Federalist and Anit-Federalist

In: Social Issues

Submitted By aileen17a
Words 489
Pages 2
The articles of confederation caused problems. Had no judicial branch nor executive branch. Weak in central government, had no power to tax, no power to regulate trade, no power to coin money and back it up with previous standard, and no money to raise an army or navy.

The Anti-Federalists found many problems in the Constitution. They argued that the document would give the country an entirely new form of government. They saw no sense in throwing out the existing government. Instead, they believed that the Federalists had over-stated the current problems of the country.
The Anti-Federalists feared that the Constitution gave the president too much power and that the proposed Congress would be too higher-class in nature; with too few representatives for too many people. They also criticized the Constitution for its lack of a Bill of Rights. The Anti-Federalists also shared the feeling that so large a country as the United States could not possibly be controlled by one national government. Although the Anti-Federalists were united in their opposition to the Constitution, they did not agree on what form of government made the best alternative to it. Some still believed that the Articles of Confederation could be amended in such a way that they would provide a workable confederation. Some wanted the Union to break up and re-form into three or four different confederations. Others were even ready to accept the Constitution if it were amended in such a way that the rights of citizens and states would be more fully protected.

The Federalists focused their arguments on the lack of the quality in national government under the Articles of Confederation and on the benefits of national government as formed by the Constitution. They were also much more favorably disposed toward importing and exporting than were the Anti-Federalists, and they argued that a strong central…...

Similar Documents

Federalist Papers

...FEDERALIST PAPERS Ramon Chavez P5 Debates were going crazy throughout the United States about whether the new Constitution was an improvement or a disaster that will soon ruin the nation. Federalists were actually people who basically agreed with the Constitution and a strong government. The Federalists were basically way much wealthier and more educated Americans than the anti-federalist well most of them like John Adams, George Washington, Benjamin Franklin, James Madison, and Alexander Hamilton. Anti-Federalists were actually people who agreed with a weaker government, but liked a stronger state legislature. Yet not all of them liked the Articles of Confederation, but none of them wanted the new Constitution to be ratified so in a way they wanted to make their own document basically. Poor classes in the West also supported the patriots like Samuel Adams and Patrick Henry in which they were actually very good at influencing people, like they were very charismatic.Anti-Federalists feared that a stronger national government would one day destroy the liberties Americans had won in the Revolution. They also worried that the new Constitution didn’t list any specific rights for the people in which that was maybe one of the main reasons why they went against the federalist. Many of the smaller states quickly approved the Constitution because it gave them more way power in the new legislative branch than they had under the Articles of Confederation...

Words: 832 - Pages: 4

Federalist Articles

... monachical systems too. Jefferson expresses to Madison that he passionately feels confident that the constitution has been rightly framed and for the overall benefit and interest of the people. “After all, it is my principle that the will of the majority should always prevail. If they approve the proposed Convention in all it's parts, I shall concur in it cheerfully, in hopes that they will amend it whenever they shall find it work wrong”(Jefferson,1787). He (Jefferson) concludes his letter by putting an emphasis on education hoping people will be educated enough to sense and preserve their liberty as a result. The same emphasis is portrayed by Plato in the Republic,book VII. In the Federalist paper number 10, it points out “the public good is disregarded in the conflicts of rival parties, and that measures are too often decided, not according to the rules of justice and the rights of the minor party, but by the superior force of an interested and overbearing majority”(The Union as a Safeguard Against Domestic Faction and Insurrection,1787). This i find it true with our current government. Instead of them (republicans and democrats) finding solutions to the issues we are currently facing like unemployment and taxes, they are busy struggling for power by criticizing and blaming each others mess. John Locke in his book (Two treaties of Government,1690) states that the main objective of the government is to provide security for our property, which......

Words: 2742 - Pages: 11

Pros and Cons of a Federalist Society

...Democracy in the United States: A comprehensive look at the Pros and Cons of a Federalist Society and Individual Freedoms. What is democracy, do we really understand the concept and the implications of the freedoms that our society enjoys. Democracy by definition is a “government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised by them directly or indirectly through a system of representation usually involving periodically held free elections”.(1) The United States democracy in current times can be a difficult situation to grasp, due to the fact that we are operating off of the Constitution written over 200 years ago, and individuals modern interpretations of what the founding fathers of this country would have considered appropriate doctrine and methodology. Through the aforementioned definition and the perspective of current lawmakers are the tools with which we will define whether the United States has become more or less democratic throughout its history. So what then are the advantages of a democracy? The first point would be that it is better for the population, everyone having an equal part or say in the laws which govern them is advantageous for any group of people. Democracy is often seen as a fairer and less arbitrary form of government as it allows the "will of the people" to become the law. To some degree, this prevents scenarios like a small, powerful minority...

