Federalist Vs. Anti-Federalists

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 government today is based off a document written over 200 years ago called the

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.

On June 21, 1788 the Constitution of the United States of America was signed. It was signed by some of America’s greatest heroes. Men like George Washington, James Madison, Alexander Hamilton, and Benjamin Franklin. But just signing it wasn’t good enough. It needed to be ratified. To ratify something means to give it formal consent. In other words, make it valid. To be able to ratify the constitution, nine out of the thirteen states had to decide to abandon the articles of confederation, and support the constitution. With New Hampshire being the ninth state, the Constitution was ratified. Through this process, these men split into two groups as they argued their positions. Federalist, and Anti-Federalist. The Federalist wanted a strong central government, while the Anti-Federalist were looking more for individual freedoms. Federalist believed that the best way to protect individual freedoms was to have a large republic, but Anti Federalist opposed. They believe that to protect our rights, we must have a small republic. Anti-Federalist concluded “competition between interest

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 argument between the Federalists and the Antifederalists principally centre on the Artivles of Confederation-Consitution. The Federalists and the Antifederalists have thier interpretions wheather the fedel government necessarliy exits or not. The Federalists believe that the relationship between fedel government and fifty states governments is stable and helpful. In contrast, the Antifederalists oppose this political struture and democratic goals, so that they think that the exitence of fedel government suppose to get corrupt. On the other hand, the Federalists and the Antifederalists also have different views about slaveries. The Federalists firmly believe that everyone should be equal, but the Antifederlists strongly hope to keep slaveries

When it came to the Federalists and the Anti-Federalists the differences are many and at times very complex, due to the beliefs that the Federalists are nationalist at heart. The Federalists had an incredibly big role in shaping the new Constitution, which the Federalists used to create a stronger Constitution at great cost to the Anti-Federalists. If you ask the Anti-Federalists They believe that should be a ratification of the US Constitution in every state. But due to the Anti-Federalists being poor at organizing they really didn’t gain any ground. Although they didn’t achieve their goals of ratification of the US Constitution, but they did force the first congress under a new Constitution along with the bill of rights. Having the bill of

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.

I honestly believe that federalism is a stronger government. Federalism is the federal principle or system of government. Federalist believe in having a state with its own government. Federalist also believe in having a military which keeps the people under a Federalist state safe from outside harm. 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.

The title of the article is “The Antifederalists were right” it was written on Sept. 27, 2006 by Gary Galles. The article was about the reasons why antifederalists were right.

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 basic federalist and anti-federalist ideas can be seen on page 185 of the hush textbook. On page 185 there is a chart of Jefferson's and Hamilton's ideas. Jefferson and other Federalists believed in a strong central government, a government run by the elite, and a loose interpretation of the Constitution. On the other hand, Hamilton and the anti-federalists believed in a small national government, the sharing of power between federal and state governments, an inclusive democracy, and a strict interpretation of the constitution.

Federalists and Anti-Federalists both have an arguable amount of supporters. I am in favor of the Anti-Federalist point of view. The Anti-Federalists believed the Constitution granted too much power to the federal courts, at the expense of the state and local courts. They argued that the federal courts would be too far away to provide justice to the average citizen. In addition the Constitution allows the government too much power,does not provide for a republican government, and it also does not include a Bill of Rights, which is vital.

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.

The new constitution, a document granting the framework for a new democratic government, replacing the Articles of the Confederation. This new document gained approval from some of the citizens, but also raised questions and concerns from others. There was a constant back and forth between the two groups on whether or not the constitution should be ratified. This editorial provides historical background on the issue and expresses my opinion on which side I would’ve chosen.