Federalists supported a strong central government, and advocated the ratification of the new constitution. Since they were all for the new constitution, they wanted to go ahead and make it. But the Anti-federalists didn’t want this. They were hesitant on this new government. So, that is why the Federalist papers were created.
Primarily, individuals such as Andrew Hamilton and James Madison, Federalists, believed in a stronger central government whereas others such as Thomas Jefferson and Patrick Henry, Anti-Federalists, were for larger state government. Federalists were typically untrusting of citizens and the American people, and felt that the more educated individuals involved in government would govern. In contrast, individuals such as Henry and Jefferson believed that government was for the people, and should be given to the people to handle. In today’s standards, the Federalist views typically align with those of the Democratic platform while those with Anti-Federalist views align with those of the Republican
After the American Revolution, two political parties by the people in an effort to form a government of their own. Anti-Federalists wanted small local government and Federalists wanted large Federal centered Government. Anti-Federalists are afraid of a strong government because “when the people fear the government, there is tyranny…[and] when the government fears the people there is liberty” (Doc B). This shows that the Anti-Federalists want a weak government because it is bad when the government is given all the power. Anti-Federalists argue for policies that support agriculture because “those who labor the earth are the chosen people of God” (Doc D).
The proposal set off a heated dispute between the Federalists and anti-Federalists. The Federalists and anti-Federalists made certain arguments to support or oppose the ratification of the U.S. Constitution. On one hand, the Federalists claimed that the ratification of the Constitution would, in turn, resolve the troubles that barraged society. In contrast, the anti-Federalists found the Constitution not steady enough to maintain justice and to protect human rights. To begin, the Federalists argued that ratifying the Constitution was necessary because of the instability of the states
The opposing viewpoints of the Federalists and the Anti-Federalists created lengthy debates on how the newly found country would run the government and what rules would be considered the supreme law of the land. The anti-federalists thought the government held too much power and wanted the inclusion of the Bill of Rights (Young, slide 30). Patrick Henry, one of the most ardent anti-federalist, advocated extensively for the inclusion of the bill of rights (Young, “Found Fathers…”). Henry constantly voiced his discontent with the constitution and questioned aloud why the inclusion of the Bill of Rights were not added. As the delegate of Virginia, he led the people of Virginia to reject the ratification of the constitution and promised them that by his efforts and their rejection that the Bill of Rights would be included (Young, “Found Fathers…”).
The federal government does not have full, complete power of the government, due to the fact the federal government has to power to tax, regulate commerce, and put laws into place if and only if laws are so called “necessary and proper.” Another thing was for each branch of government to have their own separation of powers and check and balance other branches of government. Either though, the Federalists and Anti-Federalists did not agree on ideas, the Constitution is a document of the general compromise between the two political parties. The weakness of the Articles of the Confederation was resolved through the compromise of the Federalists and Anti-federalists political
Federalists knew that another self-governing government would only lead to a weak system just like the Articles lead them to failure. Thomas R. Frazier said, “View these things, fellow citizens, and then say that we do not require a new, a protecting, and efficient federal government if you can.” (Doc #1) Frazier is stating that America is in great need of a federal government, that they need educated and knowledgeable people to lead their country. He also means that in order to maintain their freedom and independence they would need a government to protect their rights they fought for. Creating three branches to avoid congress from becoming too powerful and keep everything under control was a much better way than having just one branch like in the Articles of Confederation. Another federalist named Jonathan Elliot said , “ … it is the opinion of this Convention that certain amendments and alterations in the said Constitution would remove the fears and quiet the apprehensions of many of the good people of the commonwealth.” (Doc #6) Elliot is stating that with few alterations, limiting the Constitutions power and allowing the states to make some decisions would change the Anti-Federalists mind and therefore they would create the Bill of rights to limit the
“A Caveat Against Injustice”) Although this amendment isn’t brought up, or even known about, it helps the government control what companies enter the United States. Without this piece, there would be businesses from all around the world taking over our economy. Later on, there were disputes about the newly ratified Constitution. Federalists and anti federalists arose due to their differing views over the newest work. Federalists were for the Constitution, while anti federalists were against the Constitution, mostly because it didn’t have a guaranteed set of rights for citizens.
Through the weaknesses of the government and the constitutional compromises, the Constitution was later established. The US Constitution was seen differently between two political parties. These two political parties were the Federalist and Anti-federalist. How much power the government had wasn't the same for these two groups. A Federalist was a group of people who supported the Constitution and the Anti-federalist was a group of people who opposed the ratification of the
Many Americans who were not wealthy supported the Constitution was because they believed that the United States needed a new and stronger national government. They believed that this government could provide the stability and security against violent outrages. The foil of these people were the Antifederalist. The Antifederalists offered three objections: that the Congress had conspired under a “veil of mystery” to create a new form of government, that a strong national government would destroy states’ rights, and that the new system of government resembled and monarchy and that violated the principle of liberty that guided the American Revolution. They also pointed that the voters will not directly