Final answer:
In Federalist No. 10, Madison argues that a large republic controls factions by having diverse interests that prevent dominance by any single faction, whereas Brutus No. 1 advocates for a small republic, suggesting that a strong central government threatens personal liberty and is too removed from citizens' needs.
Step-by-step explanation:
Comparison of Federalist No. 10 and Brutus No. 1 Views
The authors of Federalist No. 10 and Brutus No. 1 offer contrasting views on the size and scope of the republic. James Madison, in Federalist No. 10, argues that a large republic will control factions by pitting them against each other, suggesting that the diverse interests of a vast nation will prevent any single faction from dominating. On the contrary, Brutus No. 1, a prominent Anti-Federalist writing, emphasizes that only a small republic can truly serve citizens' needs and that a large republic endangers personal liberties by being too far removed from the citizens' concerns.
Madison expounds that factions are inevitable, but in a large republic such as the one proposed by the Constitution, they would be so varied and numerous that no single faction could gain enough power to become a tyranny. He underscores the idea that the large scale of the republic acts as a defense against the abuse of power. In contrast, Brutus No. 1 avers that a strong central government is intrinsically dangerous to personal liberty and maintains that localized, decentralized governments would be more aligned with the citizens' needs and better able to preserve liberty.