Compare And Contrast The Constitution And Anti Federalists

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 Federalists supported the ratification of the Constitution while the Anti Federalists were against it. This boiled down to simple beliefs held by both groups. Anti Federalists believed that the Constitution gave too much power to the central government and left state governments powerless. Anti Federalists were in favor of a weaker central governments and stronger local state governments. They believed that central government was too far removed from the people, and that the nation was too large, for it to serve them on a local state basis. This resulted in the fear that people’s voices would be taken away; this fear of oppression was only increased by the fact that the Constitution didn’t include a Bill of Rights. However, Federalists believed that a strong central government, accompanied by the Constitution, was needed after the Article of Confederation failed or the nation wouldn’t survive. In the eyes of the Federalists, a Bill of Rights was not needed because the Constitution did not put any limits on the rights of the citizens; however

Anti-Federalism, an 18th century political movement led primarily by Patrick Henry and Samuel Adams, opposed the ratification of the new United States Constitution for multiple reasons. [B] The new U.S. Constitution was written by a group of delegates selected for the 1787 Constitutional Convention which took place in Philadelphia. A chief reason Anti-Federalists were highly concerned with this document was the amount of power it would give the federal government. They worried that the implementation of a strong centralized government could only be possible at the expense of individual states rights and freedoms. Anti-Federalists were also concerned that smaller states, who had previously held as much weight in national affairs as larger states, may be ignored or trampled upon in regards to passing interstate laws and amending federal documents. Another concern of the Anti-Federalists was the absence of a Bill of Rights, a specific list of personal rights possessed by American citizens, in the Constitution. They feared that without this bill of stated rights, there would be no guarantee that the American government, under the Constitution, would not pass tyrannical laws resembling those implemented by the British just prior to the American Revolution. [A]

constitution still needed to be ratified in order to be set in place. Nine of the twelve states would have to approve for the U.S. constitution to be ratified. The were still several states that opposed. American leaders such as james madison, alexander hamilton, and many others wrote the Federalist papers 3. Eighty-five essays aimed at convincing the anti-federalist to ratify the new constitution. The federalist papers were a significant part of the U.S. political history and played a key role in getting the U.S. Constitution ratified. The basis of the federalist papers was strong government to hold states accountable to the people or “mob”. The federalist papers basis was to also face many of the problems the articles of confederation could not solve. The articles of confederation mainly could not do important functions such as regulating commerce and the ability to

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

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.

During the Constitutional Convention, the Federalists and Anti Federalists disagreed on many aspects of the Constitution.The Federalists wanted a strong central government while the Anti Federalists were more for state rights. That is just a small fraction of the many arguments that these two factions disagreed upon. The Constitution was eventually ratified with the Federalists compromising with the Anti Federalists by adding The Bill of Rights, a list of the general rights that a citizen was entitled to. Although the Bill of Rights gives us our inalienable rights, the government has compromised our rights to a significant extent many times in history due to fear, corruption, and control.

The Federalist and the Democratic-Republicans had the different view on things. The leader of the Federalist was Alexander Hamilton and the leader of the Democratic-Republicans was Thomas Jefferson. The Federalist were ruled by the wealthy and the rich. While the Democratic-Republicans were ruled by the people. which meant that the Federalist mostly just cared about the rich people and the Democratic-Republicans cared for all the people. The Federalist had an alliance with Britain and the Democratic-Republicans had an alliance with the French. The Alexander Hamilton wanted to go to war with France. The Federalist hated the French because they supported the Democratic-Republicans. Also, the Federalist wanted a strong Federal government and,

Anti-Federalists were strong believers that states should be able to manage their own revenue and spend their money as they, the state, felt necessary. Anti-Federalsits proposed and favored the Bill of Rights, whereas Federalists were against it. Federalists believed that economic struggles and overall national weaknesses were caused by many individual fiscal and monetary policies that acted in different ways. The Federalists were successful in their effort to get the Constitution ratified by all thirteen states, and later established a party known as the Federalist Party, which backed the views of Hamilton and was a strong force in the early United States. After the ratification of the Constitution, the Anti-Federalists worked within the Constitutions bounds, as they expected the Federalists to do as well, holding Federalists to the pledge that the Constitution granted the national government only the powers that were specifically listed. Federalists and Anti-Federalists had very strong yet different views and goals on the position on monetary policy, position on the constitution, and the overall goal - serving as official laws for the

Anti- Federalist were against the Constitution all together but most of all, I think the Anti-Federalist were against the fact that the state government’s would no longer have as much power like it did with the Articles of Confederation. The constitution supported the idea of a powerful and strong central government. The congress had the power to tax people, and make rules and regulations as it says in document two. With liberty being the Anti-Federalist’s biggest argument, the federalist got the idea that with all the power congress had, their freedom and rights would be threatened or even

Anti-Federalists is a group of people in the early U.S. who opposed ratification of the U. S. Constitution, because they feared a strong national government would oppress the people. They believed the governments should be rightly balanced, the different branches of legislature should be unconnected, and that the legislative and executive powers should be separate (Regent, Word Doc., 2017). Their concerns were within the national government; the legislative and executive branches were to powerful. They were also concerned that the Constitution gave too much power to the national government at the expense of the state governments. However, they believed that a bill of rights was essential to protection the people from the federal government.

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.

“Articles of Confederation was an written agreement summarizing the agreement between different parties the federalist and the anti-federalist”. Federalist wanted to ratify the constitution,and Anti-federalist did not want to ratify it. One big issue they had was the concern of adding the “Bill of Rights”. The Federalist felt like it was unnecessary because, they believed the Constitution should only limited the government not the people. The Anti-federalist felt like the Constitution gave central government too much power.

The Anti-Federalists were people who opposed the ratification of the Constitution. These people were against the development of a strong federal government. These people were afraid that a strong central government would infringe on their personal liberties, citing that it would be just like going back to Great Britain. They would rather place more power in the hands of their state and local governments. The Anti-Federalists stayed opposed to the Constitution until inclusion of the Bill of Rights. Supporters of this movement often resided largely in rural, less developed areas. Anti-Federalists