ipl-logo

Assess The Difference Between The Federalist And Anti-Federalists

543 Words3 Pages

The American Constitution had a fight between the Federalists and Anti-Federalists. Some of the best political people in the world got together in Philadelphia and other cities to find common ground within governmental organization. The Federalists and the anti-Federalists had some great political thoughts that agreed as well as disagreed with some of the political views. They argued what they believed, so of course their opinions were totally different from each other. The Federalist is led by James Madison, the “Father of the constitution” (Sinopoli 45) he was supporting the new constitution. One of the biggest main focus of the federal constitution was to secure the union, and also to include any other states that would join as a part of the union, “to prove the utility of the UNION, appoint, no doubt, deeply engraved on the hearts of the great body of the people in every …show more content…

They felt that the constitution did not create a fair government, but a controlling government. They were scared that the power of the states would be lost and that the people would lose their rights and freedom. They were scared because some would take over their rights. The Anti- Federalist came together and created the Bill of rights and proposed it to the constitution to make sure the citizens were secure by law. They wanted everyone to be heard, not overruled. They believed that no bill of rights would be equal to no check on our government for the people. The only reason the Anti-Federalists agreed to help approve the constitution was because of the bill of rights and without the bill of rights the constitution would not have been approved. As it states in the book, “It was largely at Anti-Federalist Insistence that a bill of rights was included in the Constitution” (Sinopoli 33). They want the people to be heard and not

Show More
Related

  • Comparing The Federalists And Antifederalist During The Constitutional Convention Of 1787

    929 Words  | 4 Pages

    The main debate was about individual rights. Originally, the Constitution lacked a bill of rights. Anti-federalists insisted that a bill of rights be added to the Constitution to expressly grant freedoms to the country. On the other hand, federalist James Madison believed the Constitution was enough, and adding a bill of rights was unnecessary. As southern states did with slavery, antifederalists refused to ratify the Constitution without a bill of rights.

    Read More

  • Note On Speeches Debating The Consitution From The NY Ratification Convention

    846 Words  | 4 Pages

    Overall, the British government was a tyrannical rule in which the ruling and decisions were all up to one person, King George III. Since the United States had previously already had to go through a terrifying event that was the British government, the Anti Federalists wanted to learn from their mistakes and avoid a government that would possess unmanageable power which would lead to corruption within the system and oppression for the people under the rule. Secondly, the Anti Federalists had also debated that there was a lacking of a Bill of Rights, which would protect the freedom of the people and make sure that the government would not overstep boundaries. With the current path that the Constitution was following the Anti Federalists feared the downfall of the United States, with all three of the branches of the new central government threatening all of the beliefs and ideals that the Anti Federalists had followed. Not only was there a lacking of power and representation for the people in the state there was also a lack of representation in the Central government for the people in order to speak out against the ratification of the constitution.

    Read More

  • Ratifying The Constitution Dbq Essay

    1109 Words  | 5 Pages

    New York and Virginia, two major states with a massive impact, were hesitant to ratify. These states were filled with Anti-Federalist, who feared strong central government, as well as the president becoming dictator or king. In order to persuade the Anti-Federalists, Alexander Hamilton and John Jay created the Federalists Papers. Then finally, enough states had ratified for the Constitution to go in effect, although Virginia, New York, North Carolina, and Rhode Island had not yet ratified. The Anti-Federalists felt that the Constitution needed a Bill of Rights to protect personal freedoms.

    Read More

  • Explain What Compromises Were Made At The Constitutional Convention

    705 Words  | 3 Pages

    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.

    Read More

  • Ratification Of The Us Constitution Dbq Essay

    827 Words  | 4 Pages

    The Constitution of the United States was written in 1787, but there was a grapple for its ratification that went on until about two decades after the ratification. Members of Congress believed that the first government of the United States or the Articles of Confederation, needed to be adjusted while others did not want anything to change. After the Revolutionary War, the people did not want a strong central government, because it reminded them too much of what they were trying to escape from. Under the Articles, each state had their own laws, and the need for a new Constitution was desired by many. The Constitution of 1787 created huge debates, arguments and splits in the nation that lasted for several year after its ratification between people who

    Read More

  • Pros And Cons Of Ratifying The Constitution

    481 Words  | 2 Pages

    The new constitution couldn’t please everyone. Some people liked it but some didn't. The two sides were the Federalists and the Anti-Federalists. The Federalists were in favor of ratifying the Constitution, whereas the Anti-Federalists were opposed to it. They would have debates about ratifying the Constitution.

    Read More

  • Similarities Between Federalist And Anti-Federalists

    386 Words  | 2 Pages

    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.

    Read More

  • The Argument Against The Anti-Federalists

    99 Words  | 1 Pages

    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

    Read More

  • Compare And Contrast The Views Of The Federalist And Anti-Federalists

    742 Words  | 3 Pages

    The views of the Federalists and the Anti-federalists created clashes and delayed the ratification process. The supporters of the Constitution were called Federalists and they argued a strong government is important to protect people’s rights. Federalists thought a strong government would benefit the nation as a whole. Since most of the federalists were considerably wealthy, the lent money to the government during the revolution. So, they thought the new constitution would help them to get their money back.

    Read More

  • Compare And Contrast The Motives Of The Federalists

    787 Words  | 4 Pages

    that it would render the states powerless. They also believed that the strength granted in the article of confederation will yield a better federal system and also that strong central government would tax their citizens heavily. Furthermore, the anti-federalist did not support the constitution because they believed that the U.S. Supreme Court would invalidate state laws and that there would be too much power for the president. They also feared the national government would run over the liberties of the people. Also, the proposed that the power of taxing by the congress be limited and that the military should consist of state militias rather than the national force.

    Read More

  • The Federalist Party And The Anti-Federal Party

    270 Words  | 2 Pages

    The United States Constitution prompted much debate when it was made. There was a vast schism between two heavily imposed factions. The Federalist Party and the Anti-Federalist Party. The federalists believed that the Constitution should be ratified and the anti-federalists (as the name assumes) believed the Constitution should not be approved. Even to this day the Constitution is still being controverted.

    Read More

  • Articles Of Confederation Dbq Essay

    585 Words  | 3 Pages

    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.

    Read More

  • Ratification Of The Constitution Essay

    494 Words  | 2 Pages

    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.

    Read More

  • Differences And Similarities Between Anti-Federalists And Anti-Federalists

    622 Words  | 3 Pages

    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.

    Read More

  • Robert Yates Anti Federalist 17 Summary

    445 Words  | 2 Pages

    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

    Read More

More about Assess The Difference Between The Federalist And Anti-Federalists

Open Document