Federalist And Antifederalist Analysis

671 Words2 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: The anti-federalist and the federalist

Federalist and Antifederalist By and large, constitution is the system of fundamental laws and principles that prescribes the nature, functions, and limits of a government or another institution. In particular for United States, constitution is the fundamental law of the United States, framed in 1787, ratified in 1789, and variously amended since then. As a matter of fact, it’s the symbol of healthy environment that gives all opportunities to one and all to speak against or in favor of any sort of constitutional amendment. Proudly speaking, it’s the meritorious political culture of United States that encourages all American to indulge himself or herself in any sort of debate and discussion pertaining to Constitution of United States. Presence of both Federalist and Antifederalist, in my opinion, is itself blessing for the nation which enables to adopt any constitutional amendment unanimously after a long discussion between both sides. That process simply facilitates the governmental course of action that at length smoothes the progress of the country devoid of any further interruption. “The Treaty of New York with the Creeks (Document A) is another example of the government passing laws without the consent of the people. People did not feel that this treaty was just, because ceasing their alliance with France, who helped them in the war, and starting a “friendship” with the Native Americans who fought against them in the war, was not a smart thing to do (Document C). This treaty, as well as the Whiskey Rebellion, is examples of the Federalist government being selfish, and putting their own personal beliefs over those of the people. The men who ran the government were not kings; they were representatives; and the fact that they ... ... middle of paper ... ...ould Wills destroy his own straw man”. (A Necessary Distortion) Being a part of this nation, the effects of prolonged heated debate between federalists and antifederalists on me are something that can not be avoided. Instead of describing how this thing affects me I would rather put in plain words by citing famous quotation of Pulitzer Prize winning Garry Wills who once said “The real victims [of Constitutional arguments] are the millions of poor or shelter-less or medically indigent who have been told, over the years, that they must lack care or life support in the name of their very own freedom." References DBQ Federalist vs. Antifederalist By: Beast, July 22, 2003, http://www.chuckiii.com/Reports/American_History/DBQ_Federalist_vs_Antifederalist.shtml A Necessary Distortion by Wendy McElroy [Posted January 11, 2000] http://www.mises.org/fullstory.asp?control=365

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

    From 1787-1790 the development of the American Constitution was a battle between two opposing political philosophies. America’s best political minds gathered in Philadelphia and other cities in the Northeast in order to find common ground in a governmental structure. The Federalists and the Anti-Federalists had both some political thoughts that agreed as well as some political thoughts that disagreed. However, both parties would compromise and ultimately come together.

    Read More

  • Federalist vs. Democratic-Republicans

    796 Words  | 2 Pages

    There are many differences between the Democratic-Republic party and the Federalist Party. Especially in the last decade of the 18th century which is late 1700’s, early 1800’s. They have different views on foreign relations and their beliefs on the war between France and Britain, their Federal government and vision for America. Their leaders are completely different people.

    Read More

  • The Pros And Cons Of The Anti-Federalists

    835 Words  | 2 Pages

    Both groups came to agreement and agreed that there needed to be a stronger authority requiring an independent salary to function. They both also agreed that they needed to raise safeguards against the tyranny. The anti-Federalists would not agree to the new Constitution without the “Bill of Rights.” The Federalists ended up including the Bill of Rights into the Constitution. The Bill of Rights protects the freedoms of people. It reassured the anti-Federalists the government could not abuse their power by taking it out on the people. The Federalists included the Bill of Rights to get the anti-Federalists votes and support in the Constitution to actually get it

    Read More

  • Dbq The Beliefs Of The Federalist And Anti-Federalists

    576 Words  | 2 Pages

    The Federalists and Anti-federalists shared the common beliefs of John Locke’s Enlightenment ideals such as all men were born equal (even though most of these men owned slaves), but their opinions about the role of government were different. Both parties had their own visions of how a new government would function and how the Constitution would support the government being proposed. Many argued that the Articles of Confederation had created a very weak government with very limited power. Specifically, the amount of power or the absence of power of a central government was the main disagreement between the Federalists and Anti-federalists. As a result, the Federalists and Anti-federalists argued about the ratification of a new constitution, which would give the central government more power.

    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

  • Bill of Rights To Protect From Tyranny

    768 Words  | 2 Pages

    After the Constitution was written, the new born nation was immediately split into two political sides, the federalists and the anti-federalists, over the ratification. Federalists, southern planters or people that tended to hold interest in trade, advocated a strong executive. On the other hand, anti-federalists, back country people or people involved in business but not in the mercantile economy, opposed the ratification of the constitution. The two sides, after much debate, were able to come to a compromise after the Bill of Rights was included into the Constitution.

    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

  • Ratification of the Constitution and the Louisiana Purchase

    551 Words  | 2 Pages

    The Federalist wanted to ratify the Constitution while the Antifederalist despised the idea entirely. Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay eventually compiled 85 essays as the Federalist Papers. These supporters of the Constitution believed that the checks and balances system (a system in which the different parts of an organization (such as a government) have powers that affect and control the other parts so that no part can become too powerful )would allow a strong central government to preserve states' rights. They felt that the Articles of Confederation was too weak and that they were in need for a change. The Articles of Confederation had “errors” that needed to be corrected argued the Federalist. Ratifying the Constitution lead to an improved more advanced country.

    Read More

  • political views of federalists and republicans

    357 Words  | 1 Pages

    The political views of the federalist and the republicans towards the government of the United States of America were different. The republicans stressed equality of rights among citizens allowing people to govern themselves. The federalists believed in a stronger government one in which was sovereign and had superior power over the local governments.

    Read More

  • Pros And Cons Of Anti Federalists

    342 Words  | 1 Pages

    Between the fall (September) of 1787 and spring (May) of 1790 , the delegates of the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia, PA presented a ratification platform to the American public. The proposed Constitution marked a clear separation from the Articles of Confederation, which created a federal “league of friendship” between the thirteen independent states. The newly proposed Constitution would make the United States have a stronger national presence to all the states rather than a loose confederation of states. The proposed Constitution, and the change created one of the greatest political splits and debates in history. These debates created an anti-federalist and federalist movement. The Anti-federalists on one side objecting to the

    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

  • federalism

    1206 Words  | 3 Pages

    The United States Government is beloved to all Americans, in the simple fact that all men are created equal and all men are given equal opportunity, to aspire to achieve success and make their dreams come true. Although the percentage of people who achieve all of their goals in life is fairly small, they have the freedom to chase them and America for the most part is a pretty content place. The “law of the land” that sets the standards for our rights and privileges is the U.S. Constitution.

    Read More

  • Anti-Federalist vs Federalist

    2017 Words  | 5 Pages

    After winning the Revolutionary War and sovereign control of their home country from the British, Americans now had to deal with a new authoritative issue: who was to rule at home? In the wake of this massive authoritative usurpation, there were two primary views of how the new American government should function. Whereas part of the nation believed that a strong, central government would be the most beneficial for the preservation of the Union, others saw a Confederation of sovereign state governments as an option more supportive of the liberties American’s fought so hard for in the Revolution. Those in favor of a central government, the Federalists, thought this form of government was necessary to ensure national stability, unity and influence concerning foreign perception. Contrastingly, Anti-Federalists saw this stronger form of government as potentially oppressive and eerily similar to the authority’s tendencies of the British government they had just fought to remove. However, through the final ratification of the Constitution, new laws favoring state’s rights and the election at the turn of the century, one can say that the Anti-Federalist view of America prevails despite making some concessions in an effort to preserve the Union.

    Read More

More about Federalist And Antifederalist Analysis

Open Document