American Freedom and Its Relationship to Government Authority

These different views on government made many people think hard on what type of government they wanted. In the end, the Federalist’s point of view won. Today, this type of government still exists. It made one of the

During the time period of 1801 to 1817, there were multiple issues in the United States ranging from wars to political boundaries. This time period saw the termination of the Federalist party. The conflicts were between two parties called the Jeffersonian Republicans and the Federalists. The Federalist party was officially started by John Adams. John Adams was also a loose constructionist just like all the other Federalists. Federalists were in favor of a strong central government. On the other side, was Thomas Jefferson who was in office from 1801 to 1809. Jefferson started the Jeffersonian Republican party. The Jeffersonians were strict constructionists who believed in states rights. They said that anything that is not stated in

The Whig’s power was based in the North and the Northwest, which was New England and Old Northwest. The Whig ideas were authoritative among areas, which were affected by factory work and commercial agriculture, therefore among southern planters and urban merchants. David Currie claims that

To begin with, under Andrew Jackson the Democratic-Republicans took name of Democrats. The two parties, the Whigs and the Democratic Republicans, had generally opposite opinions on many issues. To begin with, their economic beliefs were opposite, especially on the existence of a national bank and the existence of tariffs because of their usual geographical location. The Whigs wanted a strong national bank and high tariffs in order to support their industries and manufacturing in the north. On the other hand, the Democrats wanted low tariffs and state banks because they wanted to ensure they would be able to profit as much as possible from the trading of cotton to foreign countries, as their south had an agriculturally based economy. Furthermore, they had different opinions on the extent of the federal government’s power. The Whigs, who were originally the Federalists, wanted

By 1817 the great American experiment was in full swing. America was developing into an effective democratic nation. However as the democracy continued to grow, two opposing political parties developed, the Jeffersonian Republicans and the Federalists. The Jeffersonian Republicans believed in strong state governments, a weak central government, and a strict interpretation of the Constitution. The Federalists saw it differently. They opted for a powerful central government with weaker state governments, and a loose interpretation of the Constitution. The seemingly solid divide between Federalist and Republican would begin to blur during the presidencies of Thomas Jefferson and James Madison. For, neither Republican president was able lead

America is the universal symbol of freedom. But is it really free? Does the history of the United States stay true to the ideas of our forefathers? Or has the definition been altered to fit American policies? Has freedom defined America? Or has America defined freedom? I believe America was at first defined by freedom, then after time, America defined freedom, altering the definition to fit the niche it fits in, but still keeping key components so it still seems to be staying true to the ideas of America’s founding fathers.

Another difference relates to the economic differences between the supporters of both sides. The Federalists were supported by big business interests that operated within and out of the American borders. They considered the implementation of the constitution as a suitable step towards the government being able to regulate the country’s economy. As a result, they would be able to benefit significantly. On the other hand, the Anti-Federalist union was chiefly dominated by small rural communities and farmers, who believed that the local government had more to offer with regards to their profits and the establishment of a market for their goods (Schultz 127). To these farmers, the state government was more

First, when the political parties emerged in the 1790’s it was evident that their ideologies were vastly different. The Republican Party wanted a representative form of government that functioned “in the interest of the people.” This party, led by Thomas Jefferson, supported a limited central government, with individual states retaining a majority of the control. Jefferson’s vision was for a nation of farmers, and farmers do not need big government to survive. They feared a large central government would take away the rights of the people. On the other hand, the Federalist Party, led by Alexander Hamilton, supported a strong central government that would pursue policies in support of economic growth, which in turn would provide the freedom the people wanted. Hamilton’s followers also supported a diverse economy.1 It is important to note here however, that both parties knew they would have to become national parties in order to win any elections and both parties had followers in the north and in the south. There was no sectional divide in the parties.

