The main difference between federalists and antifederalists is the control of the federal government. The federalists wanted more control to the national government and the antifederalists wanted each state to have their own laws and government. The federalists wanted a strong federal government because they wanted tall the states to come together as one. They wanted the constitution to be what brought them together and thought that having a strong national government would help this. Britain had control over the states still, at this time and they intended to still create the laws that the colonists followed and wanted to control the colonies. The anti federalists however, did not believe this. They wanted a weaker national government
The anti federalist in the other hand wanted more rights for the states they believed in a strong state and a very minimalist federal government, they focused on the bill of rights whereas the federalist focused on the
The anti federalists were mainly apprehensive about the Constitution, because they favored strong state governments and felt that the Constitution
The Anti-Federalists thought that one specific set of rules for the whole population would not fully represent everyone’s rights. Furthermore, the Anti-Federalists thought that if a government took place far from the people, they would no longer represent
They were scared that the federalists' idea of creating separate state and federal government would take all the states rights and it would not allow for any states to make their own decisions. They also saw that the states agreed with them and saw this as an issue. To fix this, the federalists separated everyone into smaller factions and the factions got split and that's how they claimed the power would be more even and equal throughout the states. The federalists tried to make it better but made it worse and didn't fix it whatsoever. The states' rights became no stronger not weaker than they already
Federalists are folks that agreed with the Constitution while anti-federalists disagreed. The federalists wanted a strong natinal government so the nation could be protected. Anti-federalists thought that a strong executive could become a king and similar to a monarchy. Both sides relied on Virginia's vote to raitfy the Constitution, and little states to follow behind, so it could go into effect. New Hampshire was the final state to vote and the Constitution went into effect, so the people celebrated on a day known as the 4th of July today.
The Federalist believed that once the Federal Government had more power the problems with the nation's debt would be handled better (Diffen.com, n.d.). The anti-federalist was against the ratification of the Constitution and did not want the government to have more control over them (Diffen.com, 2016). They were also against having a president out of fear of tyranny and preferred individual states to handle their affairs (Diffen.com, 2016). They did not feel comfortable with ratifying the Constitution until the Bill of Rights was added (Diffen.com).
The Federalist Papers v Democracy Were the Federalist papers anti-democratic? Were the founders against the conception of democracy as we now understand it, or was it an issue of definition assignment? What did the terms Republican, and democratic mean to the founders? Knowing what definitions certain words held during the founding era is essential to understanding the thought process of our forefathers. Another issue to consider is whether or not the Constitution itself is democratic.
The Federalists and the Anti federalists have a lot of arguments, and that is why America can be developed and become to more powerful in the world. First of all, the Federalists are the people who support the present relationship between the federal government and governments of the fifty states, which came into effect with the ratification of the US Constitution in 1787. On the other hand, the Anti federalists are those who oppose the current political structure. The tussle between these two groups can be traced back to the 18th century, when the committee which met to revise the Articles of Confederation concluded that its revision was not feasible and the entire constitution had to be rewritten. The Civil War was a fight to preserve the
Before I state my opinion, I must lay out the two opposing sides between the federalists and the anti Federalists. To put it simply, federalists were people who supported the ratification of the constitution. On the other side of the spectrum the anti-Federalists were people who opposed the ratification of the constitution. If I was living in the in the 1780’s I probably would have voted and supported the ratification of the constitution. I am the type of person that wants a strong and unified central government.
When the Articles of Confederation failed to organize the citizens and the economy of America its citizens decided to advocate for a different form of government, that arose in the creation of the Constitution, the supreme law of the land. As a new form of government was presented the fear that the American Revolution had brought upon the colonies lead to the creation of two different political groups the Federalist and Anti- federalist that stood for those who feared the government and those who believed that the government should be stronger. Based on the Federalist papers I believe that the Anti- federalist had a better argument as they pushed for the protection of individual rights and the limitation of the power of the government. Federalist
Kimberly Paul Mr. Brandenburg 030817 Much like the Democrats and Republicans of today, Federalists and Anti-Federalists had diverging opinions on how the nation should be governed. Federalists had the utmost faith in the people and believed that they were the only ones capable of governing the nation fairly and efficiently. They were avid believers of a strong central government, a central bank, and an army. Federalist No. 39 states: “It is essential to such a government that it be derived from the great body of the society, not from an inconsiderable proportion or a favored class of it,” proving that they were in favor of central, unionized government.
During the time where you had to choose between federalist vs. anti-federalist, I would support anti-federalism. Anti-federalist vowed to defend lower class against the government, protect state rights, and vowed to make sure the constitution was not being taken advantage of. They believe The Bill of Rights should be used with the constitution. What are federalist you ask? Well, federalist are people that believe in a strong central government and that it is required to be a powerful government,
Federalists are people who support a system of government and wanted to ratify the Constitution. Federalists also believed that the government is superior and believed strong Federal Government. Antifederalists
The Federalist main argument was stated based off the opinion that the government would never have complete power over the citizens, but the citizens would also have a little more power and a say in the things that involve them. On the other hand, the Anti-Federalists believed in limited powers specifically stated, they wanted strong state governments, and wanted a Bill of Rights added to the Constitution to protect the people from the government (Document 4). This was their point of view due to the fact that they believed that the individual states know and can act more based on their people that on federal government can. They focused their argument on the rights of the citizens. For the Federalists and Anti-Federalists to agree on a new government, they created a compromise that combined each of their ideas.
Federalists and Anti-Federalists had opposing views in the Constitution because of their differences; but they also had many similarities that ended up leading to the ratification of the Constitution. Anti-Federalists and Federalist had many similarities. Both were supportive of this new country and knew that they needed a government. They both wanted the congress to have power to create war and to create treaties.