Brutus argues that in a republic, "the manners, sentiments, and interests of the people should be similar…if not, there will be
a constant clashing of opinions and the representatives of one part will be constantly striving against the other." Should a republic be made up of a small group of like-minded people? Or, is diversity of opinion beneficial to the success of a federal government?
Brutus' vision of republic is outdated. Diversity of opinion is vital for a republic.
It's necessary for a republic to have people who represent all kinds of people in it. Different classes live different lives, and it's hard for a person who belongs to one class to be aware of the needs, manners, interests of people from a different class. For this reason, diversity is a very important part of a republic.
A republic should <em>NOT</em> be made up of a small group of people who think in a similar way. On the contrary, it <em>should</em> be made up of people from different backgrounds, in order to better represent its people.
Let's see, Roman architecture was immensely inspired by its Greek forerunners, Roman poets/authors aspired to emulate Greek philosophies and epics, and Rome assimilated the gods of Homer's Iliad into everyday Roman customs and belief systems.
