Jefferson And Anti-Federalism

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

Jefferson listed the tyranny acts the King and the government has been committing. He states, “For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws, and altering fundamentally the Forms of our government.” This quote was an example of the list which opened the colonists’ eyes allowing them to realize how they have been blind to the actions that have been taken regarding their rights. As a result, the colonists became passionate about becoming independent and creating the laws that were necessary, reasonable, and didn’t contradict their

In his document, The Declaration of Independence (1776), Jefferson and the representatives in the general congress proclaim that because all men possess unalienable rights, and due to the transgressions committed by the repressive British King against the people of the 13 colonies, the colonists should be entitled to dissolve all allegiance to the crown of Great Britain, and engender a new nation that “[has] full power to levy war, conclude peace, contract alliances, establish commerce, and to do all other acts and things which independent states may of right do”(4). Jefferson supports this proclamation by enumerating the rights of people when both facing and not facing a corrupt government, distinguishing the copious actions of King George

Conflicting views and contrasting ideologies have always existed throughout the history of United States politics. Alexander Hamilton, who led Federalist Party, believed that a powerful central government was necessary while Thomas Jefferson, who led the Jeffersonian Republican Party, favored an agrarian nation with most of the power left to the states. Although Alexander Hamilton and Thomas Jefferson were similar in that they both harbored good intentions and tried to keep the best interests in mind for the future of the United States, their policies were drastically different. Without doubt, both of their contrasting ideas served a vital role in forming the government.

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).

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.

Thomas Jefferson's ideals and beliefs were derived from a deep regard for life, liberty, and freedom. His concept of individual freedoms strongly disagreed with the notion of a "guided republic" which he believed concentrated a great deal unchecked power among a few people. This could have the potential of tyrannical government that might suppress personal freedoms of any kind especially those of religion, which Jefferson feels very strongly felt should be protected. After fighting hard to rid America of British domination, Jefferson was determined to create a government that was responsible to, and derived its powers from, a free people. As the writer of the Declaration of Independence and the Virginia Statute for

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

Whose side would you have been on in the 1790s, Thomas Jefferson’s or Alexander Hamilton’s? Both of these men served under George Washington in the first presidential cabinet, yet they had very different views of what government should be (Davis 86). My objective in this research essay is to inform the reader of why there was so much controversy between these two founding fathers, and to determine which side had the better views for our newly forming country.

Though both Alexander Hamilton and Thomas Jefferson served as members of President Washington’s cabinet, the two held very different views on the newly founded U.S. government, interpretation of its constitution, and the role of the “masses” in that government. These conflicting views would develop in two political parties, the Federalists led by Hamilton and the Democratic-Republicans led by Jefferson. Although both political parties presented enticing aspects, Hamilton’s views were much more reasonable and fruitful when compared Jefferson’s views; idealistic and too strict in reference to the constitution.

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.

Jefferson began the document by explaining that the rights of the Americans had been brutally molested by the unjust King of Britain. Following this accusation, he provided evidence of this abuse by listing not just a mere handful, but 27 grievances that the King had inflicted against the colonies. Lastly, the conclusion of this article publishes and declares that the United Colonies have the right to be freed from the British and that they have the right to govern themselves as any free country does. The strategic organization of the Declaration of Independence allowed the colonies to be powerfully represented by such a clear and prudently worded

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.