Words: 1241 - Pages: 5

The Federalist Party and the Democratic Republicans Party

...Josh Dean U.S. History to 1877 online Unit 1 essay I chose the northern colonies as the colony that I would most like to live in. I chose the north because it seems more stable for a family to live in. The northern colonies had a much healthier life style with a life span that averaged into the seventies. The north was a much tighter society that lived in smaller communities that worked and socialized together. I also like the fact that the settlements were also more organized then the other two colonies. I like the fact that when the northern colonies layed out a town they did it in an organized fashion with the town hall in the center or town were they would worship and have meeting. Around the town hall they would lay out the houses for the people to live so they were close to the center of town. I think this also would help with town defense against attacking Indians and other hostile groups. I also like the fact that the families were given land that had wood and a place to grow crops. This would help immigrants just arriving that they would have the security of knowing they had land to live on. Also the fact that towns with 50 or more families would start a school, which shows the importance of education in the northern colonies. The fact that the north was moral in most of their choices for the community would be a major factor for me deciding to choose the northern colonies to live in. Like the fact that the northern colonies is the anti-slavery...

Words: 657 - Pages: 3

Federalist and Anit-Federalist

... citizens and states would be more fully protected. The Federalists focused their arguments on the lack of the quality in national government under the Articles of Confederation and on the benefits of national government as formed by the Constitution. They were also much more favorably disposed toward importing and exporting than were the Anti-Federalists, and they argued that a strong central government would foster the trading growth of the new country. Moreover, the Federalist vision of society was more pluralistic than the Anti-Federalist vision. That is, the Federalists did not see society as made up principally of farmers, as did the Anti-Federalists, but instead viewed it as comprising many different and competing interests and groups, none of which would be completely dominant in a federalist system of government. The Federalist Papers makes a persuasive case for the necessity of federal government in preserving order and securing the liberty of a large republic. In doing so, it asserts that a weak union of the states will make the country more vulnerable to internal and external disagreements. Despite Anit-Federalists and Federalists differences, they wanted a strong federal government. By 1791, in response to Anti-Federalist sentiments, state legislatures voted to add the first ten amendments to the Constitution. Those ten amendments are also called the Bill of Rights, and they have become an important part of the Constitution and its heritage of liberty....

Words: 489 - Pages: 2


...FEDERALIST The Federalist Party was in favor of the newly formed constitution. One of the main objects of the federal constitution is to secure the union and in addition include any other states that would arise as a part of the union. The federal constitution would also set its aim on improving the organization of the union. Which would include improvements on toads and interior navigation. The Federalists believed that each state should find an inducement to make some sacrifices for the sake of the general protection. Americans were very suspicious of the government, but the Anti-Federalist was very distrustful of the government in general and strong national government. The mistrust was the foundation of their opposition to the constitution. The Anti-Federalist argued that the constitution had many flaws. Anti-Federalists feared that because of the flaws in the constitution, that the new national government would be a threat to their national rights. They also thought that the constitution had been developed by a privileged group to create a national government for the purpose of serving its own selfish interest. They thought the only safe government that if it had a local and closely linked with the will of the people, as we have yearly elections and replacing people in key positions. The Federalist knew that many members of Congress and the state governments were against the new constitution, because it reduced their powers. So the Federalists decided not to ask the......

Words: 283 - Pages: 2


...By: Normandie Lovince I am a supporter of the anti-federalist party. The anti-federalist took some of the ideas that the federalist had into consideration. Instead of abolishing or ignoring these ideas, they wanted to improve them. The anti-federalist and the federalist share two very opposing views. As you read this essay, you will gradually start to see just how my ideas are being supported as to why I've chosen to become an anti-federalist. The anti-federalist party was the first out of two political parties of the U.S. This party was led by Henry, George Mason and Samuel Adams alongside Richard Henry Lee who wanted the president and the senate to have the entire executive and 2/3 of the legislative power. As an anti-federalist, I believe that the constitution should not be ratified. I feel like the best way, that the U.S citizens should be protected is by being kept safe from the Government and the bill of rights will do that because of the freedom and liberty that it gives us. "The greatest importance for Freemen to retain themselves are the liberties given to us in the bill of rights", which is why it's so important that we'd add it to the constitution. In order to get the bill of rights to be in the constitution we'd need to sacrifice part of our natural rights, for the good of others around us. The anti-federalist believed that the constitution should have a bill of rights. The Anti-federalist opposed the constitution, while the federalist themselves...

