Anti Federalist Position

The Federalist believed that there should be a strong central government . The Anti-Federalist believed in less power in government and more in the people and to have our rights guaranteed. Based on the Bill of Rights and the way it was interpreted the Anti-Federalists were right.

Establishing an effective system of government has proven to be an obstacle for centuries. Fortunately, the Founding Father recognized the common flaws of governments, as did many common men in the colonies. Consequently, the ratification of the constitution was vital for a healthy governmental system, though it did bring about much debate and persuasion. There were two main positions which people took during the ratification, those being the Anti-Federalist and the Federalist. The Anti-Federalist were a diverse assembly involving prominent men such as George Mason and Patrick Henry, and also the most unlikely of individuals, those being Farmers and shopkeepers. The chief complaint about the Constitution was that it confiscated the power from the sates, thereby robbing the people of their power. Oppositely, the Federalist believed in removing some control from the states and imparting that power to the national government, thus making America partially national. Throughout this debate, many letters were shared between the two sides, and eventually, it led to the federalist winning over the colonies.

The Anti-federalist were the people who opposed the sanction of the constitution. They were Samuel Adams and John Hancock etc. They believed that the ratification of the constitution will lead to corruption and abuse of power by the government. The suggested constitution did not benefit the people as it should and did not have an assurance of the people’s right to assembly or bear arms. Anti-federalist believed in controlling government authority, therefore with the assumption that the new ratification will be most favorable to the wealthy, it was a threat to their beliefs— meaning that the poorer citizens will not be able to exercise their liberty for fear of double standard by the elite rulers. Most Anti-federalist were farmers and lower class citizens, so we could understand why they were intimidated by the rich and powerful Federalist— who had backgrounds of educations and could have easily manipulate the system for their own gratification.

For AP United States history I chose the federalist and anti federalist compare and contrast that impacted America to the first party system because the past actions have affected us in the present. We analyze the past to find the foundations of present day political problems. I relate this to the SLO by committing time to community to present the past to the community they can understand how our country was developed and where the problems came from. I can urge them to understand why seeing the past is important to relate to the present. I overcame the obstacles in the completion of this assignment by reading and researching on comparing and contrasting the federalist and anti federalist to understand their point of views and why they had

I was surprised that I actually agreed with what the Anti-federalist had to say. I found it to be more dense and harder then the federalist number ten. Once I found a good source and was able to understand what the points they are trying to make were, I found that I liked the views they stand for. I liked the idea of more representatives instead of just one for the whole nation. If each state had their own representative they would be able to better represent the interests of those people. Also they wouldn’t have to do so much damage control if each state was taking care of by their own specific representative. If each state had control over whom and what they taxed, they could better control the economy of that state. The people would feel

Many people chose to support the Constitution and those people were often called Federalists. The name Federalists comes from the word Federalism, which means a powerful central government. Nationalists seemed to be a more appropriate name for the supporters of the Constitution, but during the 1780s the name would have been a political responsibility. The most important role of a Federalist was their ability to defend the popular gains of the Revolution. Many Federalists were well educated in national-level work and very gifted. Among those gifted Federalists were Benjamin Franklin and George Washington. Furthermore, the Federalists were also well regulated, well financed, and used the printed word very wisely. Most of the newspapers were in favor of the Federalists and the articles were

The Federalist Papers established the definition of a Republic that would govern by the representation of the people and the interest of the society. Based on the principles of Democracy, the Federalist Papers established the acquisition of power by the decision of the population to “choose a body of citizens whose wisdom may best discern the true interest of the country and whose patriotism and love of justice will be at least likely to sacrifice it to temporary and partial considerations”, the principle of democracy established on the Federalist Paper advocated for the recognition of power given by the popular decision of the people to attend the interest of the whole community. The principal development of the Republic was distributed in

