The early years of the Constitution of the United States were full of political strife. The two prominent political ideals were complete opposites. The Jeffersonian Republicans were focused on giving power to the people and maintaining a pastoral economy, while the Federalists supported the control of the government by the elite class, and maintaining “positive” democracy. Both parties feared the influence and effect the other party would have on the public. In Linda K. Kerber's article, “The Fears of the Federalists”, the major concerns Federalists held in the early 19th century are described. Ever since the war with and separation from England, the citizens of America were seen to be continually drive to “patriotic rebellion” as a way to voice their wants. Violence was not an uncommon practice of the era (the use of mob tactics was prevalent), but Federalists feared that if Democratic values were abused and unrestrained, the country would fall into anarchy. Federalists sought to maintain a stable culture. After the revolution, they felt the people would not be able to remain a peaceful people once having experienced such a rebellion1. This strengthened the Federalist belief in keeping control over the people in order to prevent any “mobbish”2 behavior. Thus, the idea of having the populace ruled by an elite, as well as restricting their role in government was strengthened. However, they were threatened by the lack of deference spreading throughout the culture3. As any sort of gentile blood was being disregarded for the most part, this alarmed Federalists as this lack of deference made people “unpredictable and capable of 'mobbishness'”4. They did not trust the Republicans to be aware of the “precariousness of American social o... ... middle of paper ... ...e expansion of the country and a contribution to its empirical power14. Kerber's article is a good supplemental piece, not having enough perspective to stand alone. The ideals of Federalists and Republicans were almost at the extreme opposite of the political spectrum. Federalists were cautious, strict, and focused on elite leadership, while Republicans were more willing to change, incorporate the whole of the people, and rebel. Linda K. Kerber's article on Federalists, “The Fear of the Federalists” gives a suitable reference for the perspective and beliefs of the Federalists during the early 19th century. Works Cited Foner, Eric. Give Me Liberty! An American History. New York: W. W. Norton & Company, Inc, 2007. Hoffman, Elizabeth Cobbs and Jon Gjerde. edit., Major Problems in American History: Volume 1 to 1877. Massachusetts: Houghton Mifflin Company, 2007.
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.
However the federalist lost out to a new Republican government. Federalist saw a government that would be defined by expansive state power and public submission to the rule of elites however; Jefferson (a republican) said the American nation drew energy and strength from the confidence of a reasonable and rational people. “Once the legitimate party prevailed, Madison and his allies believed, the “monocratic” crisis would end, parties would be rendered unnecessary, and the high-minded decision of enlightened natural leaders would, at last, guide the nation.” (Wilentz, pg. 65). A strong central government would be one with checks and balances to keep fairness as well as branches to represent different parts of government. A strong government would also help to prevent riots and chaos in America when people did not like the decisions made. However, it still upheld the ideals of a weak central government where fairness of the people was in place. Incompletion the formation of the Republican opposition in the 1790’s continued the legacy of the American Revolution through inclusion of all Americans and fairness in the
As the country grows and matures into a great nation, people realize that change is inevitable and sometimes even needed. Within the time period of 1802 to 1817, many Jeffersonian Republicans realized that their ideals and principles weren’t always best for the nation. That is why they adopted some of the ideals of the old Federalist Party. Also, during this time, the Federalists died out. As realized after the Hartford Convention, the nation did not need nor want the Federalists anymore if the Democratic Republicans could get the job done. Although people changed a great deal during this time, it seemed to be beneficial to the nation. If people had not grown and never continued to learn and aspire to what is needed, then we may have never gotten to this great nation that the United States of America is today.
Walens, Susann. A. United States History Since 1877. Western Connecticut State University, Danbury, CT. September 2007.
The Anti-Federalists had many views that were different than those of the Federalists. One the differences that seems to be important, is who they view as “The people”. The Anti-Federalists believed that common people should be able to be active participants of their government; this involvement includes having a say in the laws that are made and the protection of everyday working class people. This common man involvement is reinforced by the fact that the Anti-Federalists wanted to keep government more local, by having strong state governments. Using Rogers Smith’s Civic Ideals as a foundation, this essay illustrates that the view of the Anti-Federalists is that the United States of America is combined of many different people, and that representation should be based on these differences rather than just the elite population.
Foner, Eric. "Chapter 9." Give Me Liberty!: An American History. Brief Third ed. Vol. One. New York: W.W. Norton, 2012. N. pag. Print.
Federalists believed in a lean, strong national government. Those who supported the government were in control of the government People who were best suited
Foner, Eric. Give Me Liberty! An American Novel. New York: WW Norton & Company, 2012. Print.
Foner, E. (2008). Give me Liberty: An American History. New York, Ny: WW. Norton &
Anti-Federalists didn’t believe in large governments and argued land could not be governed on the principals of freedom and self -government. It only thrived in small societies where the rulers and the people being ruled interacted on a daily basis. In order to show their disapproval for the new Constitution they made hats with the words “liberty” to wear to the polls were the members of the state’s ratification convention were being elected. They believed and lived by the motto of liberty. Liberty was viewed as America’s happiness, which they claimed resulted from the freedom of the institution and the limited involvement of the government. It was the power to govern yourself and if the new Constitution was to be adopted it would leave individuals
W.W. Norton, 2012, 771. 3.) Foner, Eric. A. Give Me a Liberty! An American History of the World. 4th ed.
The measure of strength granted to the central government is at the heart of the U.S. Constitution. It is also at the heart of much political debate and discord throughout U.S. history, notably the American Civil War. Anti-Federalists, who supported strong state governments, were backed primarily by agrarians, westerners, and southerners. Many held the belief that popular self-government flourished in small communities where ruled and ruler interacted daily (Van Zant, slide 12). Federalists, who favored a strong central government, were supported primarily by upper class northern and mid-Atlantic businessmen and professionals. They envisioned an America ruled by an informal aristocracy of elite, propertied gentlemen who would control the politics
When the wave of American Revolution was going on around Europe and around the world, the Federalists split into two factions over their contrasting vision about the programs to guide the new republic. Due to this, the foreign policies of the United States had to face several critiques from its own citizens during the Federalist Era (1789-1801). The foreign affairs of the Federalist Era was shaped by the French Revolution and other subsequent war between British and France. Clearly, the ideological differences between the prominent political leaders divided the American into two factions.
One argument that the Anti-Federalists had against the forming of a new constitution was that they claimed it would “lead to a new consolidation system of government” and the leaders of Philadelphia intended “such a system and that the consolidated system would in the end destroy republican government and individual liberty as well as the independence of the states.” (Lewis 2) The Federalists feared that the government would have so much power it would be abused. They were constantly speculating about what would happen to the Unit...
Federalists:The federalist believed that a strong central government would be necessary for the newly developed nation. In the quote “In republican government, the legislative authority necessarily predominates.” , they are saying that the national government has more power over the states government. They believe in not only a strong central government but also a national bank and also to tax the states