Men often oppose a thing, merely because they have had no agency in planning it, or because it may have been planned by those whom they dislike
This quote displays human nature. People won’t always make the best decision for the collective group.
13 Matching Annotations
- Dec 2020
-
guides.loc.gov guides.loc.gov
-
-
Of the first, the two Consuls of Rome may serve as an example
I find it interesting that Ancient Rome is used as an example. It is strange to think that we both look back on the same people and still today have a lot to learn.
-
Wherever two or more persons are engaged in any common enterprise or pursuit, there is always danger of difference of opinion
The danger of difference of opinion is prevalent when multiple people are at the same level of power. This ultimately causes more harm then good when working out a solution.
-
This unity may be destroyed in two ways: either by vesting the power in two or more magistrates of equal dignity and authority; or by vesting it ostensibly in one man, subject, in whole or in part, to the control and co-operation of others, in the capacity of counsellors to him
Having two people at the same position of power in executive government would creat internal turmoil. It is possible for people to agree but ultimately it would cause strife. As such having all the power invested into one person with no checks or balances is sure to fail as well.
-
a due dependence on the people, secondly, a due responsibility.
These two focuses show the basic requirements for having a reliable and secure system of governing.
-
-
resources.utulsa.edu resources.utulsa.edu
-
should want the virtues of General Washington
George Washington was viewed as a role model with virtuous and respectable qualities. We see this carried over today.
-
but our president will have the power of making all the great men, which comes to the same thing.
This shows a difference in terminology but ultimately having the same thing or effect.
-
Whether they are prepared to receive a king? If they are, to say so at once, and make the kingly office hereditary; to frame a constitution that should set bounds to his power, and, as far as possible, secure the liberty of the subject.
It’s strange to think of the president as a king and to even compare the two.
-
All the difference is, that we shall be embroiled in contention about the choice of the man, while they are at peace under the security of an hereditary succession.
I agree that if you are to follow a system of succession with an elective process that you need to recognize the pros and cons.
-
Antifederalist No. 70.... In the first place the office of president of the United States appears to me to be clothed with such powers as are dangerous.
It’s interesting to see acknowledgement of the power of the position and to keep that in mind.
-
-
resources.utulsa.edu resources.utulsa.edu
-
A man who must, at all events, thus leave his office, will have but few or no temptations to fill its dependent offices with his tools, or any particular set of men; whereas the man constantly looking forward to his future elections, and perhaps, to the aggrandizement of his family, will have every inducement before him to fill all places with his own props and dependents
This quote interests me due to the recent talks of filling the Supreme Court chair. I think it is an important aspect of having a set term.
-
In the latter case, we actually tempt them to disturb the state, to foment struggles and contests, by laying before them the flattering prospect of gaining much without risking anything.
I agree that this system has its flaws. The security provided to one group would sway decision making.
-
The convention, it seems, first agreed that the president should be chosen for seven years, and never after to be eligible. Whether seven years is a period too long or not, is rather a matter of opinion; but clear it is, that this mode is infinitely preferable to the one finally adopted. When a man shall get the chair, who may be reelected from time to time, for life, his greatest object will be to keep it; to gain friends and votes, at any rate; to associate some favorite son with himself, to take office after him
It seems as if a general consensus was reached to not have a leader in power for an extended amount of time. I agree that there should be a limit to how much one person can serve.
-