Of politics, debate and faction

Sometimes people are turned right off when you talk of politics. I am not sure why because I am intrigued by it. I guess when the debate is lively, that makes some nervous because, for the most part, people don't like conflict. Politics is all about conflict. The founders knew this and their intention when framing the Constitution was to create three separate but equal branches of government. They made it hard to change things and they understood this to be a good thing. They understood that stability in lawmaking was a good thing for America. They also understood that a consolidation of power could lead to the same sort of despotism they had only recently escaped. Checks and balances were the key. Political faction is not a constitution subject but one of human nature. In the Federalist Papers #10, James Madison said "By a faction, I understand a number of citizens, whether amounting to a majority or a minority of the whole, who are united and actuated by some common impulse of passion, or of interest, adversed to the rights of other citizens, or to the permanent and aggregate interests of the community". Now faction is not necessarily party however, factions can and do exist within parties. The federal system provides for a large number is elected citizens, usually from our two parties, but as individuals within the parties, they do not always agree. Ultimately debate ensues, not only between parties but within the parties themselves. Hence, politics is conflict and it is healthy in my opinion because it slows the process. Our system, by its very nature, seeks to protect against unwise and rash action that may be deleterious of the public good by balancing opinion and yes, faction. The lively debate is healthy and necessary and all very interesting, not only in the watching but in the participating, don't you think?