Bio not provided
further, the current federal govt is doing exactly as its creators wanted--it has decreased democracy and preserved (and even increased) wealth inequality by removing the people from the process of governance. That is exactly what has happened, and the larger and more centralized the fed govt becomes, the more it becomes what Madison et al, visualized. The govt is not further from what Madison et al wanted, but instead it is getting closer. As the nation grows larger and more diverse, it is becoming more factionalized, which decreases democracy, which is exactly what they wanted.
2 years, 7 months ago on Traitors to the American Revolution
ok, allow me to elaborate. The PROBLEM madison et al wanted to solve was what they called "an excess of democracy," to quote founding "father" Elbridge Gerry. Under the Articles, the working class was taking control of their own government by using democracy. The rich people like madison, washington etc etc, did not like all that democracy. So they implemented a COUP, a takeover. That coup was accomplished by installing our current federal govt.
How they controlled america was explained by Madison in the federal papers and in a letter to jefferson. Madison wrote jefferson that the way to rule america was via the 'divide et impera' maxim--divide and rule.
In the federalist papers, madison wrote that the way to do this was to decrease the unity of the voters. Madison said that his system would prevent the voters from uniting and discovering their common interest. Madison wrote that his primary goal was to preserve wealth inequality. Madison wrote that he would do this by creating larger voting districts, federal voting districts. Madison wrote that these enlarged federal districts would create more factions in each district, thus preventing the people from uniting and using the govt against the rich people. Madison wrote that this new federal govt, with its enlarged voting districts, its checks and balances, its seperation of powers, etc would "protect the minority of the opulent against the majority."
I suuuure hope that was clear enough for you.