the community” rather than merely bynpower, including majorities that mightnbase their rule on power rather thannright.nPublius has been given sufficientncredit for the “new science of politics”nthat he developed following the guidancenof David Hume. In passages thatnhave commonly been cited as examplesnof political physics, Publius showed thenmethod of separating powers betweennthe branches of the legislature (andnWills is especially good in emphasizingnthe primacy of the legislature in thengovernment defended by Publius) andnof dividing the society itself into a multitudenof kinds of property. Once the societynitself was sufficiently fragmented,none could balance, by appropriate combinationsnof duties and interests amongnofficials, any insufficiency of decent motivesnamong the people themselves.nLegislators would not merely reflect thenopinions of average citizens; they wouldnserve as filters, intended to “refine andnenlarge the public views.” With appropriatenpeople in office (those who adherednto the true principles of our Revolution),nwe could sustain the democraticnform as well as safeguard the libertiesnthat good government is intended tonsecure.nThe size of the republic was crucialnat two critical points in the theory. Ifnthe republic was sufficiently large, andnthe forms of interests within it sufficientlyndiverse, it was believed unlikelynthat any common impulse of passion ornof interest would cultivate in the peoplenan urge to violate the natural rights ofncitizens. Some region of the countrynmight be infected with this base passion,nbut it need not captivate the people asna whole. Majorities could thus providenthe checks on vicious impulses throughnthe routine operations of democraticnprocedures. The people would have tonsafeguard their own liberties, but theynwould not be at the mercy of overbearingn(and fleeting) majorities when theyntried to do so.nThe second crucial factor arguingnfor the large over the small republicnSOinChronicles of Cultureninvolved considerations of internationalnaffairs. Much of The Federalist’s directndiscussion of international affairs isnconfined to the less-than-popular papersnattributed to John Jay, but the othernwielders of Publius’s pen discussed thesenmatters frequently in the course ofntreating other topics. The essence ofnthe teaching of The Federalist in theninternational arena is that bigger isnbetter. Large nations have more resourcesnwith which to enrich themselves,nhence to engage in commerce.nThey are also more likely to build thenkind of unity that will deter assaultsnfrom other nations. Because a commercialnnation of substantial size is likelynto have far-flung interests, it will havengreater need to develop the capacity tonprotect those interests, hence it will developnthe deterrent that will make it anless inviting target for any potentialnassailants. Plato had argued in ThenLaws that the good city will be ruled bynbad cities, at least to the extent thatnthe good city must prepare to defend itselfnagainst the vicious tendencies of itsnless virtuous neighbors. The large republicnoffered a means of protectingnoneself against small and viciousnneighbors.nWills is excellent in treating thendiscussion of the character of the peoplenassumed by Publius, and he offersna needed corrective to those who be-nIn the forthcoming issue of Chronicles of Culture:nBooks and the Youthful Mindn”The major writers of our century have had a deep sensenof things falling apart: Eliot, Yeats, Pound, Faulkner,nHemingway, Fitzgerald. Having that perception during thenmodern period is itself part of the definition of a majornwriter. For the past one hundred years writers have beennrepelled by secular modernism and its celebration of thenEmpiric Economic Man, The Individual let loose. To holdnfirmly to a sense of the real, writers were forced to be,nconsciously or otherwise, antiprogressive, antiliberal,neven reactionary. Lionel Trilling, who held impeccablenliberal credentials, wrote … ‘liberal ideology has producedna large literature of social and political protest, but not,nfor several decades, a single writer who commands our realnliterary admiration … no literary figure of the very firstnrank … who, in his work, makes use of or gives credence tonliberal or radical ideas.’ “n—from “Snobbery as Spiritual Riches”nby Joseph SchwartznAlso:nOpinions & Views—Commendables—In FocusnWaste of Money—PerceptiblesnThe American Proscenium —Stage—Screen—ArtnMusic—Correspondence—Liberal CulturenJournalismnnn