The Federalist way is the future way. Over the last series of years, federalists have been arguing for a strong central government to rule the land. We strongly believe that the federalist agenda which consists of providing a strong central government by ratifying the constitution will greatly help the nation and be far better than the articles of confederation still in place. The goal of the Federalists is not to have an all controlling government, despite what many Anti-federalists want others to believe. They only want to replace the former government with a strong centralized government. They want to replace it as the Articles of Confederation do not give enough power to either the state or the central government. However, the Federalists …show more content…
They believed creating one supreme power that ruled over all the states would turn into the same situation they fought, Great Britain. “All human authority, however organized, must have confined limits, or insolence and oppression will prove the offspring of its grandeur, and the difficulty or rather impossibility of escape prevents resistance” (George Clinton, Robert Yates, Samuel Bryan, Anti- Federalist papers.) Here they wrong about how they believed if the U.S. were to have one central power as the strongest in the land it would result in tyranny. However like the Federalists, they still believed that the old government should be replaced. “Instances of the people losing their liberty by their own carelessness and the ambition of a few. We are cautioned . . . against faction and turbulence. I acknowledge that licentiousness is dangerous, and that it ought to be provided against. I acknowledge, also, the new form of government may effectually prevent it. Yet there is another thing it will as effectually do- -it will oppress and ruin the people. Patrick Henry” (George Clinton, Robert Yates, Samuel Bryan, Anti-Federalist Papers.) Here some of the authors of the Anti-Federalist papers describe how they do agree that the old government need to be replaced and that the newly proposed on could do the job. Although it goes directly back to them not agreeing
The Anti-Federalists argued that their form of government was more effective. They argued many points that were reasonable. Brutus wrote that he feared that our government would be controlled by a group of elites, and he thought that these elites would abuse the people’s rights by just doing what would only benefit them. Brutus thought once the elites started running our country, that they would be in power for a long time and no one could change their minds on certain views. (Brutus 1).
The Federalists are, no doubt, trying to help to build America’s government in the benefit of the citizens. The government should have a Central department where the power is able to help the country function properly and smoothly. The Federalists have made it possible by providing the Constitution. This piece of document helps describe the roles the Central Government should have. The constitution is an important piece of document to describe major roles of the Central Government. The constitution is a work of art in the views of the Federalists, and it is proven to show how the Constitution is able to convert our country into a beneficial government. The Constitution explains the significance of each section and how the power is distributed between the Central Government. The Federalists had to create the Constitution in order for the weakness of the Article Of Confederation to never occur again.
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.
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
During the Revolutionary War, colonists believed that they needed a sense of unified government, so this led to the creation of the Articles of Confederation, the first written constitution of the United States (history.com). Although the Articles of Confederation had its strengths, such as allowing the central government to create treaties and maintain military, it had many weaknesses, such as preventing the central government to levy taxes and regulate trade. It also could not be changed unless there was a unanimous decision and it lacked a stable currency. Since the creation of the Articles of Confederation had many issues and weaknesses, the Continental Congress rewrote the Articles into what is now known as the U.S Constitution. The Constitution established a national government, guaranteed basic rights for the colonists and revised almost everything that was wrong in the original Articles, such as the sovereignty that resided primarily in the states and the lack of power from the national government. The Constitution was later ratified by all 13 states in May 1790, with the support of the Federalist Party. [A] Federalists believed in the commitment to a strong national government and in the practice of a separation of powers. However, Anti-Federalists had the opposite view which was the opposition of a strong national government, the support for small landowners, and the representation of rights of the people. Anti-Federalists believed that a strong national government