The main argument against ratifying the constitution by the Anti-Federalists was that they thought that the government would be created would be too powerful and they would just be paving the way for another monarchy like the one that they had just fought so hard to free themselves from in England. They also wanted to add a Bill of Rights before ratifying the constitution and not after. The Pros are that the document had stated to provide protection against the cruel and unlawful act of ruling the american colonies.Freedom of movement which is under Article IV. This section explained the security and perpetual interactions and partnership among the citizens of the emerged nation. The document created a bridge to connect the individual States

can also be impeached, put on trial, and if found guilty of crime or misdemeanor, he/she is prosecuted and punished (Garzik, 2004). However, the King of Great Britain cannot be impeached or tried. Unless a crisis involving national revolution occurs, then he becomes amenable. According to the arguments provided by Lee, there are flaws in the manner in which a president should be replaced in the event that he leaves office (The Federalist Papers Project, 2015). The idea of the president holding office for four years does not take into account such issues as death, resignation, and inability. In this case, Lee poses the question of who should take over as acting president (The Federalist Papers Project, 2015). When it comes to passing bills, the president of the U.S. has the authority to return bills even after it passes the two branches of the legislature (Garzik, 2004). The president is thus said to have a qualified negative. Conversely, the British sovereign has absolute negative regarding acts of the two

n the history of the United States, the Anti-federalists were the individuals who opposed the implementation of a central federal government which would seek to oversee different operations in the country along with the ratification of the constitution. Instead, they advocated that power ought to remain within the hands of the local and state governments. Conversely, the Federalists advocated for a stronger government that would oversee the operations of all states. They also wanted the ratification of the existing constitution in order to help the government in managing its debts along with the tensions that were developing in particular states. The Federalist movement was formed by Alexander Hamilton, and it functioned as the first

The Anti-Federalist put up a long and hard fight, however, they were not as organized as the Federalists. While the Anti- Federalist had great concerns about the Constitution and National government, the Federalist had good responses to combat these concerns. The Federalist were and for the Constitution and feel the Article of Confederation were not worth ratifying, these should be scrapped altogether. They felt that the Articles limited the power of congress, because congress had to request cooperation from the states. Unlike the Anti-Federalist, the Federalist organized quickly, had ratifying conventions, and wrote the Federalist papers to rebut the Anti- Federalist arguments.

The Federalist and Anti-Federalist papers were created in response to the United States Constitution. In 1787, the Second Continental Congress called for a federal convention. This meeting in Philadelphia came to create the U.S Constitution. It originally was held to revise the Articles of Confederation, but due to the mindsets of many proponents present at the convention, like Alexander Hamilton and James Madison, and the vision of creating a new government rather than fixing the old one, the United States Constitution was formed. Once this was sent to congress it was submitted to the states for ratification. In response, many articles and letters were submitted to the public criticizing the proposition. These articles and letters are where the Anti-Federalist papers are derived from. Although there was opposition to the Constitution, many were in its favor. In response to these criticizing papers, Alexander Hamilton, John Jay, and James Madison wrote papers in the constitutions defense. These were come to be known as the Federalist papers. Two papers in particular, Federalist 51 and Anti--Federalist 51, are written on the topic of checks and balances and how this relates to a separation of powers within the national government. These arguments were successful due to their primary points of contention and strong arguments proposed.

The Constitution, when first introduced, set the stage for much controversy in the United States. The two major parties in this battle were the Federalists and the Anti-Federalists. The Federalists, such as James Madison, were in favor of ratifying the Constitution. On the other hand, the Anti-Federalists, such as Patrick Henry and Richard Henry Lee, were against ratification. Each party has their own beliefs on why or why not this document should or should not be passed. These beliefs are displayed in the following articles: Patrick Henry's "Virginia Should Reject the Constitution," Richard Henry Lee's "The Constitution Will Encourage Aristocracy," James Madison's "Federalist Paper No. 10," and "The Letters to Brutus." In these

While the anti-Federalists believed the Constitution and formation of a National Government would lead to a monarchy or aristocracy, the Federalists vision of the country supported the belief that a National Government based on the Articles of the Confederation was inadequate to support an ever growing and expanding nation.

I would support the anti-federalists. Anti-federalists wanted to make federalism better by improving areas that they were weak at, they did not completely oppose them. Anti-federalism guaranteed state rights and wanted a clarification of the constitution. By clarifying the constitution, they would also help avoid secret deals. The anti-federalists wanted the bill of rights to be in the constitution to insure people’s rights. Federalists The federalists fully supported the constitution. I personally don’t think that is bad but they did not think the bill of rights was necessary to us as Americans. The quote “In republican government, the legislative authority necessarily predominates” they are stating that the national government has more power