Anti Federalist Papers

As a democrat, Paine believed in strong state governments and Washington opposed that. Washington would do anything to make sure that a strong government-led country would survive. In spite of Washington’s efforts, Paine wrote numerous articles in which he tried to reinforce what the Declaration of Independence was actually about. He believed in a world that would focus on democratic rights other than a strong central government. Furthermore, Paine considered it to be a privilege of the country to decide its legislature, to gain individual rights, and to obtain their freedom.

Checks and balances prevents any one branch from having too much power. [Doc C is an excerpt from Federalist Paper #51 written by James Madison in 1788. The Federalist Papers were papers written to convince people to ratify the Constitution.] According to Doc C, ”...the constant aim is to divide and arrange several offices in such a manner as that they may be a check on the other…” In this quote, Madison is saying that *the Constitution made the three branches divided in a way that they can watch and check over each other. This system guards against tyranny because it ensures that the three branches won’t overpower one another.

Also the Federalist believe having a national constitution meaning that there is a better balance of laws. The federalist want a New Constitution because Federalist want a fresh start and want to avoid tyranny. In my opinion the Anti-Federalist is the weaker government between the Federalist and the Anti-Federalist. The Anti-Federalist do not want states to have their own government. Not having a government in charge of each individual state

If our country hadn’t created the Constitution, we would be filled with tyranny which was the one thing that the colonists were trying to avoid. Tyranny means that one person has too much power and takes complete control. In 1787, 12 of the 13 states got together to try and better this country. In Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, the Constitution was written and made a guideline for the federal government making sure it would never become too powerful. Some may think that just a piece of paper would have no impact on them, but they would be in a world of shame if there wasn’t one.

When James Madison and the 56 other delegates to the Constitutional Convention met in Philadelphia in May 1787, they intended to amend the Articles of Confederation. They ended up creating a new constitution, and Madison, representing Virginia, became the chief recorder of information. Madison had helped develop Virginia’s Constitution 11 years earlier, and it was his plan that served as the basis for debate in the development of the U.S Constitution. Madison argued for a strong central government that would unify the country. The Convention

The papers that they would write detailed how the Constitution would provide “a remedy for the diseases most incident to Republican Government” and to “secure the public good and private rights” (Fed #10) arguing over concepts that they felt were key to providing this security. One of their main objections against the Articles of Confederation was that the “Separation of Powers” maintained in the Articles was not an effective way to protect the public against potential abuses. The Federalist argues that each department should have a will of its own and have as little as possible to do with the appointment of members of the other branches; that each department should have enough power to carry out its mission an them limit its power so that it cannot become to tyrannical. The Federalist, argues that payments attached to the offices of each branch should be as independent as possible and that a system of checks and balances were necessary to thwart encroachments by other

During this period, the Anti-Federalists felt as though the aristocrats had no particular opinion about our future government, which alarmed the group. Because they saw aristocrats as overpowering the opinions of those who are not as noble. The writer states that he would rather be a free citizen of the Republic of Massachusetts than succumb to a great American Empire. The Federalist goes on to say that unless there is some security of the people 's liberties, the new Constitution will not be successful. The writer had full faith in the citizens of the United States to decide what was best for the future of the

They were scared of tyranny, especially pertaining to the fact that under the new Constitution, the national government, or Congress, would be able to make decisions without even asking for the states’ permission. (Anti-Federalist 1: Brutus). Even though the Constitution called for checks and balances, Anti-Federalist Patrick Henry, was convinced that the president would be the one making all the decisions, not unlike a king. (Bianco and Canon, 44). The national supremacy clause in the Constitution even stated that national law supersedes any state law when there is conflict.

Although there are many different images of ethnic groups in the newspaper such as Mercutio Southhall Jr: a “black lives matter” activist, Harjit Sajjan: the defense minister of Halifax Stanfield International Airport, and Consuelo Klingenber Perez: a woman struggling with Alzheimer’s. The articles about these individuals are written by Caucasian journalists. Ethnic journalists such as Baba Ahmed, Albert Aji and Bassem Mroue have their articles three pages from the front headline (A3), followed by seven articles written by Caucasian individuals. Baba Ahmed’s article, “Separatists say Mali hotel attack targeted peace talks”, consists of three out of five columns, located on the bottom quarter of the page. Albert Aji and Bassem Mroue’s article, “Assad touts advances made by Syrian army against rebels”, consists of the remaining two quarterly columns next to Ahmed’s article.

Changing it every time something in the world comes about will get to a point where it’s too much for the government. “A common law Constitution is a "living" Constitution, but it is also one that can protect fundamental principles against transient public opinion, and it is not one that judges (or anyone else) can simply manipulate to fit their own ideas”( Strauss, David A). With today’s society and the way things are its hard to say whether or not this document is living or not. I still believe the Constitution is a non-living document. In another article I read, Scalia states that “that issues such as abortion and homosexuality do not appear in the Constitution makes them matters for which citizens and states can enact laws”( Patel, Ushma).

Instead of editing, however, the 55 delegates rewrote the whole thing into the Constitution, which is still used today. The delegates wrote this Constitution with tyranny in mind; how could the Constitution guard against one person or group from gaining too much power? The Constitution protects against tyranny because the 55 delegates established: federalism, separation of powers, checks & balances, and equal representation. Federalism helps guard against tyranny by making sure not one government has too much power. In Document A, it is clearly stated that James Madison, a main contributor to the Constitution, wanted “[a] compound republic of America” to provide a “double security” for our rights.