The Anti-Federalist party was made up of people who, for the most part, lived in the country. They were opposed to developing a federal government, and they did not want to ratify the Constitution, which, they claimed, threatened each free person’s liberites, until the authors included the Bill of Rights. (This granted individual rights of citizens. The Anti-Federalists wanted to write down these so that they could not be taken away from the people by the government like England had done.) Instead, they wanted the state governments to keep the power to prevent monarchies and dictatorships. Famous members of this party were Thomas Jefferson, Samuel Adams, Patrick Henry, John Hancock, Mercy Otis Warren, George Mason, Richard Henry Lee, and James Monroe. They favored the Articles of Confederation. However, the Articles of Confederation had a few flaws: if a law was to pass, it would need a majority rule (9/13); it lacked a court system (nationally); and it was missing an executive branch. The Bill of Rights was appreciated because they wanted to make sure that individual rights could not be taken away. The Anti-Federalists may not have been a group that agreed with one another all the time, but as their opinions varied, more rights were thought of and protected. For example, one part of the group held the view that the sovereignty of states could be endangered

The Jacksonian Democratic Party and the Whig Party each, exemplified different beliefs on the role of the federal government in the economy and towards westward expansion in the 1830s and 1840s. However, the Jacksonian, laissez faire supporting Democrats and the economic nationalistic Whig party shared almost no beliefs except for the removal of American Indians in the areas their supporters wished to settle. The lack of similarities is because the Whigs formed their own party to oppose President Jackson’s strong-armed leadership style and policies which earned him the nickname “King Andrew.” The Jacksonian Democratic Party evolved out of the Democratic-Republican Party in the early 1800s, the core of its membership was composed of farmers, immigrants, and white Southerners. The Whigs formed in 1834 and lasted for 20 years, they were the major political party that opposed Andrew Jackson. The Whigs were created based upon the Federalist beliefs in a strong federal government and adopted many Federalist and National Republican policy ideas, including federal funding for internal improvements, a central bank, and high tariffs to protect the growth of manufacturing enterprises. Overall, the Jacksonian Democratic agrarian Party and the industrialization supporting Whig Party had different beliefs toward the role of the federal government in the economy and towards westward expansion.

Jacksonian Democracy favored Laissez faire economics over the proactive federal investments promoted by the opposing Whig Party (“Jacksonian Democracy”, 2017).

The 1820’s and 1830’s were decades full of events that accentuated the diversity of ideas and views on many topics. For instance, the Second Great Awakening brought forward many competing views on religion, some more radical than others. The many denominations that sprouted from this change were a direct result of the rise in the American idea of personal freedom and liberty, something that the Democratic Jacksonians viewed themselves as the non-disputable champions of. Although there were many negative impacts on individual freedom over the time the Jacksonian Democrats held power in the fledgling government, the Jacksonian’s view of themselves as the defenders of democracy and the Constitution is to a great extent misplaced because of their

First of all, there was a higher participation among voters of the time since it was now not only possible for white, male, property-owners to vote, but also white men who were not property owners. All white males could now have their vote matter in the grand scheme. Whigs wanted a stronger central government, while the Jacksonian Democrats wanted less government. Also, under Henry Clay’s American system, he wanted the federal funds to help create roads and make other internal improvements. Jackson ended up vetoing this, which was the first time a president vetoed something because of personal preference. The Whigs were in uproar over this, which furthered the divide between two

The Second American Party System was between the Democrats and the Whigs. The Whigs were organized to oppose Andrew Jackson in the early 1830s. The Whigs were the heir to Federalism, favoring a strong national government in the economy like the American System and supported active social reform. Its power was in the North and Old Northwest, voters who would benefit from increased commercialization. The Whigs wanted to

The argument between Federalists and Anti-Federalists might seem long gone to American citizens, but still their philosophical foundations shape the teams, scope and size of the battlefield. These philosophies go back to two lone men, Alexander Hamilton and Thomas Jefferson. Both fought aggressively for a government based on their ideas, and both did make portions of the now-standing American government. This essay will outline the political, social and economic philosophies of both men, how their philosophies influenced the government today, and a closing opinion.