Words: 836 - Pages: 4

Federalist 10 Essay

...During the ratification process of the United States Constitution, Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay published a series of anonymous articles in the New York Times. Published under the name Publius, "The Federalist Papers," as they were called, advocated for the ratification of the new Constitution by New York State. Each of the papers, therefore, outlines the benefits of one united nation, as well as the interests of, and supported by, the proposed government. Written by Madison, Federalist Paper No. 10, generally considered one of the most important articles, concerns itself with the problems of and plausible solutions for the formation of factions. Through multiple assertions concerning the dangers of factions and the benefits of a republic, Madison formed one of the major arguments in favor of the United States Constitution. Federalist No. 10, titled "The Same Subject Continued: The Utility of the Union as a Safeguard Against Domestic Faction and Insurrection," expanded on dangers of factions outlined by Hamilton in Federalist No. 9. Defined by Madison as, "A number of citizens, whether amounting to a minority or majority of the whole, who are united and actuated by some common impulse of passion or interest, adverse to the rights of other citizens or to the permanent and aggregate interests of the community" (Madison), factions are comparable to the modern day interest or lobby groups. That is to say, Madison defined factions as groups of people...

Words: 1377 - Pages: 6

The Federalist Papers

...Harjinder Kaur   USSO 10100  Prof. Gillooly  03/06/2015  The Significance of the Federalist Papers  The Federalist Papers, is a compilation of 85 articles, advocating the ratification of the  proposed Constitution of the United States. These series of articles were published by Alexander  Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay between October 1787 and May 1788. The overall  intention of the Federalist Papers was to explain the advantages of the proposed Constitution  over the prevailing Articles of Confederation. The Federalist Papers impacted the ratification of  the Constitution by making some of their most important objections, including the significance  of having a Constitution, acknowledging to the disagreements made by the Antifederalists, and  defending conflicting arguments made against the attributes of the executive and judicial branch  as specified in the proposed Constitution.   Before the ratification of the Constitution, the central government under the Articles of  Confederations was very weak and in jeopardy of falling apart. Alexander Hamilton, James  Madison, and John Jay, who were Federalists believed as well that the Articles of Confederation  was too weak to maintain a powerful central government and needed to be restored by the U.S  Constitution. The fundamental goal of the U.S constitution was to secure the rights of the U.S  citizens and for the federal government to strive for the common good of the individuals. The  Federalist Papers illustrates how...

Words: 1423 - Pages: 6

Federalist Paper 10 by James Madison

...In Federalist paper number 10 James Madison explains why there should be a concern over majority and minority factions and solutions to lessen the dangers of these factions. When our goverment first started it was made originally to help and be closely tied to the citizens of the United States. Some aspects of this has changed since the beginning of the constitution resulting in some majority and minority rule change. When the Consititution was first written it was made to simply limit majority rule and give eqaul amount of power to the minority. The national goverment was originally built closely tied to citizens because of the House of Repesentatives. The House of Representatives was made to give citizens an equal say in the legislation of the United States. Unlike in the Senate, members of the House are elected by the people of the United States giving citizens a say in govenment affairs. One of the major aspects of the national goverment that is tied to citizens is the short term lenght and frequency of elections of people holding an office in the goverment. With the short term lenght and frequency of elections citizens are constantly contributing to what is going on in the nation by voting on who will be the best candidate for a certain office. A third reason the national goverment is closely tied to citizens is that the House of Representatives represents small member districts. This causes there to be close to equal say for everyone in a state to elect someone to...

Words: 940 - Pages: 4

Federalist V Anti

...OPINION ARTICLE I as a Floridian always have Florida’s best intentions in mine because I want to maintain living somewhere safe and economically secure. And when it comes to who should be the one in charge of making big changes or passing law, it should be someone that really knows about politics and the economy, someone that will not be biased. And that would be federalist; they are true politicians, people who truly have the knowledge to direct Florida and all the other states to a better place with a strong central government in charge. I see it like this you don’t want a garbage man that has no knowledge as your doctor, you want someone that has knowledge in that field, it’s the same with politics. John Adam stated that “government is instituted for the common good; for the perfection, safety, prosperity, and happiness of the people and not for profit, honor, or private interest of any one man, family or class of man….” Federalist were business men, and wanted a central government because of equality they wanted the states to all have the same right not one be more powerful because of their size or any other quality. By Adams saying this he also was saying that sometimes people want to lead to have an advantage and for their own good, but by having a central government that wouldn’t happen. Anti-federalist believed that anyone could be a representative but if you really think about it that incorrect because people that really don’t know about......

