ipl-logo

Explain What Objections To The Constitution Were Held By Such Anti Federalists

918 Words4 Pages

We the People Reading Assignment: Anti-Federalist Position 1. Why do you think Madison suggested having the Constitution ratified by the people in special conventions instead of by state legislatures? As a Federalist, Madison knew that the state legislators would vote against ratifying the Constitution because it would lessen the states’ powers with a stronger national government. As a result, Madison suggested special conventions to prevent this from happening. 2. What objections to the Constitution were held by such Anti-Federalists as Mercy Otis Warren? Anti-Federalists thought that a House of Representatives was not sufficient for the representation of everyone. A government operating at a distance meant that the people can’t keep track of …show more content…

This is because they wrote it to prevent people from taking away property, such as slaves. Furthermore, through their system of government, the elite would have the bigger role. 11. What process did the Philadelphia Convention devise for ratifying the Constitution and why? The Convention devised ratification through state legislatures to make it more likely for the Federalists to win. Otherwise, state legislatures would vote against the Constitution because they wouldn’t want to lose their power. 12. Why did many of the writers in the debates over the Constitution use pseudonyms? The writers used pseudonyms to prevent people from judging the arguments based on the writer’s reputation. 13. What philosophical ideas guided the Anti-Federalists’ opposition to a stronger national government? How did those ideas lead them toward specific objections to the Constitution? The Anti-Federalists thought that one specific set of rules for the whole population would not fully represent everyone’s rights. Furthermore, the Anti-Federalists thought that if a government took place far from the people, they would no longer represent

Show More
Related
616 Words | 3 Pages

In the years 1787 and 1788 right after the Constitutional Convention, many people argued over the context of the constitution. The ratification started when the Congress turned the Constitution over to the state legislatures. Because most of the framers had already decided to discard the Articles of Confederation when drafting the Constitution, the lack of people following the articles made the legislatures feel that an unanimous vote was unnecessary. The delegates agreed that approval from only 9 of the 13 states would be adequate to ratify the United States Constitution. However, the process to ratifying the constitution was difficult including groups of people and regions who supported or opposed the ratification.

Read More
1511 Words | 7 Pages

Lectures Lecture 14 “Questions to Consider #1”: Why did the Anti Federalists object so strongly to the Preamble to the Constitution? The Anti-Federalists objected so strongly to Preamble to the Constitution due to the fact the Preamble establishes powers for the three branches of government, states’ relations, mode of amendment, debts, national supremacy, oath of office, and amendment ratification. This group felts as though when the federalists wanting to create a strong central government would not be strong enough if the Preamble was not put into place. Lecture 14 states, “Anti-federalists suspicious of central power fought the new Constitution tenaciously…..

Read More
438 Words | 2 Pages

The Constitution was scribed subsequent to the delegation that occurred at the Constitutional Convention, held in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. This document was intended to be an improvement of the Articles of Confederation, in which the ending result was an entirely new government called the republic. The idea of institutionalizing a constitution created differences between the participants of the meeting. Those who opposed the idea of a new government and the constitution were called the Antifederalists and those who supported the ratification of the Constitution were federalists, which is the idea of federalism vs. state’s rights. The Constitution failed to protect the rights of the civilians despite Federalists attempts to persuade individuals

Read More
872 Words | 4 Pages

On September 17, 1787, The Philadelphia Convention emitted their own new constitution to the states for ratification. Instead, The Federalist profoundly accepted the Constitution for several reasons, which included that this new constitution allowed for higher and further central government, that was formerly undermined under the Articles of Confederation. In the other hand, The Anti-Federalist, did not want a authoritative and dominant central government, but instead, powerful state governments; in response to the new constitution, many of the Anti-Federalists began writing different essays and creating pamphlets as a means of arguing against it. In retaliation to the Anti-Federalists experiment at earning states to not rarify the Constitution, many federalists advanced a group of essays known as the Federalist Papers, which argued for the ratification of the new law system.

Read More
827 Words | 4 Pages

Hence Federalists came up with the Bill of Rights as a way to get the Constitution ratified and for people to really see a needed change. The Bill Of Rights which lists specific prohibitions on governmental power, lead the Anti-Federalists to be less fearful of the new Constitution . This guaranteed that the people would still remain to have rights, but the strong central government that the country needed would have to be approved. The 1804 Map of the nation shows that even after the ratification of the United States Constitution there still continued to be “commotion” and dispute in the country.(Document 8) George Washington stated that the people should have a say in the nation and government and everything should not be left to the government to decide.(Document 3) Although George Washington was a Federalist many believed he showed a point of view that seemed to be Anti-Federalists. Many believed that The Bill of Rights needed to be changed and modified and a new document’s time to come into place.

Read More
622 Words | 3 Pages

Federalists vs. Anti-Federalists Federalists were mostly merchants, bankers manufacturers, and wealthy farm owners. They basically owned land or some type of property and were well-educated. Most of these people lived in urban areas. Anti-Federalists were mostly artisans, shopkeepers, frontier settlers, and poor farmers. They were mostly uneducated and illiterate and most of them lived in rural areas.

Read More
692 Words | 3 Pages

At the time the Constitution was created, the number of Anti- Federalists compared to Federalists was relatively the same (Doc A). Because of this, both opinions were well represented at the Constitutional Convention. When the constitution was ratified, in some ways it may have seemed that it was based mostly on the Federalists’ beliefs. However, it

Read More
99 Words | 1 Pages

The 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

Read More
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

Read More
883 Words | 4 Pages

Starting in Philadelphia on May 25th ,1787, fifty-five state delegates attended the Constitutional Convention. Their goal? To create a new government that would not succumb to the same faults of the Articles of Confederation. With the events leading into the American Revolution and the shortcomings of the Articles of Confederation fresh on their minds, many of the delegates traveled to the Convention with their own conflicting agendas of what the American government should become. Today, many people agree that the Constitution should be interpreted with the intentions of the original framers in mind.

Read More
642 Words | 3 Pages

Are you a Federalist or an Anti-Federalist? The proportional representation of the people and the government in the pursuit of equality and happiness is thoroughly explained through the Anti-Federalist party. Jackson Turner Main wrote, "to them, the man of 'federal principles' approved of 'federal measures,' which meant those that increased the weight and authority or extended the influence of the Confederation Congress." By stating this he intended to provide the explanation and root of the problem; the egos of both parties, especially federalists were a constant wall blocking the parties from a resolution The Anti-Federalists were composed of many differential elements.

Read More
487 Words | 2 Pages

One of the arguments that they proposed was that having a strong government would be remote from the people and the government wouldn't be able to protect the people of their rights. They argued that congress would end up taxing too much and the supreme court would take charge of the state courts. One of their last big arguments was that a large nation could most definitely be best ruled by a confederation. Although most of the ideas the anti-federalists thought were great, the federalists argued differently.

Read More
518 Words | 3 Pages

After signing the Declaration of Independence in 1776, The 13 former colonies were undergoing an identity crisis. It was one thing to declare independence, but it was another to realize what you were now that you declared it. The Constitution was eventually written, at an attempt to create a more perfect union between the states. One of the amazing things about the Constitutional Convention was that the people knew most governments would result in either chance or war. They knew that what they were doing was sitting in a room and rationally trying to create a good government.

Read More
445 Words | 2 Pages

The 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

Read More
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

More about Explain What Objections To The Constitution Were Held By Such Anti Federalists

Open Document