The Fears Of The Federalist Summary

In the early 19th century the two dominant political parties, the Jeffersonian Republicans and the Federalists, had many opposing beliefs. With respect to the federal constitution, the Jeffersonian Republicans were viewed as strict constructionists who were opposed to the broad and lenient constructionism of the Federalists. The Jeffersonian Republicans were supported by commoners and the middle class. In general, they favored limiting the power of the national government, they believed that farming should serve as the backbone of the economy based on agriculture, and they supported the cause of the French Revolution. Contrary to such beliefs were those of the Federalists who were supported by the wealthy and aristocrats. Federalists, who

During the time period of 1801 to 1817, there were multiple issues in the United States ranging from wars to political boundaries. This time period saw the termination of the Federalist party. The conflicts were between two parties called the Jeffersonian Republicans and the Federalists. The Federalist party was officially started by John Adams. John Adams was also a loose constructionist just like all the other Federalists. Federalists were in favor of a strong central government. On the other side, was Thomas Jefferson who was in office from 1801 to 1809. Jefferson started the Jeffersonian Republican party. The Jeffersonians were strict constructionists who believed in states rights. They said that anything that is not stated in

After the colonies gained independence, the founding fathers soon found that becoming a new independent nation was going to be a difficult task. The biggest task was deciding on the division of power in the government. This issue divided the people into two groups, the federalists and the Jeffersonian republicans. Alexander Hamilton led the federalists and Thomas Jefferson led the republicans. These two important men in history would later show how the challenges of becoming a new nation. In this essay I will be analyzing the ideas of Linda K. Kerber’s “The Fears of the Federalists,” to Drew R. McCoy’s “The Fears of the Jeffersonian Republicans.” Furthermore, comparisons will be made about both essays to gain a better understanding of the struggles of government in early America.

By 1817 the great American experiment was in full swing. America was developing into an effective democratic nation. However as the democracy continued to grow, two opposing political parties developed, the Jeffersonian Republicans and the Federalists. The Jeffersonian Republicans believed in strong state governments, a weak central government, and a strict interpretation of the Constitution. The Federalists saw it differently. They opted for a powerful central government with weaker state governments, and a loose interpretation of the Constitution. The seemingly solid divide between Federalist and Republican would begin to blur during the presidencies of Thomas Jefferson and James Madison. For, neither Republican president was able lead

America is an incredibly vast, diverse country, and has been this way for hundreds of years. The sheer size of America, even when it was only composed of thirteen states with a total population of nearly three million people (Brutus, essay 1, p. 64), concerned many Americans in the 1780s, due to this inquiry: was America simply too large for a republican style government to work? Many anti-federalists claimed that republics could only work on a small scale, while the federalists believed that having a large republic was the only way to go and would be beneficial to the public good. Before this time, history furnished no examples of a well-functioning republic as big as America, so the federalists and anti federalists were stepping into a completely new untouched territory.

The foundation of a Nation has gone through the occupation from former Native Americans, Freedom of Religion that Pilgrims sought for. Towards the Inhabitants of the American Colonists. Fast forward after the American Revolution. Now that America has broken away from Britain, there was a new sense of freedom and opinions on how the nation must need a republic and form a republic. An upcoming group called the Federalists will clash with the anti- federalists of what must the order of government should be involved with running the country. James Madison who was a federalists and Patrick Henry an Anti-federalists had both given strong opinions on a new Proposition, of taking charge and forming a country that will run fairly and not dominating as a monarch. Many are familiar with the Bill of Rights that is a document listing the protection of every natural born citizen’s freedom. So the two will discuss their view of the constitution.

