On the other hand, Cornell explains that this “will of the people” was often contorted on both sides as political debate. Thus, the “dissenting tradition” was not more than who was more qualified to run the government through countless debates and public appeal. As explained by Cornell,”Each side expended enormous energy crafting appeals to persuade citizens that it was better qualified to represent the will of the people” (Cornell 21). Thus, the Anti-Federalists were using the people to debate themselves in the public sphere to gain the will of the common man and avoid the evil corrupt centralized authority.
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.
The structure and powers of the federal government changed under the Constitution as compared to the Articles of Confederation. Many people, known as the anti-Federalists, opposed these changes while on the contrary, many people, known as the Federalists, supported them. The framework and function of the federal government changed drastically under the Constitution. The federal government was much stronger under the Constitution because it was given the power to run the states under more unified control.
The Federalists want a strong government and strong executive branch. The Anti-Federalist oppose the Constitution. They didn’t want to give up any of their state's’ power. The Articles of Confederation are a written document that establishes a function of the national government in the United States. The Constitution is saying that we people are guaranteed certain basic rights, have a national government and have fundamental laws.
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.
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
Question 3: “Federalist or Antifederalist? Pick one (or neither) and then defend your position.” Answer: After the passage of the Constitution in 1787, a fierce debate erupted between those who support a strong, national government, known as the Federalists, and those who opposed the creation of a central government that would have more power than the states, known as the Anti-Federalists. I chose the Federalist, and here’s why: In the Anti-Federalist view, the creation of a strong, national government would seem unreasonable.
For the Federalists this meant that they would abide by the law and abide by what was written on the Constitution for they believed everything that was written on it. In the other case with the Anti-Federalists this meant that they did not believe anything written on the Constitution and did not abide by any of the laws that were written there, (for they did not believe the constitution), that's why they created the bill of rights. The second difference between the Federalists and Anti-Federalists is the fact that Federalists wanted power in the states but the Anti-Federalists wanted power in the central government. This meant because the Federalists wanted power in the states that everyone would have equal say and it would not be equal. For the Anti-Federalists, believing that the power should go to the central government meant that the people would not have a say in voting and it would all just be biased and that is not fair nor right and it is not
Represented by Alexander Hamlton, they favored the constitution and were against the bill of rights. The Anti-Federalists feared/preferred a weak central government. They were represented by Thomas Jefferson, they favored the articles of confederation and were for the bill of rights. The warnings from the Anti-Federalists about the constitution were right. They warned the Federalists about the consequences of undelegated power becoming abused.
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”.
As others are the federalist, I’d be an anti-federalism. According to fact that they didn’t hate to support federalism. All they wanted to make more improvement. They worked so that the states would have more power. They didn’t want any secrets.
One major difference between both groups was that The Federalists supported the creation of a strong federal government, but the Antifederalists wanted more power for the states (Debate over Ratification of the United States Constitution). Moreover, the Antifederalists believed that the Constitution would limit the power of the people and give more power to the government. A second important difference between the two groups was that the Antifederalists demanded the inclusion of a bill of rights but the Federalists opposed the idea. The bill of rights was called for in order to protect the individual liberties of American citizens, which was not already included in the Constitution (The Constitution Webquest). Before being able to ratify the document, the writing of a bill of rights was
During the ratification of the constitution, the debate between the federalists and the anti-federalists raised many important points. Some main points included were- power of central government, role of the states and the inclusion of a Bill of Rights. Based on the principals brought up, I would consider myself an anti-federalist. I would consider myself this because I agree with their principles and ideals on States’ right. They believe that the power should focus mainly on the people rather than on a federal government.
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.
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.
