Federalist Vs Anti-Federalist

  • Length: 912 words (2.6 double-spaced pages)
  • Rating: Excellent
Open Document

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Text Preview

More ↓

Continue reading...

Open Document

John Adams stated that “Government is instituted for the common good; for the protection, safety, prosperity, and happiness of the people; and not for profit, honor, or private interest of any one man, family, or class of men; therefore, the people alone have an incontestable, unalienable, and indefeasible right to institute government; and to reform, alter, or totally change the same, when their protection, safety, prosperity, and happiness require it.” Federalists believed this, and fought verbal and written battles against the Anti-Federalists, who disagreed with John Adams. Anti-Federalists believed that in an elite democracy, the elite’s would get greedy and selfish, and only worry about themselves. As I’m on the Federalist side, I believe that John Adams was correct in his statement, and that the government is only trying to uphold the rights and liberties that each citizen ought to have.
According to Elite Democrats, political representatives “should filter the views of the people through their superior expertise, intelligence and temperament”. Federalists were very intelligent when it came to people’s attitudes and personality. People are very self-centered and egotistical, only looking out for themselves. Having a spokesperson chosen by the people would help them with their problems, and to get their word across. In my opinion, elites who have studied politics in college, and who know the government well are obviously more intelligent than the citizens when it comes to representation. They would have a better understanding of what to do in a situation compared to the people.
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”.
Elite Democrats believe that the majority of people are not interested in politics as much as their interested in their own private lives and wellbeing. People aren’t concerned with politics unless it pertains to their own lives, which is what the Anti-Federalists believe. However, I disagree that if people don’t feel like getting involved with government and politics, it’s not the democratic system’s fault.

Need Writing Help?

Get feedback on grammar, clarity, concision and logic instantly.

Check your paper »

How to Cite this Page

MLA Citation:
"Federalist Vs Anti-Federalist." 123HelpMe.com. 21 Jun 2018
Title Length Color Rating  
The Similarities and Differences between the Federalist and Anti-Federalist Papers - 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....   [tags: US post-revolution history, ] 882 words
(2.5 pages)
Better Essays [preview]
Federalist vs. Anti-Federalist Essay - Federalist vs. Anti-Federalist The road to accepting the Constitution of the United States was neither easy nor predetermined. In fact during and after its drafting a wide-ranging debate was held between those who supported the Constitution, the Federalists, and those who were against it, the Anti-Federalists. The basis of this debate regarded the kind of government the Constitution was proposing, a centralized republic. Included in the debate over a centralized government were issues concerning the affect the Constitution would have on state power, the power of the different branches of government that the Constitution would create, and the issue of a standing army....   [tags: Papers] 852 words
(2.4 pages)
Better Essays [preview]
Federalist Vs Anti-Federalist Essay - John Adams stated that “Government is instituted for the common good; for the protection, safety, prosperity, and happiness of the people; and not for profit, honor, or private interest of any one man, family, or class of men; therefore, the people alone have an incontestable, unalienable, and indefeasible right to institute government; and to reform, alter, or totally change the same, when their protection, safety, prosperity, and happiness require it.” Federalists believed this, and fought verbal and written battles against the Anti-Federalists, who disagreed with John Adams....   [tags: US History Constitution] 912 words
(2.6 pages)
Strong Essays [preview]
The Progression From The Articles of Confederation to The Constitution As a Result of Anti-Federalist, and Federalist Debate - Looking back in history (1781-1787) at the debate over ratification of the Constitution we can see that the making of the constitution was a long drawn out battle between the federalists and the Anti-Federalists. There were concerns as to the inherent weaknesses of the Articles of Confederation, such as the lack of action during Shay’s Rebellion, the issue over taxation, as well as the problematic consensus required by all states to change any one of the Articles. There was a fear that if given too much power the executive leader would become like the king they had just fought a revolution to free themselves from....   [tags: American Constitution]
:: 3 Works Cited
3731 words
(10.7 pages)
Research Papers [preview]
The Ratification of the United States Constitution Essay - During 1787 and 1788 there were quite a few debates over the ratification of the United States Constitution. The issues disputed are outlined and explored in the Federalist Papers, an assortment of letters and essays, often published under pseudonyms, which emerged in a variety of publications after the Constitution was presented to the public. Those who supported the Constitution were Federalists, and those who opposed were Anti-Federalists. Their deliberations concerned several main issues. Alexander Hamilton, John Jay, James Madison, and other supporters of the Constitution argued in support of the federalist requirements that reserved powers to the states as well as the nationalist el...   [tags: anti-federalists, federalist paper] 961 words
(2.7 pages)
Better Essays [preview]
Anti-Federalist Essay - Most Americans were very suspicious of government, but the Anti- Federalist was really mistrustful of the government in general and strong national government. This mistrust was the basis of their opposition to the constitution. They feared it had created a government the people could not control. Many distinguished Americans were Anti-Federalists. Leaders included George Mason and Elbridge Gerry. Both attended the Philadelphia Convention but had refused to sign the constitution....   [tags: essays research papers] 661 words
(1.9 pages)
Strong Essays [preview]
James Madison and the Federalist Papers - On September 17, 1787, the Philadelphia Convention sent their new constitution to the states for ratification. The Federalists highly approved of the Constitution because it allowed for a more central and powerful government that was previously undermined under the Articles of Confederation. The Anti-Federalists, however, didn’t want a powerful central government, but, instead, powerful state governments; in response to the Constitution, many Anti-Federalists began writing essays and creating pamphlets as a means of arguing against it....   [tags: Federalist Papers] 739 words
(2.1 pages)
Better Essays [preview]
The Federalist Essay - In order to ascertain the cultural and literary significance of the “The Federalist”, an understanding of some small but significant United States history is in order. In 1787 the Constitutional Convention was to meet and determine the next pivotal step for the United States of America. What will be the governing body of this new republic and how should it strike forward on this great adventure. A team of framers set out to write what would become one the greatest documents in modern history. “We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Bl...   [tags: Cultural, Literary Significance]
:: 7 Works Cited
980 words
(2.8 pages)
Better Essays [preview]
Essay about Federalist - Federalist The Constitution came out to a world full of criticism. To put to sleep many of the objections that the critics had to the Constitution a number of those in favor of it such as Hamilton, Madison and John Jay wrote the Federalist. While there were many arguments for the Constitution, there were two that played a major part in American life. The first major argument was that the powers of the government came directly or indirectly from the common people. The second argument stated that to keep the government in check there is a series of checks and balances that will not let one branch of government gain too much control....   [tags: Papers] 1180 words
(3.4 pages)
Good Essays [preview]
Federalist Essay - 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....   [tags: Political Science Politics] 1448 words
(4.1 pages)
Strong Essays [preview]

