Question

by what means is this object attainable? evidently by one of two only.
from this view of the subject it may be concluded that a pure democracy, by which i mean a society consisting of a small number of citizens, who assemble and administer the government in person, can admit of no cure for the mischiefs of faction. a common passion or interest will, in almost every case, be felt by a majority of the whole; a communication and concert results from the form of government itself; and there is nothing to check the inducements to sacrifice the weaker party or an obnoxious individual. hence it is that such democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property; and have in general been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths.
what form of government does madison describe?
what will the majority faction normally do in this form of government?
has this form of government been successful? yes or no
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 union.
which forms of government is madison going to compare and contrast?
the two great points of difference between a democracy and a republic are: first, the delegation size of the government, in the latter republic, to a small number of citizens elected by the rest; secondly, the greater number of citizens and greater sphere of country over which the latter republic may be extended.
what are 2 positive things about a republic?
a)

Explanation:

• For the first question, the text clearly states "a pure democracy, by which I mean a society consisting of a small number of citizens, who assemble and administer the government in person".
• For the second question, it says "a common passion or interest will, in almost every case, be felt by a majority of the whole; a communication and concert results from the form of government itself; and there is nothing to check the inducements to sacrifice the weaker party or an obnoxious individual".
• For the third question, the text mentions "such democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property; and have in general been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths", so the answer is No.
• For the fourth question, the text says "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 Union" and later compares democracy and republic.
• For the fifth question, the text states "first, the delegation [size] of the government, in the latter [republic], to a small number of citizens elected by the rest; secondly, the greater number of citizens and greater sphere of country over which the latter [republic] may be extended".

Answer:

• What form of government does Madison describe? A pure democracy.
• What will the majority faction normally do in this form of government? Sacrifice the weaker party or an obnoxious individual.
• Has this form of government been successful? No.
• Which forms of government is Madison going to compare and contrast? Democracy and republic.
• What are 2 positive things about a republic?
• Delegation of the government to a small number of citizens elected by the rest.
• Greater number of citizens and greater sphere of country over which it may be extended.