N The History Of The United States, The Anti-Federalists

1386 WordsMar 29, 20176 Pages
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…show more content…
It also provided a stronger image of America in relation to other countries in the world. The proposed constitution also proposed the establishment of a united army, which would function to protect America from external attacks (Schultz 126). The Anti-Federalists strongly opposed the implementation of the constitution as it relinquished some of their powers, and made them answerable to the federal government. However, they later on supported its ratification after the Bill of Rights was included (Schultz 126). The Bill of Rights was of great importance to them as it guaranteed that their liberties and freedoms were still preserved despite the constitutional change. Another difference relates to the economic differences between the supporters of both sides. The Federalists were supported by big business interests that operated within and out of the American borders. They considered the implementation of the constitution as a suitable step towards the government being able to regulate the country’s economy. As a result, they would be able to benefit significantly. On the other hand, the Anti-Federalist union was chiefly dominated by small rural communities and farmers, who believed that the local government had more to offer with regards to their profits and the establishment of a market for their goods (Schultz 127). To these farmers, the state government was more
Open Document