... 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 favored it. The federalist's...
Words: 836 - Pages: 4
...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 politics could say something is right but only see it in the point of view that it would help them and not really analyze...
Words: 394 - Pages: 2
...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 created...
Words: 382 - Pages: 2
...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 the federal government is divided into three distinct...
Words: 1423 - Pages: 6
...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 with...
Words: 1377 - Pages: 6
...Federalism supports a strong government and actually benefits our country by changing the government. While the anti-federalists claim to want to improve the government, but instead puts powers into the hands of the states. A centralized government that “is a system of democratic rules and institutions in which the power to govern is shared between national and provincial/state governments, creating what is often called a federation.” Even giving the constitution a certain amount of power, it created a method of checks and balances to prevent dictatorship. Anti-federalists wanted to the states to have more power than the centralized government. The anti-federalist view what would’ve led this country into pure corruption. The federalist, however, covered this view by thinking about it’s people by adding their opinions and covering the worries. This country needs a system of rules to live upon or else the people of this country wouldn’t know what’s hurting or benefiting it from destruction. The federalists favored limited state power. Local control was key to anti-federalist concept of democracy. Which would heat up state’s right fights in the 1800’s. For example, the anti-federalists were favored in the New Jersey Plan rather than the federalists choosing the Virginia Plan giving more power to the states like they favored. Yes, the anti-federalists believe that we should be working together as a whole. Not state by state, it is “We the People” not “We the Divided”. ...
Words: 293 - Pages: 2
...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...
Words: 489 - Pages: 2
...and differences between Thomas Paine’s Common Sense and the Federalist and Anti-Federalist controversy. The Federalist and Anti-Federalist controversy explores the views of the Federalists and Anti-Federalists. The Federalists supported the Constitution, and they wanted the Constitution to become law or ratified. Moreover, the Federalists wanted and believed in a strong, central government. The Federalists consisted of Alexander Hamilton, John Jay, and James Madison. On the other side, there were opponents of the Constitution (the Anti-Federalists). The Anti-Federalists thought the Constitution would give the government too much power and control; there was no Bill of Rights to protect the people and their rights from...
Words: 1199 - Pages: 5
...Pros-Federalists ♥ Supporters of the Constitution that were led by Alexander Hamilton and John Adams. They firmly believed the national government should be strong. They didn't want the Bill of Rights because they felt citizens' rights were already well protected by the Constitution. ♥ Felt that there should be three independent branches each representing a different aspect of the people, and because they are equal one cannot overpower the other. ♥ The more organized party. ♥ The party that wanted the constitution to be ratified and it was! ♥ Federalist 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. ♥ Federalists were made up of the wealthy and elite plantation owners and businessmen. ♥ The Federalists believed the articles of confederation which were the first attempt to unite the country into a continental nation had failed ♥ Cons-Anti Federalists ♥ Thought Congress held too much power. ♥ Did not like it that there was no bill of rights. ♥ Opponents of a strong central government who campaigned against the ratification of the Constitution in favor of a confederation of independent states ♥ Believe Executive Branch held too much power. ♥ Did not want the constitution Ratified ♥ Did not get their way. ♥ Anti-Federalists believed the Constitution and formation of a National Government would lead to a monarchy...
Words: 324 - Pages: 2
...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 branches...
Words: 380 - Pages: 2
...Federalist Articles James Madison, Alexander Hamilton, and John Jay were the authors of the federalist papers. James Madison was the principle author for article No 10 and article No 51. The immediate purpose for publishing these papers were to obtain support for the ratification of the Constitution, they wanted a diverse republic to prevent faction but with equality to maintain unity among the states. Madison addresses that a large faction will provide better representatives, since the cause of faction has been the unequal distribution of property. Those who have property versus those who don’t, have ever had different interest in society. He saw direct democracy as a danger to individual rights and addressed for a representative democracy to protect individual liberty from majority rule. In federalist No 10 Madison discusses to guard against factions, or groups of citizens, how the passion and interest of one group could mean a danger to the government. In article No 51 the purpose is for four aspects: Layered representation which is the people that are elected directly or indirectly to represent other people, Separation of powers are the three branches that make, and enforce the law; judicial, executive, and legislative branches, Checks and balancing is the ability of each branch to check the powers of the others so the power is balance in all three branches, and Federalism which is the existence of two governments, state and federal and both governments have dominance over...
