I have a strong hunch that students don't appreciate Federalist 10 as much as I do, and that reading through the thing is a mundane exercise, but I think its important that you read at least one of the Federalist Papers all the way through at some point in your life. We will do the same for 51 soon enough as well as touch on the arguments in a handful of others.
Remember that this section introduces us to the first of the principles embedded within the original Constitution - republicanism - which refers to the fact that we are an indirect democracy. While the people retain sovereignty, their influence lies in having influence over who holds positions in a variety of governing institutions, specifically Congress, the presidency and the courts. James Madison argues that this arrangement allows both for retaining the principles of self government and for providing the stability necessary for maintaining the republic. This, he argues, is an improvement over previous constitutional arrangements.
As we read through the document I want you to note Madison's assessment of human nature and how he claims the constitutional design compensates for it. It is in our nature to form into groups that promote our understanding of our self interest. It is also in our nature to come into conflict with each other. We create groups in order to pursue our self interest at the expense of that of others. It's not a rosy picture, but it becomes useful one because it allows him to argue that a large republic prevents a tyrannical majority to control the government. Its an interesting approach because instead of arguing that people can be made better, it assumes human nature is a constant, but that this allows for its use to achieve an important objective.
I'll throw out a few other comments about this paper later, as well as the others that will be used to illustrate central principles within the document, but here is a link to past stories I thought illustrate Madison's argument. It might help with class discussion, especially whether Madison's beliefs about the formations of groups are in fact accurate. Mutual interests do not always lead to the creation of equally powerful groups.
