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
Are you a Federalist or an Anti-Federalist? The proportional representation of the people and the government in the pursuit of equality and happiness is thoroughly explained through the Anti-Federalist party. Jackson Turner Main wrote, "to them, the man of 'federal principles' approved of 'federal measures,' which meant those that increased the weight and authority or extended the influence of the Confederation Congress." By stating this he intended to provide the explanation and root of the problem; the egos of both parties, especially federalists were a constant wall blocking the parties from a resolution The Anti-Federalists were composed of many differential elements.
I Agree… “The Federalist No. 84” and “The Anti-Federalist No.84”, both have their views on what should happen to our government. Whether it is to add a bill of rights or not, but I agree with the writer of “The Federalist No.84” because if the Constitution is adopted, then it will be our Bill of Rights, also based on other countries’ bill of rights then it may argue with a semblance of reason. Because I have read both sides of the discussion, I can see who is wrong and why.
Anti-Federalists in the late 1780s strongly objected to the amount of authority given to the government by the constitution, and had an unorganized but large effort to prevent its ratification. The Anti-Federalists believed that liberty could only be upheld if the federal government remained small and uninvolved with local matters in the states. Congress, with the power to make laws deemed necessary and proper, has no firm limitations under the constitution. Anti-Federalists thought that each state should control itself, with minimal interference by Congress or the national government. The purpose of becoming independent of England was because the King was not sympathetic to struggles in the Americas, and under this new constitution, the executive
Lectures Lecture 14 “Questions to Consider #1”: Why did the Anti Federalists object so strongly to the Preamble to the Constitution? The Anti-Federalists objected so strongly to Preamble to the Constitution due to the fact the Preamble establishes powers for the three branches of government, states’ relations, mode of amendment, debts, national supremacy, oath of office, and amendment ratification. This group felts as though when the federalists wanting to create a strong central government would not be strong enough if the Preamble was not put into place. Lecture 14 states, “Anti-federalists suspicious of central power fought the new Constitution tenaciously…..
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.
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.
However, the call for a Bill of Rights had been the anti-Federalists' most powerful weapon. Attacking the future Constitution, Patrick Henry asked the Virginia convention, "What can avail your specious, imaginary balances, your rope-dancing, chain-rattling, ridiculous ideal checks and contrivances." The anti-Federalists, demanding a briefer, clear Constitution, one that laid out for all to see the right of the people and limitations of the power of government. But, the efforts of the Anti-Federalists were not enough to stop the ratification of the Constitution of the United States, but they managed to push for the creation of the Bill of Rights, which promised protection for the rights of all
Under the guidance of Alexander Hamilton and John Adams, Federalists became a popular political party at the end of George Washington’s term. As a proud Federalists in The United Stated under George Washington, a numerous amount of hypocrisy has consumed the population on, “What were Federalists’ views?” A Federalist strongly believed in the power of the national government because the central government would have yielded stability to the country. Instead of a democracy or popular sovereignty, an “aristocratic leadership,” would better lead the nation (History in the Making - Chapter 10).
The people who supported The Constitution, were called themselves as Federalists and their opponent were known as Antifederalists. The Constitution’s merits and demerits were printed in the newspapers and pamphlets by both parties, and circulated among the American public created a point by point discussion, explaining the constitution. Merits by the Federalist, earned interest for Judges, legislators and other public. The Antifederalist author Brutus (Elbridge Germy and George Mason) argued and defended that, the free republic could survive only in the area with people with same values, cultures and history. He argued, for a too large republic nation, it will become contentious and the common good will be sacrificed.
The Anti-Federalist were correct that the Bill of Rights was necessary to guard citizens from tyranny. Anti-Federalist wanted to have a limited government to protect against tyranny because to much power in one hand could limit the right to the people. To prevent this a constitution was created to divide power and keep the government in check. The constitution was a document that states and the government acknowledge and with hold. Although this happened the Anti-Federalist argue that the Bill of Rights were need to safeguard the liberty of the people, but Federalist argued that the constitution did not need a Bill of Rights because the people and the stares kept any power not given to the federal government.
Patrick Henry says, “I smelt a rat”, because of not only the influence of ideas from fellow patriots, but also because of his own investigations of how much the Constitution actually represented the citizens of the United States of America. The concerns of fellow Constitution Framers and the general public eventually snowballed for well known patriots to all out reject the Constitution. The Anti Federalists all noticed a very significant piece that should be apart of the Constitution. In investigation B, C, F,and G highlight the most powerful argument for the Anti Federalists.
Despite the fact that most grievances that the colonist wanted, had been addressed in the Constitution throughout time, these grievances still cause conflicting issues that abused the natural rights of not only the people but also the government, due to the fact that they were not fully convey. For instances, during the debate team A said that, one of the fears of the anti-federalist was that the government will become a monarchy if too much power was to be given to the federal government. They then support that with the fact that, there are three equal branch of powers today and these three branches, check and balance each other's power. Therefore, a monarchy will not possibly occur and the grievances of the anti-federalist is addresses. Although
Although I agree with some points of the Federalists, I mainly find the Antifederalists’ arguments more persuasive. Regarding the view of ‘The People,’ the Federalists believe that having an authority figure make decisions instead of the mass is more efficient. However, with access to education, people are educated to understand and develop their own choices instead of relying on one person to make the decisions for them. One example are the people voting in the presidential elections. The people choose who they want as the president of the country.
They felt the Constitution would create a system of federalism, a system in which the national government holds significant power, but the smaller political subdivisions also hold significant power. They felt the country needed a strong central government so that it didn’t fall apart. The Ant-Federalists were on the opposing side, they felt the Constitution granted the government too much power. They also felt there wasn’t enough protection of their right with an absent Bill of Rights. Another concern of the Anti-Federalists mainly came from the lower classes, from their standpoint they thought the wealthy class would be in main control and gain the most benefits from the ratification of this document.
Federalists vs. Anti-Federalists Federalists were mostly merchants, bankers manufacturers, and wealthy farm owners. They basically owned land or some type of property and were well-educated. Most of these people lived in urban areas. Anti-Federalists were mostly artisans, shopkeepers, frontier settlers, and poor farmers. They were mostly uneducated and illiterate and most of them lived in rural areas.