Opponents of the ratifications were less organized. They were named Anti-Federalists after the entire issue. The anti-federalists were weary of placing great power in a single point of execution because it would go against the whole idealistic point of the revolutionary war, which was to get away from the tyranny of the king.
In interpreting the Constitution, the anti-Federalists believed that because of these key issues and how they were dealt with in the new government, their freedom was seriously at risk. Their fear and distrust of the new government was focused on the relatively few individuals who, under the new government, would hold the political reigns of the nation. To the opponents of the Constitution, many warning signs of potential despotism were visible in the proposed government -- the sole power of taxation, the lack of protection of freedoms, the formation of a large military force, the dissolving of states' powers, and above all, the concentration of powers in the hands of a few. It is this last issue that seemed to be of greatest concern to the anti-Federalists, and logically so, because all other powers and laws prescribed by the Constitution were to be interpreted and e... ... middle of paper ... ...y discovered power was seen as a mortal threat to their liberty. They saw themselves as they were ten years earlier under English rule, subjects to political powers they could not see, and this, they believed, is what would happen again if the Constitution was to be ratified.
It was these ideals that essentially led to the development of the Anti-Federalists who feared that such great allocations of power to centralized government would lead to a centralized rule that could not be controlled. Once the Federalists had control of the federal government, the fears of the Anti-Federalists quickly came to fruition. Although the Anti-Federalists were in opposition to the actions and strength of the federal government under Federalist control, certain accommodations were made to appease some Anti-Federalists. The main one being that Thomas Jefferson, a leader of the Anti-Federalists was made vice-president after losing in a presidential
It was then that the leaders of the nation decided to write a central constitution, which would be followed by all states. This is when the power struggle began. While some states agreed to the proposal, several states completely rejected it and others were indecisive as to what would be the right thing to do. There were so many issues that arose that the individual states urged the people to reject the idea of a central government, because it would, purportedly, create undue interference in a state's internal matters. The people who opposed the proposal were known as Anti-federalists.
Distrust of Democracy “A government big enough to give you everything you want is big enough to take away everything you have” (Democracy Quotes). Years ago, Thomas Jefferson was among many who, during drafting and ratification of the constitution, voiced their wariness over the creation of a strong national government. Professor I.M. Skeptic argues that the constitution was born out of a distrust of democracy. I do believe that the constitution was created out of distrust; however I believe this distrust is for a strong central government that was displayed through Britain 's monarchy, not of democracy.
The Anti-Feds, Republicans, believed in strict interpretation of the constitution, peaceful foreign relations, and a reduction of the role of the federal government in the lives of average citizens. They were opposed to a strong central government and felt states should hold the power to govern. The Federalists believed that the constitution should be loosely interpreted and that America should follow the spirit of it to make laws and judgements. Federalists wanted to organize the states so a strong federal power could govern over them in order to keep enough power for the economy, war and ruling. Many were opposed to this form of government because it so closely mimicked that of Great Britain.
But the articles denied Congress the power to collect taxes, regulate interstate commerce and enforce laws. Because of this, the central government had to request donations from the states to finance its operations and raise armed forces. The states attempted to limit the power of the national government because they feared that it would become a monarchy. In an effort to limit the power of the national government, Congress created one without enough power to govern effectively, which led to serious national and international problems. One of the main weaknesses under the Articles of Confederation was its incapability to regulate trade and levy taxes.
The United States left the Articles of Confederation behind for a new more adapted constitution in 1788 due to more than one reason, however a main reason for the switch had to do with the power of the federal government. There would be some Libertarians that would hold the Articles to be the symbol of American freedom at its peak, however there were those that would later be known as Federalists that saw the Articles as a failure due to the lack of strong central government powers within the articles. The many differences between the two documents were each important in there own respect, the first one that come to mind would be the power to levy taxes, under the articles Congress could request that States pay taxes, but under the constitution Congress had the power to levy taxes upon individuals. This power in particular was interesting because of its controversy with the recent War with England that partially encompassed England levying taxes upon her subjects and colonies. It is interesting that it would be part of our own Constitution that a powerful government could levy taxes upon individuals when we fought England to not do the same.
The government of the United States under the Articles of Confederation was split between two main powers, the colonies and Britain. The colonies struggled to overthrow the British government and create their own government. The United States Constitution was drafted to replace these Articles in order to address many weaknesses, while meeting both the colonies and the government’s needs. Under the Articles of Confederation, there were many things the federal government couldn’t do. It couldn’t tax, make trade treaties, resolve disputes between states, keep order, and pay its debts.
After winning their independence in the American Revolution, America's leaders were hesitant to create a strong centralized government in fear that it would only replace King George III's tyranny. As a result, the first constitution, the Articles of Confederation, gave the national government hardly any power over the states, and created chaos within the nation. Because of the Articles' inefficiency, a new document called the Constitution was drafted. The Constitution created a more centralized government with the separation of powers among executive, legislative, and judicial branches. The ratification of this new constitution created a debate among the federalists and the anti-federalists.