To What Extent And How Did The Anti-Federalists Agree On A New Constitution
Jake, Kiara, Miah, and Danny Unit 2 Question 1 How did the Anti-Federalists and Federalists agree on a new Constitution? Delegates met at the Philadelphia Convention in 1787 to amend the Articles of Confederation. The idea of having a strong national government divided people either in support or against the new Constitution. Anti-Federalists voiced their objections to the proposed Constitution as they feared a strong central government. The Anti-Federalists had objections to the proposed Constitution that were shaped by their political philosophies. Their three biggest concerns included a Republican Government, the president, and the lack of Bill of Rights. Anti-Federalists agreed that a republican government was the only form of government …show more content…
They believed this form of government was too distant from the people. To have a republican government, virtuous citizens would be required. They insisted that in a republic the people are sovereign and for those people to make good decisions they would need to be virtuous. And according to Anti-Federalists, it was less likely to have people like this in a large nation than a small state. It was then argued that a president; someone equipped with power to nominate judicial officers, pardon for the offense of treason, and armed forces at his disposal, would resemble a “elective King”. This point was made by Luther Martin and it was reflecting the fears that were a result of the experience Americans had with the British Monarchy. Many were shocked that there was no Bill of Rights in the ratification of the Constitution. …show more content…
Federalists argued that “energy in the executive is the first prerequisite of good government” as it needed power to enforce laws, and provide protection against attacks. Having one executive serve for four years avoided conflict between two or more leaders of equal power, allowing the president to “act quickly when necessary for the common defense to preserve the public peace and in international relations.” The four year term helps the president “resist momentary impulses and act on the basis of the long-term calculations of the public good.” Federalists also believed the executive should be elected by an electoral college. This would solve the dispute between those who wanted to use the popular vote and those who wanted to use state legislatures to choose. The Bill of Rights was another topic the Federalists discussed. In a political system where government authority is derived from the people, adding the Bill of Rights “might afford the pretext for the government to claim power if it doesn’t have on the ground.” It would provide protection against powers that have not been granted. In addition, Federalists argued the liberties listed in the Bill of Rights were included in the guarantee of habeas corpus, and prohibition of ex post facto laws. To adopt these provisions, states ratified the
Articles Of Confederation And The Constitution Rhetorical Analysis
133 Words | 1 PagesFederalist’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).
Comparing The Federalists And Antifederalist During The Constitutional Convention Of 1787
929 Words | 4 PagesThe main debate was about individual rights. Originally, the Constitution lacked a bill of rights. Anti-federalists insisted that a bill of rights be added to the Constitution to expressly grant freedoms to the country. On the other hand, federalist James Madison believed the Constitution was enough, and adding a bill of rights was unnecessary. As southern states did with slavery, antifederalists refused to ratify the Constitution without a bill of rights.
Explain What Compromises Were Made At The Constitutional Convention
705 Words | 3 PagesThe 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.
Ratification Of The Us Constitution Dbq Essay
827 Words | 4 PagesThe Constitution of the United States was written in 1787, but there was a grapple for its ratification that went on until about two decades after the ratification. Members of Congress believed that the first government of the United States or the Articles of Confederation, needed to be adjusted while others did not want anything to change. After the Revolutionary War, the people did not want a strong central government, because it reminded them too much of what they were trying to escape from. Under the Articles, each state had their own laws, and the need for a new Constitution was desired by many. The Constitution of 1787 created huge debates, arguments and splits in the nation that lasted for several year after its ratification between people who
Ratifying The Constitution Dbq Essay
1210 Words | 5 PagesThe Anti Federalists didn’t want what we have now,they didn’t want the federal government to have and influence over citizens’ lives, they didn’t want the govt to in any way resemble a monarchy because they had just escaped from the corrupt monarchy. They believed that if the power in the country occupied in the people of the various states, then their vision would have a chance of success. Likewise, the Anti Federalist thought there was no bill of rights, so they disliked the constitution. Every constitution should have one for the people, and the government shouldn’t refuse to give on, as shown on Document E. The Letter to James Madison, Objections to the Constitution was written by Thomas Jefferson to explain what he disliked about the constitution to one of the writings, after the constitution was drafted and were awaiting ratification. Thomas Jefferson also asserts that he doesn’t like the fact that there is no rules and regulations in regard to office terms, and how the officers could get re-elected and serve for like, thus, will result with corruption
Essay On Jefferson's Consolidation Of Power Dbq
1149 Words | 5 PagesAfter the American Revolution, the formation of a new government was precedent. Federalists were afraid of disorder, anarchy, and chaos; the unchecked power of the masses, and sought for the constitution to create a government distant from popular passions. On the other hand, antifederalists were more concerned about the dangers of concentrated power. Equally, the antifederalists opposed the constitution because of the obstacles between the people and the exercised power, which is why federalists supported it. Hamilton was the Leader of the federalist party while Jefferson was the leader of the Republican party.
