Differences Between The Anti-Federalist And Anti Federalists

The anti-federalist wanted to improve the equality in the government this is clear with this quote "As long as we can preserve our unalienable rights, we are in safety". The anti-federalist believed that the constitution needs the bill of rights to protect people individual rights. The federalist were a strong central government .They wanted a strong leader and they wanted the separation of powers as stated in the federalist quote. "It is evident that each department should have a will of its own; and consequently should be so constituted that the members of each should have as little agency as possible in the appointment of the members of the others.

When writing the Constitution, the Federalists, which included Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay, had stated the rights and liberties of the civilians within the Constitution. Alexander Hamilton, a federalist, believed that if a Bill of Rights was to be created then the whole idea of republican government would fall apart. As stated in a federalist letter, " [the constitution] would contain various exceptions to powers not granted, and on this very account would afford a colorable pretext to claim more than were granted”(Federalist No. 71, Alexander Hamilton). The Constitution stated that all free people had equal rights. Rights that were implicit, which connected to fixing all the problems within the government and the people.

The Federalists of the convention were in favor of the ratification of the Constitution. They believed that the national government must be strong in order to function and to control uncooperative states, which could protect the rights of the people. They also believed that the Constitution and state government protected individual freedoms. On the other hand, the Anti-Federalists opposed a strong central government, particularly a standing army. They believed it threatened state power along with the rights of the common people.

After the Declaration of Independence in 1787, the Federal Government turned to the creation of the Constitution in which delegates from 13 states convened to make compromises on their beliefs for the betterment of a nation. Although the Bill of Rights was initially not a part of the Constitution, the Federalists thought that it was crucial to ensure ratification of the Constitution. This ratification was one of the main reasons why the Bill of Rights needed to be added. Federalists feared a strong, central government, and created a Bill of Rights in order to prevent government abuse. Others believed that a dominating Government could prohibit rights in the future, which would not necessarily be expressed in the Bill of Rights.

Hence Federalists came up with the Bill of Rights as a way to get the Constitution ratified and for people to really see a needed change. The Bill Of Rights which lists specific prohibitions on governmental power, lead the Anti-Federalists to be less fearful of the new Constitution . This guaranteed that the people would still remain to have rights, but the strong central government that the country needed would have to be approved. The 1804 Map of the nation shows that even after the ratification of the United States Constitution there still continued to be “commotion” and dispute in the country.(Document 8) George Washington stated that the people should have a say in the nation and government and everything should not be left to the government to decide.(Document 3) Although George Washington was a Federalist many believed he showed a point of view that seemed to be Anti-Federalists. Many believed that The Bill of Rights needed to be changed and modified and a new document’s time to come into place.

cannot suspend the right to trial by jury in criminal cases, that the government cannot pass any ex post facto laws or bills of attainders, among many others. While the constitution was being drafted there were many disagreements between the federalists and the anti-federalists about whether this new constitution sufficiently protected individual rights. Obviously the anti-federalists, who were not in favor of a strong central government, weren’t too excited at the prospect of scrapping the Articles of confederation for one with a stronger federal government. The Federalists wanted a

The initial lack of a Bill of Rights was the chief objection of the antifederalist[footnoteRef:8] The antifederalist were concerned over local control of civil liberties. However, Federalist insisted the because the Constitution gave the federal government only certain delegated powers, a Bill of Rights was not needed.[footnoteRef:9] Additionally, federalist argued that enumerating individual rights could be dangerous because it may be interpreted as a comprehensive list, thus forfeiting unmentioned rights.[footnoteRef:10] Eventually, the Bill of Rights was adopted and ratified. However, the Bill of Rights was not as comprehensive as Thomas Jefferson had proposed.[footnoteRef:11]

The Anti-Federalists suggested that the new system would threaten liberties, and all freedom would be lost with the Constitution because of how much power it granted the federal government. The Federalists, on the other hand,

The Federalists wanted a strong central government. The Anti- Federalists claims Constitution gives the central government too much power and, and they worried about the new constitution will not give them any rights. That the new system threatened freedom; Also, threatened the sovereignty of the states and personal liberties; failed to protect individual rights. Besides, some of famous peoples such as " Patrick Henry" and artists have came out against the Constitution. Although the anti-Federalists were unsuccessful in stopping the passage of the Constitution, their efforts have been responsible for the creation and implementation of the Bill of

"A bill of rights is what the people are entitled to against every government on earth, general or particular, and what no just government should refuse. "1 This is said by Thomas Jefferson. This quote is the best to show why Anti-federalists wanted a bill of rights. They expected it could

The Anti-Federalists were correct that a Bill of Rights was necessary to guard citizens from tyranny. To begin with, the Constitution is the framework for the organization of the U.S government and for the relationship the federal government with the states, citizens, and all people within the nation. When the United States was being born, the Founders adopted the first constitution to the nation called, Article of Confederation which created a central government that did not have much power and most of the power were given to the state government. However, the Article of Confederation was not working because there was no chief executive, no court system, and most important that was the central government could not force a state to pay taxes.

After the Constitution was sent to states for ratification, the people felt the Constitution did not protect the natural rights of the American citizens. The cause or reason for this addition to the Constitution was to ensure that the rights detailed in the Constitution and the Bill of Rights were not thought to be the only possible rights of American citizens. The Anti-Federalists, Thomas Jefferson, Patrick Henry, and George Mason, said that if certain rights weren't specifically granted to the people, the government would easily take over these rights and abuse the people in the country. The Federalists, George Washington, John Adams, James Madison and Alexander Hamilton, said that the Constitution give the government to do things that were

The Federalists believe that there is no need for a Bill of Rights to be written in the Constitution. Unalienable rights, Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness, and all rights and responsibilities were already spelled out in detail in the Constitution. By creating a Bill of Rights, it would put too much power in the hands of the states; which would just create another confederacy type of government with little power to act. If each state had its own government, they would be very weak and they would probably be eliminated within a year.

A federalist is defined as a person that believes in the Constitution as it is, and argues for ratification. An anti-federalist, however, believes that there needs to be adjustments within the Constitution. While both the anti-federalists and federalists contributed to the Constitution’s success, anti-federalists created the most conflict and elaboration of the Constitution and aimed for success in many years to come. Anti-federalists argued to include the Bill of Rights into the Constitution. George Mason describes the importance of the Bill of Rights in “Objections to the Constitution”.

The Anti- Federalists claimed the Constitution gave the central government an excessive amount of power, and while not a Bill of Rights the folks would be in danger of oppression. Both Hamilton and Madison argued that the Constitution did not want a Bill of Rights, that it might produce a "parchment barrier" that restricted the rights of the folks, as critical protective