ipl-logo

To What Extent Were The Anti-Federalists Really The Bad Guys

1864 Words8 Pages

Were the Anti-Federalist really the Bad Guys? Many people throughout history often talk about the Federalist, but what about the Anti-Federalist? They are equally important, if not more important because of their contributions to the American people. The Anti-Federalist were adversaries of ratifying the United States Constitution, they had a strong fear for the repercussions of the government having too much power and their main fear was that the government would become an oppressor of the American people. This group of individuals who were lawyers, scholars, politicians and merchants are written down in history as being the opponents of progress as well as enemies of the government but really, they were the good guys. They were branded the …show more content…

According to Saul Cornell, the struggle between the Federalist and the Anti-Federalist over the constitution is one of the “greatest political struggles in American history”. (Cornell, 2012) From what I gather the men who were called the Anti-Federalist are the real Federalist because they cared about the rights of the people and wanted to protect them from an all-powerful government and give more power to the states to care for their own people. They believed that citizens should be included in decisions and that when they weren’t included into decision making procedures the government would become detached from their citizens. (Borowiak, 2007). The ones who have been called the Federalist throughout time seem more like Nationalist from what I understand. I’ve found that nationalists are members of a political group or party who are advocates for a stronger government, which is exactly what the Federalist wanted from the beginning, they wanted weakened states ruled over by one central government. The first draft of the Constitution included nothing in it that protected the citizens’ rights or gave them a voice or protection from the government. On September 10th, 1787 at the Federal Convention, Edmond Randolph, who was a lawyer stood up and lists twelve different objections that he had to the Constitution and refused to sign it. Two days after Randolph’s list of …show more content…

They were responsible for the rights and freedoms that we have today, for so long they have been overlooked in history books but I think it is foolish to continue to do so. Without the efforts of the lasting ramifications of the efforts of these men will be felt indefinitely. Even though they have been overshadowed by the winners who eventually ratified their constitution, the Anti-federalist legacy will forever be the Bill of Rights, which is the first 10 amendments of the constitution. Even though the Amendments were passed by The House of Representatives on August 24th in 1789, they were not the original amendments proposed by James Madison on June 8th, 1789, though it still retained rights and freedoms for the American People, it was revised by both the House Select Committee and the House of Representatives. Nonetheless the bill came to be and is still used to help retain the rights and freedoms of millions of people to this very

Show More
Related
918 Words | 4 Pages

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

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
313 Words | 2 Pages

The article, “The Antifederalists Were Right”, Mises Daily, September 27, 2006 by Gary Galles examines Anti-Federalists’ predictions and if we don’t limit of the federal government it will lead to corruption of power. The Anti-Federalist believed that ratifying the U.S Constitution will create an overbearing central government. Even though the Anti-Federalist lost the debate and was overlooked, their predictions about the result of the Constitution turned out the be true. The Anti-Federalist suggested the Bill of Rights to let the people have rights, however the Constitution was too vague which leads to abuse of power. Some of the vague laws are the “general welfare” which lead to the override limits on delegated federal powers and creating

Read More
703 Words | 3 Pages

Federalism was an influential political movement that supported ratification of the US Constitution and was discontent with the Articles of Confederation that limited the central government’s power. The outlook and vision of the Federalist Party called for a stronger national government, a loose construction of the Constitution and a mercantile, rather than agricultural, economy. Leading Federalists Alexander Hamilton and Chief Justice John Marshall helped shape the development of our nation’s government branches with their views that they expressed about ratifying and interpreting our Nation’s newly drafted Constitution. For Federalists during this time period, upholding and honoring the United States Constitution was extremely important in order to safe guard

Read More
193 Words | 1 Pages

The Anti-Federalist consisted of many proud men who believed that the bill of rights was in did necessary before executing the future government. Unlike the Federalist, who focused on a central government that could have personally stolen and threaten our freedom; had no right to engage the Constitution? In the document Brutus 1, had stated clearly his motive, “Though I am of opinion, that it is a sufficient objection to this government, to reject it, that it creates the whole union into one government, under the form of a republic, yet if this objection was obviated, there are exceptions to it, which are so material and fundamental, that they ought to determine every man, who is a friend to the liberty and happiness of mankind, not to adopt

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
900 Words | 4 Pages

Anti-federalists on one side objecting to the Constitution, and Federalists on the other supporting it. Therefore both sides are trying to persuade the public that precious liberty and self-government

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
490 Words | 2 Pages

The Anti-Federalists were a political group who did not support the Constitution and a

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
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
83 Words | 1 Pages

The new Constitution, they protested, took too much power away from the states and localities and gave it to the central government. In the long run, they charged, the Constitution would erode the faceto-face participation necessary for a healthy democracy. The Anti-federalists were not a marginal group; many state

Read More
1474 Words | 6 Pages

The anti-federalist were the opposing party of the federalist disagreeing with the strong government. The anti-federalists had wanted a weaker government and had wanted individual rights for people by adding the bill of rights to the constitution. The anti-federalists were the type of political group who wanted rights for the people and for the United States, so everyone could have their individual rights as people. The anti-federalists believed that the federalists and the constitution was granting too much power to the federal courts at any expense. The Anti-federalists were arguing that the federal courts would be to far away to have justice for each average citizen.

Read More
710 Words | 3 Pages

Federalists glorified power, specifically government-centered power, they seemed to obsess over the idea of control, because not only did they admire the Government’s authority, but they also supported the opposition of the Bill of Rights, which was meant to give people ineluctable liberties, like freedom of speech, the right to bear arms, and the right to a trial. Basic rights you would to give to anyone you respected, or simply acknowledged. Anti-Federalists, however, believed in less power from the Government, and more citizen based power, believing that giving people their own “individual liberties” would lead to said person making good decisions with the betterment of the nation in

Read More
917 Words | 4 Pages

The Federalists and The Anti-Federalists: Two different ideologies After the American Revolution, the United States had to face the war debt and challenges of constructing a new country. In an effort to create a system that solved these problems, they created the Constitution. In order to institute a new government under the Constitution, the ratification required the approval of nine states conventions. States that did not ratify the Constitution would not be considered as a part of the United States. The creation of the Constitution became a complicated process, especially between two political groups with different ideologies, who fought over the distribution of power.

Read More

More about To What Extent Were The Anti-Federalists Really The Bad Guys

Open Document