ipl-logo

Ratification Of The Constitution Dbq Essay

900 Words4 Pages

Federalists valiantly try to pull the cart to a bright future, while Anti-federalists impede the cart’s progress. The Anti-Federalist is the label that politicians of 1787 coined in order to lump together all folks who opposed ratification of the Constitution. These folks may have opposed the Constitution for different reasons.

George Washington was elected the United States’ first president and took the oath of office on April 30, 1789. His vice president was John Adams.
The first Congress under the Constitution convened in New York City in March 1789. Congress immediately set out to establish a judicial branch, develop the executive branch, set a legislative agenda, and meet the popular demand for a bill of rights. The Constitution only …show more content…

Whom wanted to push for strong central government that would unite the states as one large continental nation. Federalists attacked the weaknesses of the Articles of Confederation and articulated their support for the new Constitution. Arguing that it was a necessary improvement on the ARTICLES OF CONFEDERATION. The country's first attempt at unifying the states in a national political …show more content…

This led the Anti-federalists to argue that the federal government should be limited to issues of national defense and interstate commerce and all other powers to the state. The Anti-federalists believed this plan granted the national government undue economic power over the states. Anti-Federalists found many problems in the Constitution. They saw no sense in throwing out the existing government.

And being that the Federalists and the Anti-federalists are divided they’re revealed in the debate over national states. Many of these questions are still being question today; What is the best form of government? What rights must the government protect? Which government powers should be granted to the states, and which to the federal government?

These things also helped led the debates to form a public conversation, and mainly through the newspaper editorials. Anti-federalists on one side objecting to the Constitution, and Federalists on the other supporting it. Therefore both sides are trying to persuade the public that precious liberty and self-government

Show More
Related

  • The Pros And Cons Of The Anti-Federalists

    433 Words  | 2 Pages

    The anti-federalist wanted to improve the equality in the government this is clear with this quote "As long as we can preserve our unalienable rights, we are in safety". The anti-federalist believed that the constitution needs the bill of rights to protect people individual rights. The federalist were a strong central government .They wanted a strong leader and they wanted the separation of powers as stated in the federalist quote. "It is evident that each department should have a will of its own; and consequently should be so constituted that the members of each should have as little agency as possible in the appointment of the members of the others.

    Read More

  • Debate Between Hamilton Pros And Cons

    1426 Words  | 6 Pages

    During the late 1700’s there was a great debate over how the country should be run. Also there was controversy over this new Constitution and how it would work. Two sides slowly emerged. The Federalists who believed in a federal system and this new constitution. Their opposition, the Anti-Federalist, believed in a weak central government and had plenty of issues with this new Constitution.

    Read More

  • Articles Of Confederation And The Constitution Rhetorical Analysis

    133 Words  | 1 Pages

    Federalist’s ideas about functions of the central government encompassed a national appeal that influenced adoption of the constitution. They convinced the delegates that a strong national government was capable of ensuring equitable resource sharing. By quoting the gaps in the Articles of Confederation, the Federalists expressed the concern that passing the constitution would address the highlighted inefficacies to make American a sustainable nation. Also, Federalists were open to new ideas including the consideration of the bill of rights. Contrariwise, the Antifederalists did not prosper in the mission to convince the delegates to oppose the constitution that provided supreme powers to the national government (Hamilton, Madison and Jay 67).

    Read More

  • Explain What Compromises Were Made At The Constitutional Convention

    705 Words  | 3 Pages

    The Federalists of the convention were in favor of the ratification of the Constitution. They believed that the national government must be strong in order to function and to control uncooperative states, which could protect the rights of the people. They also believed that the Constitution and state government protected individual freedoms. On the other hand, the Anti-Federalists opposed a strong central government, particularly a standing army. They believed it threatened state power along with the rights of the common people.

    Read More

  • Pros And Cons Of The Articles Of Confederation

    706 Words  | 3 Pages

    The Anti-Federalists wanted the people to elect their representatives, because they believed that it would allow a sense of security for the people since the congress already had so much power over them. The people repeatedly told the state legislature that they would never submit to an authority that is not elected by themselves. They had the idea that the state legislature would elect subservient to their own desires, not the people's. If the elected representatives are representing the people, then the people should choose who they want to be represented by. The Federalists, on the other hand, wanted the state legislature to elect representatives because they believed that “politicians should elect politicians.”

    Read More

  • Anti Federalism Dbq

    175 Words  | 1 Pages

    While the federalist and anti-federalist had opposing views in a functioning government system, some crucial points were agreed upon. They both knew in order for the United States to succeed as a new country, they needed better stability and a sense of unity between the colonies. The Articles of Confederation, on both sides, were thought of as a weak system of governmental control. A central government appealed to both sides, but as to how much power it would possess was still at a still point. Federalist wanted a strong central government, whereas anti-federalists were afraid of it seeming too much like the British monarchy.