The book A Magnificent Catastrophe, by Edward J. Larson, narrates a story about how dirty and devious America’s first presidential campaign of 1800, how it became the most powerful election and how it molded America’s future in today’s society. Adams and Jefferson two great friends that shared one common goal. It is to obtain America’s freedom against the motherland Great Britain. They have remained close coworkers and friends throughout the American Revolution, but then in the 1800 each went thru their separate ways and had their own political parties and different ideologies. One believed that solitary “effective central government led by a powerful president could forge a stable, secure nation from a multiple of weak, wrangling states” (Larson, 2007, 17) and called themselves Federalist led by John Adams. Adams believed that America should have only one strong influential president that is in control of the nation. He does not want to give people too much power because he does not want them to have a lot of freedom. On the other hand, one wants America to be the “land of free, prosperous farmers and workers” (Larson, 2007, 17) called themselves Republicans led by Thomas Jefferson. Jefferson saw America as a country that is for the people. The people of the U.S is the President and that all people are born with individual rights. An individual rights that the government couldn’t restrict just because they wanted to control the people and create a central government. The

More than personality fueled the political crisis of the 1790’s; two strong individuals dominated the era. (Reader, 165) The federalist split into two factions over financial policy and the French Revolution, and their leaders, Alexander Hamilton and Thomas Jefferson, offered contrasting visions of the future. (Textbook, 193) The conflict gave rise to political parties by creating factions on opposite political sides. Both saw a great future for the nation but very different approaches.

In the late 1700s, the United States had began to split into two factions: Federalists and Antifederalists. Factions are groups of citizens united by a common interest. The reasoning behind the differing views of how the government works across the world was best said by Locke “Men are equal in a natural sense, but society establishes many dimensions that are unequal”. (Barbour and Wright, 2017). In the states, Federalists wanted a strong central government while anti-federalists wanted a weak one. “The Georgians, for example, wanted a strong central authority to provide military protection for their huge, underpopulated state against the Creek Confederacy; Jerseymen and Connecticuters wanted to escape from economic bondage to New York; the Virginians hoped to establish a system which would give that great state its rightful place in the councils of the republic” (Roche, 800). The one thing they agreed on was having George Washington as president. George Washington tried to be a neutral leader of the United States and suggested for the states to stay together rather than divide into factions. “Thomas Jefferson is credited as stating: “North and South will hang together if they have you to hang on””(Jamison, 2016).

When the United States declared itself a sovereign nation, the Articles of Confederation were drafted to serve as the nations first Constitution.Under these Articles, the states held most of the power; but due to an almost absent centralized government, colonists were ill-equipped to deal with such practices as regulating trade both between states and internationally, levying taxes, solving inter-state disputes, negotiating with foreign nations, and most importantly enforcing laws under the current notion of "Congress". Realizing that there were several deficiencies in the current system of self-government, the states appointed delegates to ratify the situation and come up with a way to attain the aforementioned practices they needed to

The early years of the Constitution of the United States were full of political strife. The two prominent political ideals were complete opposites. The Jeffersonian Republicans were focused on giving power to the people and maintaining a pastoral economy, while the Federalists supported the control of the government by the elite class, and maintaining “positive” democracy. Both parties feared the influence and effect the other party would have on the public. In Linda K. Kerber's article, “The Fears of the Federalists”, the major concerns Federalists held in the early 19th century are described. Ever since the war with and separation from England, the citizens of America were seen to be continually drive to “patriotic rebellion” as a way to

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.

The argument between Federalists and Anti-Federalists might seem long gone to American citizens, but still their philosophical foundations shape the teams, scope and size of the battlefield. These philosophies go back to two lone men, Alexander Hamilton and Thomas Jefferson. Both fought aggressively for a government based on their ideas, and both did make portions of the now-standing American government. This essay will outline the political, social and economic philosophies of both men, how their philosophies influenced the government today, and a closing opinion.

Federalism was an inevitable and paramount mechanism to creation the of the Union. Therefore, it is acceptable that its governing principles would define and refine a majority of the nation’s history. Shaping the government, laws, and politics of the current and future generations during the creation of the Constitution, federalism permanently altered the life of every American. Federalism and the Constitution were derived from a similar ideal: endurance of free society had to be preserved by a sense of unity that acted as a safeguard against prevalent dangers, advanced the common good while still maintaining responsiveness to the diversity of the nation (Wechsler, 1954). The Constitution established a central government that possessed the capacity to interpret its