The Federalist Papers essays

The Federalist Papers essays In The Federalist Papers, James Madison, Alexander Hamilton, and John Jay argue in support of the Constitution. One of the more influential articles is Federalist 51 by Madison. In the article Madison discusses the separation of powers and the theory of checks and balances. He contends, If men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary. In stating this, Madison says that men are not angels and are therefore subject to wrongdoing and poor decision making. He continues to say that because men are governed by other men there must be controls on government. Madisons assertion can be summed up; since we are a nation governed by other men, internal and external controls must exist to prevent leaders from making improper and inadequate decisions. Madisons assertion refers to the concepts of federalism, separation of powers, and checks and balances. Federalism is the division of power between a central government and regional units. The Constitution divides power between the states and a central government, but it put more power with the national government at the expense of the states. According to the Constitution, the powers given to national and state governments are derived from the people, who are the ultimate sovereigns. The two governments can regulate the people and property within their jurisdiction, but the people can also restrain both national and state governments if necessary to preserve liberty. The principle of federalism exemplifies Madisons belief that internal and external controls must exist toward the government. The ability of the people to restrain the use of power by the national and state governments represents the controls that Madison described. The principle of separation of powers also represents Madisons view on the role of government in the ...

Insidious vs. Invidious

Insidious vs. Invidious â€Å"Insidious† vs. â€Å"Invidious† â€Å"Insidious† vs. â€Å"Invidious† By Mark Nichol What’s the difference between insidious and invidious, and what about perfidious and pernicious, for that matter? None of the four words is synonymous with any of the others, though your connotation radar may correctly sense that they all have unpleasant associations. Insidious, which derives from the Latin word for â€Å"ambush† (the second syllable is cognate with sit), means â€Å"treacherous† or â€Å"seductive,† with an additional connotation of â€Å"subtle,† in the sense of a gradual, cumulative effect. (This, unlike the other meanings, is neutral, but the word is rarely used except in a negative sense.) For example, in medical terminology, an insidious disease is one that remains hidden until it is well established. The noun form is insidiousness, and the adverbial form is insidiously. Invidious, meanwhile, which stems from the Latin word for envy, refers to feelings of animosity, discontent, or resentment, or to obnoxious or even harmful behavior. Perfidious (the second syllable of this word is cognate with fid- in fidelity) means â€Å"treacherous† or â€Å"disloyal†; the noun form is perfidy. Pernicious, meanwhile, means deadly. (The second syllable is cognate with nox- in noxious.) Pernicious anemia is a particularly serious form of blood-cell depletion that might as well be called insidious anemia because of its slow onset, and pernicious scale, also known as San Jose scale (for its discovery in the California city of that name), is an insect that infests and kills trees. The noun and adverbial forms of invidious, perfidious, and pernicious follow the same pattern as those for insidious. Want to improve your English in five minutes a day? Get a subscription and start receiving our writing tips and exercises daily! Keep learning! Browse the Misused Words category, check our popular posts, or choose a related post below:10 Grammar Mistakes You Should AvoidWhen to Form a Plural with an ApostropheCapitalizing Titles of People and Groups