    Read More

  • Compare And Contrast Federalist And Anti Federalists

    251 Words  | 2 Pages

    When the Articles of Confederation failed to organize the citizens and the economy of America its citizens decided to advocate for a different form of government, that arose in the creation of the Constitution, the supreme law of the land. As a new form of government was presented the fear that the American Revolution had brought upon the colonies lead to the creation of two different political groups the Federalist and Anti- federalist that stood for those who feared the government and those who believed that the government should be stronger. Based on the Federalist papers I believe that the Anti- federalist had a better argument as they pushed for the protection of individual rights and the limitation of the power of the government. Federalist

    Read More

  • Compare And Contrast Federalist And Anti Federalists

    970 Words  | 4 Pages

    Federalists believed the key to a successful nation lay within giving the majority of the power to the national government- where they would protect the rights of the people to the fullest extent. On the contrary, anti-federalists believed giving too much power to the national federal government would result in corruption among the states, threatening the rights and liberties of the common person. As a solution to this fear of corruption, anti-federalists believed a better alternative to strong national rule would be by dividing the power up among the states. Localized authority, they believed, would better represent the needs of the common man, whereas strong centralized authority would be difficult to represent the average

    Read More

  • Compare And Contrast Federalist And Anti Federalists

    642 Words  | 3 Pages

    They believed that the Constitution gave the government too much power and if the government had too much power then they would be back to where they started with the same monarchy as Britain. The Anti-Federalist lacked the leadership power compared to the Federalists. Some Anti-Federalist included Samuel Adams, John Hancock, and Patrick Henry. Anti-Federalists said that the new government would fall because of merchants and creditors. Anti-Federalist who opposed the Constitution believed that the Constitution failed to protect the rights of citizens and threatened liberties.

    Read More

  • How Is Anti Federalism Different From The Anti-Federalists

    871 Words  | 4 Pages

    Federalists vs. Anti-Federalists On September 17, 1787, the constitution was signed and in America, this changed society because the constitution was fundamentals and examples for the future for next generations to follow. Although, to many people, the constitution was not enough and it only benefited those wrote it and created equality for the majority of people but not everyone. However, even though there were protesters, there were supports who did not see this constitution as flawed, but the only perfection. These two groups were known as the Federalists and the Anti-Federalists, in which they wrote continuous arguments against each other to only disprove other.

    Read More

  • Anti Federalists Research Paper

    440 Words  | 2 Pages

    Kimberly Paul Mr. Brandenburg 030817 Much like the Democrats and Republicans of today, Federalists and Anti-Federalists had diverging opinions on how the nation should be governed. Federalists had the utmost faith in the people and believed that they were the only ones capable of governing the nation fairly and efficiently. They were avid believers of a strong central government, a central bank, and an army. Federalist No. 39 states: “It is essential to such a government that it be derived from the great body of the society, not from an inconsiderable proportion or a favored class of it,” proving that they were in favor of central, unionized government.

    Read More

  • Weaknesses Of The Articles Of Confederation

    748 Words  | 3 Pages

    Central government did not have the power the federalists wish it would have had under the Articles. Due to the constitution, the central government was too strong in the eyes of the anti-federalists. The Constitution didn’t provide any power for the states and individual freedom. Anti-federalists were scared that if a president was reelected, he would act more like a king. Many people's ideas contributed on the Debate Over the

    Read More

  • Articles Of Confederation Dbq Essay

    585 Words  | 3 Pages

    The Federalist main argument was stated based off the opinion that the government would never have complete power over the citizens, but the citizens would also have a little more power and a say in the things that involve them. On the other hand, the Anti-Federalists believed in limited powers specifically stated, they wanted strong state governments, and wanted a Bill of Rights added to the Constitution to protect the people from the government (Document 4). This was their point of view due to the fact that they believed that the individual states know and can act more based on their people that on federal government can. They focused their argument on the rights of the citizens. For the Federalists and Anti-Federalists to agree on a new government, they created a compromise that combined each of their ideas.

    Read More

  • Ratification Of The Constitution Essay

    494 Words  | 2 Pages

    They felt the Constitution would create a system of federalism, a system in which the national government holds significant power, but the smaller political subdivisions also hold significant power. They felt the country needed a strong central government so that it didn’t fall apart. The Ant-Federalists were on the opposing side, they felt the Constitution granted the government too much power. They also felt there wasn’t enough protection of their right with an absent Bill of Rights. Another concern of the Anti-Federalists mainly came from the lower classes, from their standpoint they thought the wealthy class would be in main control and gain the most benefits from the ratification of this document.

    Read More

  • Robert Yates Anti Federalist 17 Summary

    445 Words  | 2 Pages

    The author of anti-federalist 17# was Robert Yates (not the serial killer), at the time he was a politician and judge also the oldest of his family. he lived in the state of New York and tried to run for governor. The document yates wrote was just about states that the anti-federalists did not desire a constitution as a result of they felt that it 'd offer the central government an excessive amount of power which it 'd remove all power from the states. "to raise and support armies at pleasure, in addition in peace as in war, and their management over the militia, tend not solely to a consolidation of the govt. , however the destruction of liberty..." a stronger central government would higher shield everybody and is additional for the good

    Read More

More about Ratification Of The Constitution Dbq Essay

Open Document