The Argument Against The Anti-Federalists
99 Words | 1 PagesThe Federalists wanted a strong central government. The Anti- Federalists claims Constitution gives the central government too much power and, and they worried about the new constitution will not give them any rights. That the new system threatened freedom; Also, threatened the sovereignty of the states and personal liberties; failed to protect individual rights. Besides, some of famous peoples such as " Patrick Henry" and artists have came out against the Constitution. Although the anti-Federalists were unsuccessful in stopping the passage of the Constitution, their efforts have been responsible for the creation and implementation of the Bill of
Classical Republicanism Dbq
796 Words | 4 PagesAntifederalists were against the ratification of the Constitution because they believed in classical republicanism. Monroe and Kersh (2016) define classical republicanism as, “ a democratic idea … that calls on citizens to participate in public affairs, seek the public interest, shun private gain, and defer to natural leaders,” (p. 69). The Antifederalists wanted citizens to take part in government so that public interests would be well represented so that the minority of the population would not have more power than the majority. The Antifederalists had four main reasons why they were against the ratification of the Constitution. Firstly, according to Monroe and Kersh (2016) “it stripped political control from citizens and placed it in a
Anti Federalists Feared A Strong Central Government Essay
665 Words | 3 Pages“Anti-federalist concern that anything not included in the Constitution would not be protected” (Amendment 9). The quote from Amendment 9 proves the Anti-federalists feared a strong central government because, if something was not written in the Constitution then it would
Weaknesses Of The Articles Of Confederation
748 Words | 3 PagesCentral 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
The Federalist Party And The Anti-Federal Party
270 Words | 2 PagesBeyond just believing that the Constitution should be ratified, the Anti-Federalist Party had a broad ideology that they held foremost to their cause. They believed that Congress and the Executive Branch held too much power in the federal government and over the people of the people in the United States. They thought that under the Constitution
Ratification Of The Constitution Essay
494 Words | 2 PagesThey 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.
Differences And Similarities Between Anti-Federalists And Anti-Federalists
622 Words | 3 PagesFederalists and Anti-Federalists had opposing views in the Constitution because of their differences; but they also had many similarities that ended up leading to the ratification of the Constitution. Anti-Federalists and Federalist had many similarities. Both were supportive of this new country and knew that they needed a government. They both wanted the congress to have power to create war and to create treaties.
Compare And Contrast The Federalist And Anti Federalists
713 Words | 3 PagesIn order for America to succeed as a nation both the anti-Federalists and Federalists had to agree about the future of the nation and the Constitution. The Federalists believed that the republican government proposed by the Constitution was likely to be successful and efficacious while the anti-Federalists were not convinced and believed that the power should remain at the hands of the state and local governments. One of the reasons that the Federalists believed that the republican government was likely to be successful and efficacious, as presented in the Constitution, was because the larger government meant more power to control the transatlantic force. The Federalists believed that only a union would be strong enough to secure favorable
Robert Yates Anti Federalist 17 Summary
445 Words | 2 PagesThe Anti- Federalists claimed the Constitution gave the central government an excessive amount of power, and while not a Bill of Rights the folks would be in danger of oppression. Both Hamilton and Madison argued that the Constitution did not want a Bill of Rights, that it might produce a "parchment barrier" that restricted the rights of the folks, as critical protective
More about To What Extent And How Did The Anti-Federalists Agree On A New Constitution
Articles Of Confederation And The Constitution Rhetorical Analysis
133 Words | 1 PagesComparing The Federalists And Antifederalist During The Constitutional Convention Of 1787
929 Words | 4 PagesExplain What Compromises Were Made At The Constitutional Convention
705 Words | 3 PagesRatification Of The Us Constitution Dbq Essay
827 Words | 4 PagesRatifying The Constitution Dbq Essay
1210 Words | 5 PagesEssay On Jefferson's Consolidation Of Power Dbq
1149 Words | 5 PagesThe Argument Against The Anti-Federalists
99 Words | 1 PagesClassical Republicanism Dbq
796 Words | 4 PagesAnti Federalists Feared A Strong Central Government Essay
665 Words | 3 PagesWeaknesses Of The Articles Of Confederation
748 Words | 3 PagesThe Federalist Party And The Anti-Federal Party
270 Words | 2 PagesRatification Of The Constitution Essay
494 Words | 2 PagesDifferences And Similarities Between Anti-Federalists And Anti-Federalists
622 Words | 3 PagesCompare And Contrast The Federalist And Anti Federalists
713 Words | 3 PagesRobert Yates Anti Federalist 17 Summary
445 Words | 2 Pages