ipl-logo

Compare And Contrast Federalist And Anti Federalists

970 Words4 Pages

Federalist vs. Anti-Federalist During the building of America’s government identity in the 1780s, the colonies were politically divided between two parties; the federalists and the anti-federalists. Typically the lower class, anti-federalists generally pushed for stronger state power. However, the wealthy and propertied class, the federalists, pushed for gains through a stronger national unity. The opposing groups worked hand-in-hand in creating the structural framework of the United States of America. Originally a republic, through the demolition of the Articles of Confederation and the creation of the Constitution, America soon became shaped into the democratic republic it is today. Despite their differences, the prominent leaders in the …show more content…

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 …show more content…

Anti-federalists believed a pure democracy was the most efficient and honest way to run a country. This way, they preached, America would accurately represent a “country of the people.” Using evidence of the shared hatred every colonist had for the British government, anti-federalists pushed strongly towards straying away from every aspect of British Parliament. However, while federalists did not support British Parliament, they also did not support a pure democracy. Federalists supported their argument of pure democracies leading a country to failure with the example of the Greek Empire, in which was a pure democracy, and resulted in failure. Although they did not push out the idea of democracy, for they concluded that to a certain extent a democratic society had potential of having positive outcomes. They supported the creation of a democratic-republic, which would hold a small governing elite while still taking in citizen opinion and

Show More
Related
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
900 Words | 4 Pages

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.

Read More
227 Words | 1 Pages

This shows that the Anti-Federalists want a weak government because it is bad when the government is given all the power. Anti-Federalists argue for policies that support agriculture because “those who labor the earth are the chosen people of God” (Doc D). Anti-Federalists like local government because “our country is too large to have all the

Read More
1417 Words | 6 Pages

Following the American Revolution, America was divided into two political groups: the federalists and the anti-federalists. Both parties believed the United states future was in the best interest of the new nation. While the anti-federalists believed in power to the individual states, the federalists believed in a strong central government to body the nation. Prior to 1789, the Articles of Confederation is what held the nation together, despite the immense problems that arose from it. The document was formed in order to equally divide powers in America.

Read More
476 Words | 2 Pages

The Antifederalists worried that a strong federal government would be too much like having a king. Instead, the Antifederalists wanted the state governments to have most of the power. They worried that a strong federal government would take away people’s rights. Hamilton was a key leader of the Federalists. He wanted the new constitution to make the federal government stronger.

Read More
277 Words | 2 Pages

This rivalry among the Federalists and Anti-Federalists signified a controversial democracy which focused upon the national government consuming an amount of authority they should accept. Alexander Hamilton represented the Federalists as Thomas Jefferson represented the Anti-Federalists who promptly announced themselves the Democratic-Republicans. The Democratic-Republicans solicited power towards the state government considering they "believe" in an egalitarian civilization that would develop to preserve the individuals' preferences. However, the Federalists suppose that the state governments were exceedingly constitutional since it would lead to unfairness towards the "elites" moreover critical for the economy. The Anti-Federalists believes

Read More
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
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
730 Words | 3 Pages

Under the guidance of Alexander Hamilton and John Adams, Federalists became a popular political party at the end of George Washington’s term. As a proud Federalists in The United Stated under George Washington, a numerous amount of hypocrisy has consumed the population on, “What were Federalists’ views?” A Federalist strongly believed in the power of the national government because the central government would have yielded stability to the country. Instead of a democracy or popular sovereignty, an “aristocratic leadership,” would better lead the nation (History in the Making - Chapter 10).

Read More
537 Words | 3 Pages

Moreover, anti-federalist were also dissatisfied with the power of national legislative organs. To put it more precisely, they argued that the Congress, because of the ‘necessity and proper clause’ (Norton 1999), wielded too much power. However, what was totally unacceptable to anti-federalists was the lack of Bill of Rights which was viewed as a potential threat to the rights of Americans.

Read More
504 Words | 3 Pages

The truest definition of Anti-Federalism is a movement that opposed the creation of a stronger US Federal Government, and also later opposed the ratification of the 1787 Constitution. After reading both sides, the opinion of this writer would be swayed towards being an Anti-Federalist. They wanted to make improvements, while working to put more power into the hands of the states while giving more authority to state governments. The Anti-Federalists knew it was necessary to add the first ten amendments to the Constitution, which is now the Bill of Rights, These are the personal rights that are enjoyed by all citizens today. Much to the opposing side, Federalist were in favor of a strong central governments.

Read More
368 Words | 2 Pages

The difference in philosophical beliefs of the Federalists and Antifederalists was immense. They two were on opposite ends of the political spectrum. The Federalists supported a large, centralized government. The Anti-Federalists supported a more local approach, putting the power in the state and city people. The Federalists were Pro constitution, a ratifying document for all people to follow.

Read More
547 Words | 3 Pages

It is clear to see that anti-federalists are more fond of their freedom. Clearly, they know that it is important to be in control of their own government and to ensure that certain rights are not taken away. The Broad differences between the two are quite obvious and can be generalized. However, what are the minor details and opinions that play a key role in being

Read More
603 Words | 3 Pages

The American Revolution, a war fought against a distant and all too powerful government, instilled a fear of centralized governmental power in the United States. The idea of the U.S. constitution sparked a political divide; it encouraged heated debates from those who are known as Federalists, and those who are known as Anti-Federalists. The Federalists, individuals who supported the ratification of the constitution, argued that the Articles of Confederation were too weak and that a strong national government with checks and balances was needed. On the other hand, the Anti-Federalists argued that the president would be like a king and that there needs to be a Bill of Rights to protect the people. If I had been alive in the time of this intense debate, I would have voted for the federalist side of the argument.

Read More
909 Words | 4 Pages

After defeating the British in the Revolutionary War and declaring their independence, Americans made the first step to forging their new government. The Articles of Confederation were the first set of laws that the original thirteen states would abide by. But the Articles of Confederation was an unsuccessful attempt to better the conditions for the people of America. Due to the downfall of the Articles of Confederation people of power began to split apart and create two different views on how to fix the poorly run government. These groups were known as the Federalists and Anti-federalists.

Read More

More about Compare And Contrast Federalist And Anti Federalists

Open Document