Confederation History

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).

A constitution is a written document that sets forth the fundamental rules by which a society is governed. Throughout the course of history the United States has lived under two Constitutions since the British-American colonies declared their independence from Great Britain in 1776. First in line was the Articles of Confederation (1789-1789) followed by the Constitution of United States of America (1789-present). The Articles of Confederation was the first formal written Constitution of America that specified how the national government was to operate. Unfortunately, the Articles did not last long. Under the words of the Article’s power was limited; Congress could make decisions, but had no power to enforce them. Also the articles stated

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 Constitutional Convention of 1787 marked the evolution from the Articles of Confederation to the U.S. Constitution. The ratification argument led to disagreements between the Federalists, who wanted to approve the Constitution, and Anti-Federalists, who opposed the document. The latter believed that the new system forced by the Constitution failed to protect the individual rights of citizens and threatened liberties.

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

After many years of fighting for independence, America needed a break from any type of government. Well you see in order to have a functioning country you need some type of functioning government. When the idea of a government came up many were fearful of what could happen. What if they resorted back to the old ways? What if all those years of fighting for independence were for nothing? Congress had to start somewhere. And in November 1777, The Articles of Confederation were accepted. “The Continental Congress adopted the Articles of Confederation, the first constitution of the United States, on November 5, 1777.” The main purpose of the Articles of Confederation was to have something to hold on to while America set up. However there Articles did not deal very well with state things. Such as dealing with foreign relations and economic conditions. When accepted the Articles were only to work under certain conditions. Conditions being those such as not interfering with other states and their commerce. Or states that had not paid if war debts. Out of fear of becoming their enemy they thought that it was a good idea. Congress created many departments and one of them was the Department of

The Constitution wasn’t fair and was poorly made so they had to create a new one. The Congress started off by adding improvements but it needed too many improvements they had to start over. If they hadn't started over the Constitution Would not have been as good, and there would still be poorly written parts. The new constitution was called the Constitutional Convention. People complained that their Liberty was being taken away and they wanted it back the Congress thought about the complaints and decide to consider revising the Constitution. The revising turned into the Constitutional Convention.

Following the creation of the United States of America, a constitution of laws was desperately needed to create firm unity in the young nation. The original constitution that the Congress brought forth was the Articles of Confederation. The Articles of Confederation left most of the power with the state governments, which many people approved of. However, many problems were created by this law of the land. A convention was called in Philadelphia in 1787 to revise the Articles where they eventually scrapped it and wrote a new, but similar in ideals, document which is now known as the U.S. Constitution. The Constitution was, in fact, very different from the Articles of Confederation. So much so that they do not even appear to be similar in any

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 U.S. Constitution is the document of the principles and system of the United States government. It covers the goals of the new government, the system and purpose of each branch, how the states will work, how to amend the constitution, the supremacy of the national government, and the process of ratification. The U.S. Constitution is the supreme law of America, that must be followed by everyone. The Constitution of the United States was established at the 1787 Constitutional Convention and signed in 1787. The Constitution is the structure of America, it tells us how everything will work in this nation of ours. Without the Constitution, there would not be any specified rules of how this country is set up and how it works. The Constitution makes us who we are today, it establishes our system of government, our rules of what we can and can’t do, what the government can do for the people, and how everything in America is set up.

Anti-Federalists and Federalists were opinionated groups who tried to sway Americans about the Constitution. Anti-Federalists opposed developing a federal government, and they did not want to ratify the Constitution. Instead, they wanted the state governments to keep the power. The Federalists disagreed because they wanted a government that was stronger on the national level and that had the Constitution to manage tensions and debts from the Revolution. They both differed in many ways, but one way that they were similar was because they had an impact on the way the Constitution was written.

With a failing, and week Articles of Confederation loosely uniting the state, delegates from each states set out to revise the Articles of Confederation. Instead, they made an extremely polarizing Constitution, which was debated on and revised in the years to come. In these debates were parties, with two entirely different political ideologies and philosophies. The Federalists believed that they should ratify the Constitution now, and they would amend the Constitution later. On the other hand, the Anti-Federalists believed that the Constitution shouldn’t be ratified, because it didn't guarantee the citizen’s rights and gave too much power to the 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.

Declaring Independence from Great Britain left the United States dismantled and in need of structure. During the Revolutionary war the continental congress wrote the Articles of Confederation to regulate the colonies as a national government. Lasting no more than 4 years the Articles of Confederation lacked any sufficient power to keep the country united as one and protected with a national army or navy. As each state was formed they began to act out against each other in self-interest. With no power to regulate commerce between states, the states were free to establish their own commerce rules that would most often impact other states negatively. Without a way to properly enforce laws and taxation through a national court system, laws were

After reading all this information on Federalist and Antifederalist I discovered that the reason they divided was because the federalist thought that they could strengthened the government so that their country could be better. The Antifederalist didn’t want them to do that because they thought that the constitution wouldn’t protect the individual rights the people have that it would just take them away. Also the Federalist wanted a strong central government while the Anti-federalist just wanted the states to have all the power and not the central government. To Benjamin Franklin, and Alexander Hamilton they said that they wanted the power to go toward the government. To John Hancock, and Patrick Henry they