ipl-logo

The Pros And Cons Of The Anti-Federalists

649 Words3 Pages

Imagine living in a society where everyone gets along and agrees with everything. Thankfully, we live in a society where people have their sets of beliefs and tend to disagree with one another. When creating the Constitution there was a huge debate regarding the future of the United States and how it was going to be regulated. This was one of the biggest debates to be known throughout United States history. It led down to two different opposing groups the Federalists and the Anti- Federalists. There are pros and cons about people disagreeing. For instance, the Federalists and the Anti- Federalists both had some of the similar political thoughts as well as some political thoughts that they did not agree with one another. Though, both of the parties had different outlooks on what they thought, they would eventually come together and decided what is better for everyone as a nation. After the constitution was created in 1787, members of the Anti- Federalists believed that they could not ratify the constitution. The Anti- Federalists also believed that the United States should just stay with the Articles of Confederation and wanted to prevent creating a federal government that could develop into a very dominant and overpower individual’s rights. They were also afraid that the Constitution would create too much power in the …show more content…

The federalists were the ones who believed that the United States needed a stronger centralized government to represent and defend our country. They supported the Constitution, and proposed that the division of the powers between the legislative, judicial, and executive branches would avoid any president from becoming an absolute dictator. Even though these two groups had different point of views and had different set of beliefs, they all aimed for the same goal, to modify the constitution of the United

Show More
Related
189 Words | 1 Pages

On the other hand, Cornell explains that this “will of the people” was often contorted on both sides as political debate. Thus, the “dissenting tradition” was not more than who was more qualified to run the government through countless debates and public appeal. As explained by Cornell,”Each side expended enormous energy crafting appeals to persuade citizens that it was better qualified to represent the will of the people” (Cornell 21). Thus, the Anti-Federalists were using the people to debate themselves in the public sphere to gain the will of the common man and avoid the evil corrupt centralized authority.

Read More
642 Words | 3 Pages

In the late 18th century, America’s founding fathers would have never dreamed of being organized into different political factions: for they were not fans of them. In Federalist 10, James Madison, leading Democratic-Republican thinker, stated that he was skeptical of factions. In his Farewell Address, George Washington, the first President of the United States, warned the American public against the egotistic political factions. Both Madison and Washington believed that factions were signs of corruption. Despite the public warnings against factions, two political parties emerged from our founding fathers: the Federalists, and the Democratic-Republicans.

Read More
1006 Words | 5 Pages

The anti-federalists feared a strong government because it posed a threat to the people rights and that the president could be a king. I find that the federalist camp more appealing because they realized the weakness of the Confederation and tried to improve it such as the Judicial court system. There was no system of courts in the national government, the courts were dependent on the other states. This also made it that the states can ignore the national law without any consequences because the Congress has no way to enforce its own law. But the constitution helps the Congress to establish a national court system.

Read More
318 Words | 2 Pages

United under the articles of confederation federalist and anti federalist strongly believed in liberty and freedom but there were more differences than similarities for example, Federalist and anti federalist had very different ideas on how the new nation of America should have run. federalist wanted a strong central government to fix the weak system of the Articles Of The Confederation and strengthen the nation as a whole, while anti federalist wanted a weak central government, so they could continue to have the power that made up their economy and regulations in each state. During the Revolutionary the founding fathers need to show the people and other nations that they were prepared to fight for America's freedom in a orderly and

Read More
622 Words | 3 Pages

Federalists 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.

Read More
287 Words | 2 Pages

It 's never good for a new country to fight over its very foundation. In the USA’s case the foundation was the constitution, and the disagreement was over how to interpret the document. The amendments and code of conduct are listed in the constitution so this dispute was for the better of the country. The Federalists believed in a loose interpretation of the constitution.

Read More
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
426 Words | 2 Pages

The debate between the Anti-Federalists and the Federalists significantly impacted the ratification of the Constitution. In the 1780’s, there were two opposing groups: the Anti-Federalists and the Federalists. The Anti-Federalists were concerned about the potential for a strong central government and the lack of individual rights. On the other hand, Federalists believed in a strong federal government to maintain order and protect the nation. Both these arguments and discussions led to the addition of the Bill of Rights, which addressed the Anti-Federalists' concerns.

Read More
585 Words | 3 Pages

Following the Revolutionary War, America had just gained independance from Great Britain and needed to form a new government. The Articles of Confederation were established as an attempt to create a government that was unlike Britain’s. Unfortunately, the Articles of Confederation had several weaknesses. When in the process of repairing those weaknesses, the Federalists and the Anti-federalists formed. The Articles of Confederation were very weak as well as useless to America and because of this, the Federalists and the Anti-Federalists could not agree on a new type of government.

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
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
481 Words | 2 Pages

The new constitution couldn’t please everyone. Some people liked it but some didn't. The two sides were the Federalists and the Anti-Federalists. The Federalists were in favor of ratifying the Constitution, whereas the Anti-Federalists were opposed to it. They would have debates about ratifying the Constitution.

Read More
214 Words | 1 Pages

Represented by Alexander Hamlton, they favored the constitution and were against the bill of rights. The Anti-Federalists feared/preferred a weak central government. They were represented by Thomas Jefferson, they favored the articles of confederation and were for the bill of rights. The warnings from the Anti-Federalists about the constitution were right. They warned the Federalists about the consequences of undelegated power becoming abused.

Read More
515 Words | 3 Pages

During the construction of early American policy, two distinct political factions formed in regards to the Constitution. These factions were divided by their different belief in how power should be balanced among the federal government and state government. Those in support of the U.S. Constitution, were titled Federalists. These Federalists desired a strong central government, supreme over the states. On the other hand, those opposed to the Constitution were called Anti-federalists.

Read More
270 Words | 2 Pages

The United States Constitution prompted much debate when it was made. There was a vast schism between two heavily imposed factions. The Federalist Party and the Anti-Federalist Party. The federalists believed that the Constitution should be ratified and the anti-federalists (as the name assumes) believed the Constitution should not be approved. Even to this day the Constitution is still being controverted.

Read More

More about The Pros And Cons Of The Anti-Federalists

Open Document