woldring (1998) and Paul Wells (2006), a number of important ideas by Althusius. This will provide a general idea of some revolutionary points made by Him. Then, finally, I will explain through their work how these ideas can or can not be applied in the postmodern world. Although both regarded Althusius as one with a brilliant idea when it comes to his political theory, they do differ in focus on his work. …show more content…
The first is that every individual participant should contribute to the production of goods that are considered either useful or neccesary for the benefit of the self as well as the whole association of which he or she is part. The second characteristic is that all respective associations assist each other through different occupations and various services or labours to improve and preserve harmonious social living. The third characteristic that all associations share in common is that when united, a community of law is formed in which the life of participants is organised through each’s respective just laws. This implies that the legal competence of an association should not be extended imperialistically over other communities as all associations have their own particular governors and inferiors. (Woldring p
He had always been a strong supporter of states’ rights and a major critic of Federalist policies. Clearly, reaching into his early political career of being president in 1801, he seemed to have instituted a couple of hypocritical
Prior to the ratification of the United States Constitution, a series of eighty-five essays, later compiled and published as The Federalist Papers, were written under the joint pseudonym “Publius” by Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay. In these essays, the three men expressed support for ratification by explaining the meaning and virtues of the Constitution (Brinkley, 139). Although, it did not receive such fame until the early twentieth-century, Madison’s Federalist No. 10 has since been regarded as one of the more prominent Federalist papers (Adair, 48). In it, Madison presents the argument that the new republican government under the Constitution would be better able to deal with the problems that arise from factions. This paper
Legislative and judicial decisions are the results of faction, as the decisions made affect “the rights of large bodies of citizens”. Justice would balance the views of each side, “and the most numerous party… or… the most powerful faction must be expected to prevail”. Madison stated that a single, uniform party in power will adopt legislation that benefited the class that party represented, but allowing more parties and therefore more people to participate makes the legislative process more democratic and less like a monarchical form of government. The thesis is extended: “The inference to which we are brought is, that the CAUSES of faction cannot be removed, and that relief is only to be sought in the means of controlling its EFFECTS”. It is the goal of government to then limit the extent to which factions influence politics through partisanship, so as “to preserve the spirit and the form of popular government”.
Numerous thoughts were proposed amid the drafting of the constitution however maybe none as vital as that of balanced governance. This thought is exemplified in James Madison's The Federalist. He additionally does this by demonstrating that the legislature must have fundamental measures to control itself. Both of the thoughts he bolsters in his paper show that he was an extraordinary supporter of the endorsement of
We see this here that Madison eases the concerns of the Anti-Federalists and persuades the Federalist by stating “A republic, by which I mean a government in which the scheme of representation takes place, opens a different prospect, and promises the cure for which we are seeking. Let us examine the points in which it varies from pure democracy, and we shall comprehend both the nature of the cure and the efficacy which it must derive from the