Arguments Against The Articles Of Confederation

Tyranny can come in many different forms. It could only be one person ruling everything, or it could be any group of people. Tyranny means a cruel or oppressive government rule, which is usually started by someone with too much power, and they become corrupt. For this reason, In Philadelphia, 1787, 55 men met up for the Constitutional Convention. This convention aimed to fix all problems with the Articles of Confederation. However this idea was eventually scrapped and they wrote a whole new constitution. This constitution would protect America from tyranny, so they could keep a civilized and united country. The Constitution that was made helped defend America from almost all types of tyranny and is still helping us hundreds of years later.

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. 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.

The United States Constitution is a document that or founding fathers made in order to replace the failing Articles of Confederation (A of C). Under the Constitution, the current government and states don’t have the problems they faced when the A of C was in action. The Constitution was created in 1788, and held an idea that the whole nation was nervous about. This idea was a strong national government, and the Federalist assured the people that this new government would work. The framers of the Constitution decided to give more power to the Federal government rather than the state governments because the A of C had many problems, there was a need for the layout of new government, rights, and laws, and there was a need for the Federal

In 1777 congress adopted the Articles Of Confederation which failed to give the United States an effective government so most the power went to the Federal government. The Articles of Confederation had many problems that would loss of power in the government. The Federal government wanted power in the national government and felt the Constitution would help manage the debt. The Anti-Federalist wanted power in the states and wanted limited federal power. Congress had done things that benefited the United States while the second continental congress created a government that lacked power which cause problems.

Following the Revolutionary War, America had just gained independance from Great Britain and needed to form a new government. The Articles of Confederation were established as an attempt to create a government that was unlike Britain’s. Unfortunately, the Articles of Confederation had several weaknesses. When in the process of repairing those weaknesses, the Federalists and the Anti-federalists formed. The Articles of Confederation were very weak as well as useless to America and because of this, the Federalists and the Anti-Federalists could not agree on a new type of government.

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….. (1).” This group did not the Constitution did not properly state the rights and powers of the three branches of government, states’ rights, etc. In order to please the Anti-federalists, the Preamble was put into place to allow American citizens know the central government’s rights, and states’ rights.

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

The Articles of Confederation were a major improvement over the past government of England, in which the power only belongs to a few people, the king and parliament. The Articles of Confederation allowed each individual state to have its own power. Congress could not require any state to pay taxes, nor could they require to build a national army. Preventing tyranny was a major idea and a major goal that the Articles of Confederation produced. One other improvement that the Articles of Confederation instituted was the idea of not only reducing the power of the king, but increasing the power of the people. The people were “fed up” with all of their decisions being made by the central government, and as a result, The Articles of Confederation

The Federalist papers were made for two specifics reason of events that happened before the revolution that the leaders wanted to prevent in the future by coming up with the idea of editing the Articles of Confederation. this two reason were: American federal organization were practicing of the old British empire as it existed before 1764, and the arguments of the generation from the French and Indian war to the adoption of the federal Constitution, and, more particularly, the discussions in the ten or twelve years before independence, made the way they want to organize the country difficult because the population was used to it they were afraid of a change meant. “The center of this problem was the difficulty of recognizing federalism; and,

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.

At a time many thought that the effects of a revolution would cause another one. The Articles of Confederation was the center of attention for this problem. After the fight for Independence the new America had to have a type of government. The Congress of this newly established nation created the Articles of Confederation. Of course problems would arise due to the ability of them knowing what they didn’t want when they should’ve known what the should have. Although the Articles of Confederation created the Northwest Ordinance; the failure to produce a stable Economy, the weakness of the Federal Government, and the inability to create a strong and structured army were causes of the Articles of Confederation.

In the middle of the 18th century, Britain and France were at war against each other. Both the British and the French wished to extend their colonies in North America into the territory west of the Appalachian Mountains. Britain’s purpose of this expansion was to gain more territory and power, whereas the French were pursuing trade with the Native Americans that lived in that part of the country. After seven years of fighting, Britain had won the war, and Treaty of Paris of 1763 officially resolved the French and Indian War. Despite the immense amount of land that Britain attained in the aftermath of this war, they were in severe debt because the French and Indian War was unbearably expensive. As a result, Britain decided to tax their colonists

It 's never good for a new country to fight over its very foundation. In the USA’s case the foundation was the constitution, and the disagreement was over how to interpret the document. The amendments and code of conduct are listed in the constitution so this dispute was for the better of the country.

The Federalists had a better belief on improving the government. They believed in ratification. They knew if you separated the powers of government under three branches, it would protect the rights of people. No one branch has more authority than the other. The Federalists were more educated while the Anti-Federalists were of poor families and less educated. They believed the Article of Confederation were ineffective. They believed the government should be strong and should protect the people.

During the Revolutionary era, the birth of the U.S. Constitution gave way to the political divide between the two polarizing philosophies of Federalists and Anti-Federalists. After the economic pitfalls and decentralization the Articles of Confederation had left behind, action was taken to ameliorate its failures. With the creation of the Federalist party in by founder Alexander Hamilton, its members advocated for a stronger national government and defended the validity of the Constitution’s ratification. Contrarily, the Constitution was met with skepticism on behalf of the Anti-Federalists, who believed it would undermine state sovereignty and infringe upon their human rights. The two parties hailed from different socioeconomic backgrounds,