Related Searches

In my lifetime, I’ve observed that people didn’t involve themselves in politics until a tragedy happens, or if they want to place the blame on someone. Part of people’s nature is that people like to find scapegoats to take the blame away from them. When it comes to the country’s problem, the government, and especially the president get blamed for everything.
Federalists feel that the kindness and honesty is only found in the elites. I believe that’s only true when it comes to government and politics. As we’ve seen, when people disagree with an event or a choice by the government, they get violent. As many of the founding fathers believed, debates between people would inevitably end in mob rule. The only way people know how to get their opinions across when they aren’t heard is through violence, which is unacceptable. The founding fathers were worried about the people overthrowing the government. I’m not saying that only elites are kind and honest, because through experience, America has seen some not so caring and truthful elites, but they were elected by the people. So whose fault is it when the elite don’t cooperate with the people’s wishes? The people are the one to blame, but even still, the constitution gives power to impeach and get rid of the elite.
As I stated before, the government is put in place to protect its people’s rights and liberties, and due to different abilities, democracies must deal with inequality. The Anti-Federalists believed that the government should minimize inequalities some how, as to not threaten the republic. How is the government supposed to regulate people’s inequalities? Every person is different. We all have different abilities and talents. People also obtain different levels of education. People who don’t attend college, or don’t work hard in high school are destined to a low-paying job. The government can’t regulate the people’s willingness to be successful. Even if the people make a mess of their lives, the government has created programs, such as welfare, to help them survive in society. The government can only do so much.
Both the Federalists and Anti-Federalists put forth great points about democracy and republic, but in the end, the Federalists came up with a better form of government. They were much more coordinated and organized than the Anti-Federalists. To give some credit to the Anti-Federalists, the Bill of Rights has shown to be very important to upholding people’s rights and liberties. James Madison and the rest of the founding fathers demonstrated the need for a republic, instead of a confederation through the federalist papers. Madison’s work and beliefs can be proven through the observation of America’s government today, which has lasted more than two hundred years. As previously stated, the government’s not here to appease the people, its here to make sure that order is kept and that people’s rights are protected.

Return to 123HelpMe.com