Essay On Anti Federalists

522 Words2 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: Federalism and anti federalism

Anti-Federalists The primary fears of the Anti-Federalist were stronger Federal government, power of taxation, and strong army. These fears they had toward the new government. They were well known that majority of people would like Federalist because they were more educate, and rich people than Anti-Federalist. Also they were less organized people compare to Federalist. On the other hand, Anti-Federalist had strong state right supporters, who cares about their believes, and values. For supporting Anti-Federalist, they had Article of Confederation which fulfills what they desire for. Article of Confederation gave states more rights and power than Federal government. They thought they will be obeying Federal government commands as they were treated from British hands. Leaders that served as Anti-Federalist were Patrick Henry, George Mason, George Clinton, and Thomas Jefferson. Antifederalists were opposed to have strong Federal government; they believed that Federal government shouldn’t have a lot power. Because if Federal government got too much power, the state would be neglected. And they will treat them badly as Britain people treated them before Independence. They were scared of Federalist people because they were stronger than them. Furthermore nation would unite and fight …show more content…

Because they desire or hope for those things that were not helping our nation in any way. After the independence from Great Britain, United Stated has to have strong government, which can served with some kind of strong leader whose decision, and work can help nation in any way. Federalist believed that, and I also think it was most wise decision they made. Moreover having strong army was really needed that time to support our country from our enemies. If they didn’t build army for nation defense Britain would come again and start ruling on us again. Federalist ideas were really worthy, and important for our

Show More
Related

  • The Federalists vs. The Anti-Federalists

    664 Words  | 2 Pages

    who thought that the constitution would not be able to protect the rights of the people.

    Read More

  • Federalists vs. Anti-Federalists

    348 Words  | 1 Pages

    The Anti-Federalist Party, led by Patrick Henry, objected to the constitution. They objected to it for a few basic reasons. Mostly the Anti-Federalists thought that the Constitution created too strong a central government. They felt that the Constitution did not create a Federal government, but a single national government. They were afraid that the power of the states would be lost and that the people would lose their individual rights because a few individuals would take over. They proposed a “Bill of Rights”, to make sure the citizens were protected by the law. They believed that no Bill of Rights would be equal to no check on our government for the people.

    Read More

  • The Pros And Cons Of The Anti-Federalists

    835 Words  | 2 Pages

    The leaders of the anti-Federalists were Patrick Henry from Virginia, George Mason from Virginia, Richard Henry Lee from Virginia, James Monroe from Virginia, George Clinton from New York, Samuel Adams from Massachusetts, Elbridge Gerry from Massachusetts, Luther Martin from Maryland, and Samuel Chase from Maryland. The anti-Federalist leaders were men who had their careers and reputations already established. The anti-Federalists were the losers in the Constitution debate. They had accepted their defeat very well. They did not attempt to create problems and start fights or wars. Instead some leaders became well-known leaders in the government. James Monroe was the fifth president. George Clinton, along with Elbridge Gerry became vice presidents. Samuel Chase was in the Supreme Court. The anti-Federalists brought awareness to the subject matter of giving more power to the government and how dangerous it could be. They thought the Constitution could be improved with a bill of rights. They brought awareness to why our government needed to include a bill of rights. They wanted one to protect the rights of the people and the states. The anti-Federalists found the ratification process unreliable. They were correct because the Articles of Confederation stated it being

    Read More

  • Dbq The Beliefs Of The Federalist And Anti-Federalists

    576 Words  | 2 Pages

    This party developed because of the ratification of the constitution process; one way the Federalists tried to persuade people that their views were right about a strong central government during the ratification process was through several articles, which became known as The Federalist Papers. The Federalists argued that the people needed a strong central government to keep order and protect the union (Doc 1). They believed that this form of government was needed because the Articles of Confederation was proof that the union needed a strong central government. They argued that the Articles of Confederation gave the central government too little power and as a result the Union, faced economic difficulties, foreign problems and state quarrels (Doc 3). They processed Checks and Balances, which was a system designed so that the central government would not get more powerful than the other would, and was intended to counter arguments being made by the Anti-federalists (Doc

    Read More

  • The Similarities and Differences between the Federalist and Anti-Federalist Papers

    882 Words  | 2 Pages

    The Federalist and Anti-Federalist papers played a major role in US History. They dealt with many problems in politics. The papers were made after the Revolutionary war. People started to worry that the government would not last under the Articles of Confederation. Without having a backup plan just yet, some delegates met up and created the Constitution. The constitution had to be ratified before it became the rule of all the land. The Federalist and Anti-Federalist papers discuss whether the constitution should be approved or not. Some things Anti-Federalist and Federalists argued was a strong national government, a standing army, and whether or not the constitution should be ratified and why.

    Read More

  • The Framers: Federalists and Anti-Federalists

    701 Words  | 2 Pages

    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 be a functional independent nation.

    Read More

  • Federalist vs. Anti-Federalist

    852 Words  | 2 Pages

    One of the most important concerns of the Anti-Federalists were concerned that the new form of government would strip the states of their own power. The Anti-Federalists feared by combining the previously independent states. under one government that, ".the states, once sovereign. would retain but a shadow of their former power. "(Main 120).