Words: 394 - Pages: 2

2.03 Anti Federalist

...Federalism In a monarchy, the people have no say in the government, while the anti-federalists wanted to keep our government as it is. They both are most likely alike. This would cause chaos and hostility amongst the citizens of the nation. The federalists believed in a strong central government. They wanted some of the state powers for itself. Also, the supported the division of the government into three branches Anti-Federalist and Federalist The federalist were for the people and not just in favor for the ruling class. Federalists wanted a strong, central federal government, a central bank, and an army. Stated in the federalist paper in No.3 "it is essential to such a government that it be derived from the great body of society, not from an inconsiderable proportion or a favored class of it; otherwise a handful of tyrannical nobles, exercising their oppressions by a delegation of their powers, might aspire to the rank of republicans and claim for their government the honorable title of republic." The federalist also wanted to separate the powers of the government into different branches so that the government could be kept under control. The Anti-federalists wanted to stay with the British government. The British was a monarchy at the time. It would be a corrupt government since only the rich could have a say in the government but the poor couldn't. The united states did not approve of it. " And are by this clause invested with the power of making all laws...

Words: 458 - Pages: 2

Federalist or Antifederalist

...Choose whether to argue as a Federalist or as an Anti-Federalist. Review the lesson to make sure you understand their main points. Using quotes from the Federalist and Anti-Federalist Papers, write an opinion article for a newspaper, or create a speech podcast to convince people in your state to agree with your position. Include the following in your speech or article: teens shaking hands after playing a game of tennis © 2012 Polka Dot/Thinkstock introductory paragraph that clearly states your position as a Federalist or Anti-Federalist at least two paragraphs describing differences between the Federalist and Anti-Federalist points of view. Use at least two quotes from each of the Federalist Papers and Anti-Federalist Papers. If you would like to explore more of the Federalist Papers and Anti-Federalist Papers to find your own quotes, these sites will be helpful. Federalist Papers American Studies at the University of Virginia The Avalon Project at Yale Law School The Law Center at the University of Oklahoma Anti-Federalist Papers Document Library by Teaching American History at least one paragraph to explain why you disagree with the opposing stance. For example, if you have chosen to argue as a Federalist, you will explain why you disagree with the Anti-Federalist position, using quotes from the documents to support your argument. strong concluding paragraph that summarizes your argument and encourage others to support you Your argument should be...

Words: 382 - Pages: 2

Anti Federalist vs. Federalist

...Both Federalists and Anti-Federalist was both established from Washington’s cabinet. Jefferson who was an anti-federalist, was the secretary of state and hamilton, who was a federalist, was the secretary of the treasury. both parties thought presidents should be voted in by the public, (white males to specific). they based their ideas from the Enlightenment. Overall, they both wanted to keep the liberties of the people protected and wanted representative government. it is important to understand the two opposing view because the two groups untimely forged our nation, and they also created the basic of today two party political system. Opposing Views Federalists Anti-Federalist they were the supporters of a larger national government. they were a group of people that opposed the ratification of the proposed constitution in 1787. Federalists felt like the Bill of Rights addition was not necessary, because they believe that the constitution as it stood only limited the government not the people. propose and supported the Bill of Rights addition because they claimed the constitution gave the central government too much power, and without the bill of rights the people would be at risk of oppression. felt that the states were free agents that should manage their own revenue and spend their money as they say fit. felt that many individual and different fiscal and monetary policies led to economic struggles and national weakness. favored dividing the power among different...

Words: 380 - Pages: 2

2.03 Federalist vs Antifederalist

...If you were to ask me whether I sided with the anti-federalist or the federalist, you might be surprised at what I would say. Maybe not for the reasons you think. In my opinion, I side with the federalist. I’m all for order and I don’t like change so much but to make a country better you need to change some things. Things will constantly be changing and that is fine. A strong central government is very important. The federalist wanted to see a change to improve the country as a whole whereas the anti-federalist wanted to keep the monarchy ways. The anti-federalist and federalist had different views as to how a country should be ran. Both did have ideas to help the country and make it better. Federalist wanted a central federal government, a central bank, and an army. They cared about the governed and not just the ones who govern. In federalist paper no. 39 it says “It is essential to such a government that it be derived from the great body of the society, not from and inconsiderable proportion or a favored class of it; otherwise a handful of tyrannical nobles, exercising their oppression by a delegation of their powers, might aspire to the rank of republicans and claims for their government and honorable title of republic.” Not only did the federalist care about giving too much power to the important people, they also wanted to have control of the government. It states this in federalist paper no. 59: “It is evident that each department should have a will of its own and...

Words: 545 - Pages: 3