Final answer:
Republics control factions more effectively than direct democracies due to their structure of electing representatives, larger number of citizens, and greater territorial extent, which dilute the power of single factions and protect minority rights.
Step-by-step explanation:
Factions are more easily controlled in republics compared to direct democracies because republics are characterized by a delegation of governmental power to a smaller number of elected citizens and by a larger number of citizens and territory.
This structure makes it less likely for any single faction to dominate and infringe on the rights of others. In a republic, the elected representatives are expected to possess enlightened views and virtuous sentiments, making them less prone to local prejudices and schemes of injustice.
The increased number of parties in a larger republic provides greater security against the oppression of a singular dominating party. Moreover, the difficulty for an unjust majority to concert and execute their plans is increased by the sheer numbers needing to agree and the diversity of interests present.
Contrast this with a direct democracy, where the government is administered in person by a small group of citizens, making it easier for a majority to unify around a common passion or interest, potentially leading to the sacrifice of weaker parties or individuals.
The founders of the United States chose a republican form of governance to safeguard against these dangers, ensuring the protection of minority rights against the majority's potential tyranny.