    Read More

  • Compare And Contrast The Anti-Federalist And Anti Federalists

    710 Words  | 2 Pages

    Anti –federalist believed that with out the bill of rights, the national government would became a to strong it would threating the americans peoples rights and libertys. Due to prior american revolution, ant-federalist did not forget what they fought for an believed that with a stronger national government, the president could become kind if he wanted. During this time people still feared a strong central government, due to british occupany of the states. Concidently the of people who wanted the bill of rights and were anti-federalist were famers and the working class, as to the fedarlist were extremely rich and powerful people Thomas Jeferson who was a active anti-federalist once wrote to james Madison A bill of rights is what the people are entitled to against every government on earth, general or particular; and what no just government should refuse, or rest on inferences. (Thomas Jefferson to James Madison, 1787. ME 6:388, Papers

    Read More

  • Hamilton Argues Against A Bill Of Rights

    994 Words  | 2 Pages

    During the late 18th century the Antifederalists argued against the constitution on the grounds that it did not contain a bill of rights. They believed that without a list of personal freedoms, the new national government might abuse its powers and that the states would be immersed in an all too dominant and influential national government. The Antifederalists worried that the limits on direct voting and the long terms of the president and senators, supplied by the constitution, would create a population of elites and aristocrats, which in turn would eventually take away power from the people. They also feared that the president might become another monarch. In other words, the Antifederalists ultimately felt that the new Constitution was undemocratic.

    Read More

  • Philosophers Of The Federalist Papers

    1120 Words  | 3 Pages

    Philosophers that shaped and influenced the Federalist include Thomas Hobbes, Jean Jacques Rousseau, Montesquieu and John Locke. These philosophers believed in natural rights and built branches of government that would protect these natural rights. They believed that all men are instinctively selfish individuals and strive for self-preservation. From their viewpoint, balancing mans selfish desires and the desire to safeguard the community would be the ideal form of government for man. These philosophers built their ideas around the theory that too much liberty is bad for society. In order to avoid creating a strong central government comparable to Great B...

    Read More

  • Federalists and Anti-Federalists

    1659 Words  | 4 Pages

    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 documents, many aspects of the Constitution, good and bad, are discussed. Although the Federalists and Anti-Federalists had very conflicting views, many common principals are discussed throughout their essays. The preservation of liberty and the effects of human nature are two aspects of these similarities. Although the similarities exist, they represent and support either the views of the Federalists or the Anti-Federalists.

    Read More

  • Essay On Ratification Of The Constitution

    1213 Words  | 3 Pages

    While the Federalists believe in a strong, central government, the Anti-Federalists believe in the shared power of state and national governments to maintain the rights of all Americans .The Anti-Federalist favored a confederated government were the state and national governments could share power ,protect citizen’s freedom ,and independence. The Anti-Federalists found many problems in the Constitution. Many were concerned the central government take was all individual rights. Anti-Federalist primarily consisted of farmers and tradesmen and was less likely to be a part of the wealthy elite than were members of their rival the Federalist. Many Anti-federalists were local politicians who feared losing power should the Constitution be ratified and argued that senators that served for too long and represented excessively large territories would cause senators to forget what their responsibilities were for that state. They argued that the Constitution would give the country an entirely new and unknown form of government and saw no reason in throwing out the current government. Instead, they believed that the Federalists had over-stated the current problems of the country and wanted improved characterization of power allowable to the states. They also maintained that the Framers of the Constitution had met as a discriminatory group under an order of secrecy and had violated the stipulations of the Articles of Confederation in the hopes for the for ratification of the Constitution. The Anti-Federalist were sure that the Constitution would take away the rights of the American citizens and fought hard to stop the ratification on the

    Read More

  • Essay On The Pros And Cons Of Federalism

    1162 Words  | 3 Pages

    Federalism was majorly influenced by Alexander Hamilton, who was the dominant author of the Federalist Papers. Hamilton did not want to repeat the mistake that Great Britain made and believed that spreading the power to multiple sources of government, along with checks and balances would abolish tyranny. Furthermore, it would aid the people to be heard and their concerns to be resolved faster and with attention from their government. Federalism is when a nation has two sources of government instead of one, the two levels are national and state/local. Similar to many American qualities, having a federal government has its advantages and disadvantages. Three positive factors of federalism are that there is a more orderly system to dispute and

    Read More

  • Federalist Vs Anti-Federalist

    912 Words  | 2 Pages

    Anti-Federalists believed that a representative should not “filter out” the people’s requests, but reflect on them exactly as the people asked. I feel this is totally incorrect, because if a person’s opinion is wrong, and it won’t benefit the country, then why should the representative follow through with it. Anti-Federalists are trying to appease the people instead of helping them and doing what’s best for them, even if the people disagree with it. That’s why the representative must be educated, and “have a good head on his shoulders”.

    Read More

  • Strengths And Weaknesses Of The Anti-Federalists

    853 Words  | 2 Pages

    Our powerpoint states that the Federalists were led by Alexander Hamilton and James Madison. The Anti-Federalists on the other hand, did not agree. The powerpoint mentions that they attacked every area of the Constitution, but two of its features attracted the most criticism. One was the extremely increased powers of the central government. The second included the lack of “bill of rights” that would have provided necessary liberties including freedom of speech and religion.

    Read More

More about Essay On Anti Federalists

Open Document