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-Federalists favor a central government similar to the Articles of Confederation. Not all of the Anti-Federalists think identical; Some prefer to stay with the Articles of Confederation and a slightly stronger central government with the states in power would work for America better others prefer to compromise and only adding the Bill of Rights. "The objects of jurisdiction…, are so numerous, and the shades of distinction between civil causes are oftentimes so slight, that it is more than probable that the state judicatories would be wholly superseded; for in contests about jurisdiction, the federal court, as the most powerful, would ever prevail." In the Centinel No. 1 the Anti-Federalists tell the people that slightly changing the judicial system or the law can change everything. “It appears from these articles that there is no need of any intervention of the state governments, between the Congress and the people, to execute any one power vested in the general government, and that the constitution and laws of every state are nullified and declared void, so far as they are or shall be inconsistent with this constitution, or the laws made in pursuance of it, or with treaties made under the authority of the United States. — The government then, so far as it extends, is a complete one, and not a confederation.” In Brutus I the Anti-Federalists input their opinions on how government does not need to be run by one big power but by smaller powers held in the
Most Americans did not trust the new government that was in place, but the Anti-Federalist was really skeptical of the government in general and strong national government. So in not trusting the government they did not approve of the new constitution. They were afraid it created a government that the people could not manage. Many notable Americans were Anti-Federalists. Some of the creators of the Anti-Federalist papers included George Mason and Elbridge Gerry. Both were present the Philadelphia Convention but had declined to sign the constitution. The Anti-Federalist believed that the Constitution had many imperfections. The Anti-Federalist believed the Constitution should have been constructed in a more public place and not behind closed
Federalists or Anti-federalists are both fair sides, and each side has an arguable amount of supporters. I am an Anti-federalist, or someone who opposes the Constitution. Moreover, we believe that the Constitution takes too much power away from the people. The Federalists on the other hand are those who support the Constitution. They link themselves with the idea of federalism, and federalism is when power is divided and shared between a central government and local governments. In addition, the Constitution gives the national government too much power, it doesn’t provide for a republican government, and in the end, it doesn't provide a Bill of Rights which is vital.
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
They believed that the Articles of Confederation had already failed because America was still in debt to foreign nations and even individual citizens, commerce was not doing well, and the national government had no actual power to perform foreign relations (3). Additionally, they argued that the federal government under the Articles of Confederation had no actual authority, it could only make recommendations and states could choose whether or not to abide by those recommendations (3). Federalists believed that the national government needed to be able to raise revenue by taxing the people, and that by giving the national government the right to tax along with so many other powers would not be infringing on states rights by doing so because the people regulate the government and because states’ still maintain their power to tax their citizens (6)(7)(12)(15)(18). No. 15 of the Federalist Papers stated that “We have neither troops, nor treasury, nor government” (3). Also, the Articles of Confederation did not have the power to provide national defense, one of the most important duties of government (1)(4). Federalists believed that "the Union ought to be invested with full power to levy troops; to build and equip fleets, and to raise the revenues which will be required for the formation and support of an arm and navy, in the customary and ordinary modes practiced in other governments" in order to provide safety for their citizens (4). Federalists also defended the Supremacy and Necessary and Proper Clauses by stating that they were necessary for the national government to be able to enforce the powers it had (7)(10). If a government has a responsibility and authority to exercise a certain action, it needs to have the power to do so (13). They also believed that the
The federalists favored a strong central government because they believed that if the states had too much power the government wouldn’t be able to protect the rights of the citizens. Alexander Hamilton, leader of the federalists, believed in a loose constitution, taking action on whatever the people wanted as long as it wasn’t listed in the constitution. Federalists concluded that the United States should be able to manufacture and trade. The federalists were strong in New England and had support from the northern east, they supported the Britain with whom they traded with.
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.
The Antifederalists were obviously opposed to the Constitution, and they were in full support of the Articles of Confederation. The Antifederalists leaders, like Patrick Henry, believed the Constitution challenged individual’s liberty. The Antifederalists acted in factions. As the Federalists believed in a strong central government, the Antifederalists thought this would get in the way of state sovereignty. Furthermore, other factions within the Antifederalists believed a strong, central government would reflect the government of Great Britain, in which they were trying to get away from. Patrick Henry publicly spoke out against the Constitution claiming it would give the States very limited power. The Constitution was to contain a president, army, and the power to tax. Henry and others viewed this as basically Great Britain. They were afraid that the