Words: 869 - Pages: 4
...The Federalist Era started with the election of George Washington in 1789 and ended with Thomas Jefferson’s election in 1801. This period in American history saw many important events as a new government and procedures to run it had to be established. Some of those important events included the adoption of the United States Constitution and the passage of the Bill of Rights, the election of George Washington as the first President of the United States, and the creation of two political parties knows as the Federalist and Anti-Federalists, or Democrat-Republicans. The two parties debated over everything but from the beginning, the Anti-Federalists opposed the initial ratification of the Constitution and after being ratified, its interpretation....
Words: 918 - Pages: 4
...The Anti-federalists My position as a federalist is to ratificate the constitution while also creating a strong central government by separation of both of the powers combined. All the federalists were always strong believers in the constitution, believing that this ratification was the only way they were all able to achieve a fair society where all people can all have their rights to liberty, life and the pursuit of happiness, while also wanting to help shape future analysis of the Constitution for the better and in beneficial ways. By them being able to build a sufficient government with the foundation of the basis of popular sovereignty, without the need of sacrificing any sovereignty of the varied states fairness of the new government, it can be secured and work as it should. The rich would be happy in this case, because they would feel like the new Constitution was benefcial on their part, because the fact that rich's votes would earn much more value than the less fortunate in the states like what they wanted to achieve. They can possibly keep the potential of tyranny from becoming something dangerous to their people and they know that safeguards they have with the government will keep it from overpowering. The constitution should be ratified as a Federalist because the nation might of never survived without the constitution by their side leading them and a stronger government was necessary at this very point in desperate time. The federalists explained...
Words: 875 - Pages: 4
...1_03Letter Student Name: Candyce Miller Dear Mr. President, Civic and political participation is important because if you live in a nation, if you want to live in harmony and peace, if you want to your voice to be heard and/or if you want freedom and democracy all over then you must participate in the civic and political activities and vote. No democracy would exist on earth without participation. No freedom would ever be there for us. And that is why I have chosen Booker T. Washington to have a holiday because he deserves it, and I am here to explain to you why. Raised the son of a slave mother, Washington was self-motivated and committed to his own education from a young age. Around this time, Abraham Lincoln was in office. Booker T. Washington was one of the most influential and controversial Africans in history. He took the first opportunity to attend a formal school, Hampton Institute, which led to him becoming a professor and the founding of a African American educational institutions of the nineteenth century, Tuskegee Institute in Alabama. Washington deserves a holiday because he was seen as an icon of African American dependence because the message of his writings and speeches was that the road to success for blacks was through achieving productive support through education. He did not protest, did not challenge the political system and didn’t speak about the small proportion of social equal rights. Not only did he used a different technique to help get us...
Words: 306 - Pages: 2
...Federalist 10 1. Madison says that “complaints are everywhere heard from our most considerate and virtuous citizens”—what are these complaints that people make. a. “…that our governments are too unstable, that 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.” 2. Are these complaints valid in Madison’s view? a. Yes, even though he wished that they were not true, he couldn’t deny the facts that showed all of these complaints to be true. 3. What is Madison’s definition of a faction? a. Groups of citizens who are passionate about a cause even when it may be harmful to the community as a whole. 4. What are the “two methods of removing the causes of factions”? What does Madison think of these two approaches? Is he in favor of removing the causes? a. “the one, by removing its causes; the other, by controlling its effects.” He thinks the first one is unwise and the second one is impractical. He is not in favor of removing the causes, because the cause is liberty. He does not wish to remove peoples’ liberty. 5. What is the “most common and durable source of factions” according to Madison? a. “…The various and unequal distribution of property.” 6. Madison notes that factions are a serious problem in a republican form of government because a democracy is similar to a court. What...
Words: 782 - Pages: 4
