The current situation of South Korean democracy displays severe partisan conflicts between two major factions around political reformation of the judiciary department and the ensuing social issues of justice and fairness. In this light, this article examines the problematic relationship of democracy, faction and diversity revealed in The Federalist Papers. I argue that Publius thinking in The Federalist Papers discloses the existential ground of democratic republic which embraces both the constant emergence of factious struggle and the political necessity of social diversification. Some scholarly views of The Federalist Papers merely focus on the economic aspects of Publius attempt to regulate the factional strife concerning property rights; other studies maintain that Publus constitutional scheme simply provides a formalistic basis for the institutional compromise of the clashing interests. But a close reading of The Federalist Papers reveals the Publius concern of faction is to deal with a deeper ground of political existence that cannot escape the differing movements of human passions, interests and opinions in everyday life. Furthermore, Publius constitutional design of the extended republic and the separation of powers ultimately discloses the political necessity of social diversification to sustain the self-ruling power of popular government facing the clashing movements of human differentiation. Thereby, this article suggests that the Publius political insights of the nature of popular regime help us to carefully approach the recurrent problem of democratic factions in the Republic of Korea.
I. Introduction: Partisan Struggles of South Korean Democracy and the Political Implications of the American Founding
II. Popular Government and the Problem of Faction
III. Possibility of Faction and the Limit of Social Assimilation
IV. The Control of Faction and The Extended Republic of Diversity
V. Separation of Powers and Social Diversification
VI. Conclusion: Democratic Republic as a Lively Unity of Difference