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…..
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.
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.
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
The ratification of the U.S. Constitution process included debates and discussions to convince citizens to approve of the new Constitution. The Federalists and Anti-Federalists played a huge part in the topic of the Constitution. The Federalists were people who supported the Constitution and wanted a strong central government, highlighting the necessity for a unified government. Anti-Federalists opposed the ratification, fearing that a central government will be too powerful and will jeopardize the protection of individual liberties in the Bill of Rights. Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and Patrick Henry were key figures who played a part in molding the state rights, federalism, and balance of power.
Many people were unhappy with the Articles of Confederation and wanted to get rid of it completely while others wanted to change it or keep it. These two groups were called Federalists and Antifederalists. Federalist wanted to get rid of the Constitution while Antifederalists did not. Most people were unhappy because the majority of people were small farmers, landowners and people who were in debt.
They felt that the constitution did not create a fair government, but a controlling government. They were scared that the power of the states would be lost and that the people would lose their rights and freedom. They were scared because some would take over their rights. The Anti- Federalist came together and created the Bill of rights and proposed it to the constitution to make sure the citizens were secure by law. They wanted everyone to be heard, not overruled.
Federalists and Anti-Federalists both have an arguable amount of supporters. I am in favor of the Anti-Federalist point of view. The Anti-Federalists believed the Constitution granted too much power to the federal courts, at the expense of the state and local courts. They argued that the federal courts would be too far away to provide justice to the average citizen. In addition the Constitution allows the government too much power,does not provide for a republican government, and it also does not include a Bill of Rights, which is vital.
he Anti-Federalists were centered around two fundamental things; making an oppressive government and absence of individual power on the off chance that the focal government turned out to be all the more intense (Kaminski et al 3). They held the conviction that the Constitution gave the focal government a great deal of forces through the lawmaking body, legal and official. They were of the contention that, much the same as King George III, the official would be onerous to the general population as opposed to ensuring their individual rights. In supporting their claim, the counter Federalists contended that Americans had been included in a grisly and exceedingly expensive progressive clash to wind up free from British run the show. Setting themselves in a place like that of an unregulated government would not be valuable to the eventual fate of the country.
The United States Constitution overcame the weaknesses of the Articles of Confederation to provide the organization of the new government. In the late 1700s, in the thirteen original colonies the American Revolution was fought against the British. In this war, the outnumbered colonists won. After the war, they developed the Articles of Confederation, which were the first type of government that the colonists had. This government was very weak.
The Anti-Federalist believed that the Constitution granted too much power to the federal courts and took power from the states, depriving citizens of liberties. The Federalist believed that "The smaller the number of individuals composing a majority, and the smaller the compass within which they are placed, the more easily will they concert and execute their plans of oppression. Extend the sphere, and you take in a greater variety of parties and interests; you make it less probable that a majority of the whole will have a common motive to invade the rights of other citizens" (Federalist Papers, No. 10). The Anti-Federalist wanted a national representation large enough to secure a substantial representation of the middle class, but not a very large one. They did not want a large national representation because they believed it may derive liberties from local state representatives.
Federalists shared the belief that the Constitution would bring a good balance of power. While the Anti-Federalists, such as Patrick Henry, were the exact opposite; they were against the ratification of the Constitution. Anti-Federalists were concerned about their liberty and the government being given too much power.
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.
The opposing viewpoints of the Federalists and the Anti-Federalists created lengthy debates on how the newly found country would run the government and what rules would be considered the supreme law of the land. The anti-federalists thought the government held too much power and wanted the inclusion of the Bill of Rights (Young, slide 30). Patrick Henry, one of the most ardent anti-federalist, advocated extensively for the inclusion of the bill of rights (Young, “Found Fathers…”). Henry constantly voiced his discontent with the constitution and questioned aloud why the inclusion of the Bill of Rights were not added. As the delegate of Virginia, he led the people of Virginia to reject the ratification of the constitution and promised them that by his efforts and their rejection that the Bill of Rights would be included (Young, “Found Fathers…”).
They felt that the Constitution only favored the wealthy men and their power. The anti federalists were afraid of a strong central government when it came to the government taking over their property and using them. For example, the 3rd amendment states that homeowners should not be obligated to open their homes to soldiers and the soldiers should not be allowed to take over one 's home. This proves that they had to address this issue for something to be done to stop this, they must have been feeling like their lives were
