Compare And Contrast The Federalist 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.

There exists a similarity between both the federalists and the anti-federalists. Both felt that government was necessary because ‘men were not “angels”’ (Bryner, Public Virtue and the Roots of American Government, 1987). However, they disagree on the size of government and the republic. The federalists wanted a large republic with a central government while the anti-federalist wanted a small republic with a state government. In this essay, I generally agree with the statements except the part where federalists were republicans because they envisioned the commonweal of the national community. The weakness of this argument is that there may be a false impression that the candidate is truly virtuous. Thus, when he becomes the national government,

The concept of theory versus reality is a constant in everyday life. Every person has experienced a situation in which the idea in their head was much better than the outcome. All actions have consequences, and sometimes those consequences are worse than others. In the case of the Federalists vs. The Anti-Federalists, was the drafting of the Constitution actually worth it in the end? When the colonists first came over seas from Great Britain there was one thing that was vastly agreed on—a change in how government works and runs was necessary for the future of America. Two major groups eventually formed behind this way of thinking, the Federalists and the Anti-Federalists. The Federalists were under the impression that the formation of a constitution and a strong federal government was needed. On the opposite political end there were The Anti-Federalists, were opposed to the idea of a constitution because they worried that the government and the people running it would become too corrupt and powerful. They also believed that a smaller central government was needed with larger governments at the state levels. This smaller central government would be similar to what was formed under the Articles of Confederation. Both sides bring very good arguments, and it is impossible to truly know whether one side’s plan of government would have been better than the other. But when looking at the facts of where our country came from, and where our country is

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.

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

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.

Political parties had not existed until the Federalists and Anti-Federalists came along. These two parties had very different ideas on how our government should be ran. A federalist is a member of the Federalist Party, which was the first American political party who agreed with change to the constitution allowing tariffs and a national bank. This party existed from the early 1790s to 1816. An Anti-federalist is a person who opposed the ratification of the Constitution in 1789 who then allied with Thomas Jefferson's Anti-federal Party, which opposed extension of the powers of the federal Government. Each of these parties view the constitution differently and would disagree often in the same way our two political parties do today. These two

One of the great debates in American history was over the approval of the Constitution in 1787. Those who supported the Constitution were known as Federalist, a person who advocates and supports a system of government in which several states unite under a Central authority. Those who opposed the approval of the Constitution in favor of small localized government were known as Anti Federalists. Both the Federalists and the Anti Federalists were concerned with the protection of liberty. However, they disagreed over whether or not a strong national government would preserve or eventually destroy the liberty of the American people.

The differences that exist between the anti-federalists and the federalists are wide and at times more complex. The beliefs of the federalists can be described as nationalists. Initially the federalists were the ones who were instrumental in shaping the 1787 constitution of the United States which in return strengthened the state government. On the other hand, anti-federalism is basically the type of movement which opposed the establishment of a stronger federal government of the United States that in return contrasted the ratification of the late1788 constitution. Regardless of that opposition, the anti-federalists never managed to organize it efficiently throughout the thirteen states of the United States; hence they had to fight for its

It is due to the powerful leaders that guided America that the country has become as prosperous as it is. These leaders include: George Washington, John Adams, and Thomas Jefferson. All of these men had to make multiple difficult decisions in order to satisfy the country as a whole. Their quick and logical thinking is what established a stable government in the United States of America.

The Federalists in America originally were in favor of destroying the articles of confederation and employing the constitution. After this was done, they believed in a loose interpretation of it and the Elastic Clause. Basically, the Federalists showed little regard to state rights and felt the federal government needed to be powerful in order to properly rule the nation. The Federalist Party died by the time of the Hartford Convention, but later reappeared as the Whig Party. The Federalist Party can be associated with the modern day Democratic Party as they both believe in using Federal Government and a very loose interpretation

"The ground of liberty is to be gained by inches, that we must be contented to secure what we can get from time to time, and eternally press forward for what is yet to get. It takes time to persuade men to do even what is for their own good," quoted by Thomas Jefferson on January 27, 1790. Around this time there were two political parties that are talked about throughout this paper, The Federalists and The Democratic-Republican party. There were several problems occurring in the United States of America around the 1790's, due to the fact that George Washington resigned from presidency and didn't choose to run for a third four year term. Around this time Washington worried that the nation will split from political parties emerging trying to elect a new president and vice-president. There are two major political parties emerging, Federalist and the Democratic-Republican party, these two parties had differing views on The Constitution, ideal people, government, and foreign policy position. These two parties do represent, and they do not represent the Democratic Party and the Republican Party of today. Our government today follows some of each sides views today. I think that it doesn't matter what kind of job you have or what ethnicity you are to be president, unlike the Federalist and the Democratic-Republican party. The Government chooses bits and pieces of there ideal views, and that's how they run the government today. I do favor parts of the Federalist Party, and the Democratic-Republican Party today. I like how the Democratic-Republican Party had farmers as some of there people because today we don't run off large scale manufacturing, and large scale manufacturing only, we use small farms to help produce products for the whole entire world.