Preview

Views of the Federalists and the Anti-Federalists on the Interpretation of the Constitution Essay Example

Good Essays
Open Document
Open Document
666 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Views of the Federalists and the Anti-Federalists on the Interpretation of the Constitution Essay Example
The period from 1783 to 1788 was a critical time for the United States, during which the American people debated and ultimately accepted the Constitution. Because of its size, wealth, and influence and because it was the first state to call a ratifying convention, Federalist-dominated Pennsylvania was the center of national attention. The positions of the Federalists, those who encouraged the Constitution, and the anti-Federalists, those who resisted it, were stated in newspapers all over the country.
Federalists, who most of them gained their livelihoods as merchants, shopkeepers, professionals, artisans, and commercial farmers, desired a government that would foster the growth of a market economy and facilitate trade with other countries. They also believed that society benefited when people pursued individual goals. Federalist James Madison claimed that the Constitution would be beneficial because a large republic contained more safeguards than a small one, but Anti-Federalists disagreed with that, because they favored small republics and because they feared the actions of men who would likely dominate the central government. Anti-Federalists, who were small farmers, many of them debtors, wanted nothing to do with this Constitution. They believed that the power should remain in the states. They argued that a republic must be geographically small with a homogeneous population in order to meet the needs of its people. Anti-Federalists also thought that the Constitution lacked adequate protection against corruption and abuse of power.
The way Anti-Federalists saw the fate of the states was that the general government outlined in the proposed Constitution would swallow up the states, reducing them to administrative districts at best, and thus destroying the people's liberties and right of self-government. The Federalists, citing the history of government under the Confederation, insisted that the possibility was that the states would continue to infringe on the

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Satisfactory Essays

    3. Madison argued that The Anti-Federalists responded that a central government so far away from the people could not be responsive to their needs. Constituencies would be too large for representatives to know their interests. They feared that the executive would come to dominate the other branches.…

    • 278 Words
    • 1 Page
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Before the state convention, there is a great issue about liberty. One proponents of the Constitution are federalists who favor to establish a stronger national government; one opponents of the Constitution are anti-federalists who favor to establish a weaker national government. Federalists think only a stronger national government have an ability to keep the states in control. Anti-federalists think the states should have more power than the national government. Even though the conflict between federalist and anti-federalist doesn't stop, whether it is a federalists or anti-federalists, they have the same dream to united the states to become a strong country. The perfect decision is to use the best way to administrate the country and stabilize the society. In my opinion, a stronger national government will keep the country developing.…

    • 1009 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    They also felt as if the Union to last there must be a stronger central government. Lastly they wanted the central government to have power that they lacked in the Articles of Confederation. The Anti-Federalists that the constitution made the government have too much power. Because the Constitution was making the Central government too strong, the Anti-federalists feared that the states would have no power. They also feared that if the president was elected again, he may abuse the power and act like a king. The federalists would also have no Bill of Rights, and many state constitutions had only one. Later the federalists promised to add the Bill of Rights if the Anti-federalists voted for the Constitution. Both the federalists and the Anti-Federalists gave strong points on why people should or should not vote for the…

    • 600 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    Federalist believed that there should be a strong, central government in order to maintain domestic security and liberty. The federalist wanted the constitution to be ratified. The Anti-Federalists wanted to bar the constitution that was drafted from being ratified. They felt that this gave the government too much power. They argued that the drafters were all part of the colonial Aristocracy, and therefore, could not and would not stand for the common good of the nation, but would instead be overbearing, and hostile to the common people.…

    • 1057 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    The Philadelphia Convention was an assembly of the brightest minds of American politics in 1787. Emerging from it was the Constitution of the United States, which gave the national government more power, but kept them restrained through a system of checks and balances. States still decided smaller political matters, but much power was taken away from them that they held with the Articles of Confederation. Two groups emerged after the Convention, one for the ratification of the Constitution and the other against. The group…

    • 804 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    The Constitutional Convention was an important part of the United States’ history and played a big role in shaping our history and also our present. The Constitution is important because it is what our country follows to be organized, fair, and in order. People who favored the Constitution along with a strong national government were called federalists. The Federalists were afraid that the United States wouldn’t stay united without the Constitution, so that…

    • 698 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    Unlike some of the state legislatures that wrote and voted on their constitutions, the US Constitution was to be ratified by special state constitutional conventions. This virtually made it impossible for Congress to change the Constitution on an impulse or to even abolish it, leaving no room for “democratic despotism”. It also placed sovereignty with the people and not with governmental institutions. This very important principle of sovereignty was carried over from the revolution but seemingly got lost in some of the states’ legislatures. The Constitution considered the people to be the supreme authority. The Federalists were arguing that “sovereignty remained always with the people and government was only a temporary and limited agency of the people.” This principle was made even clearer by the opening words of the Constitution: “We the People of the United States”, leaving no doubt as to where sovereignty rested, and considering the people the “only source of just authority.” With the debate of sovereignty finally put to rest the Constitution was ratified, strengthening the union of thirteen states by embodying republican…

    • 1743 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    The debates over ratification of the Constitution represent the most important and intellectually sophisticated public debates in American history. On the one side, the supporters of the Constitution, or "Federalists," argued that the nation desperately needed a stronger national government to bring order, stability and unity to its efforts to find its way in an increasingly complicated world. Opponents of the Constitution, or "Antifederalists," countered that the the governments of the states were strong enough to realize the objectives of each state. Any government that diminished the power of the states, as the new Constitution surely promised to do, would also diminish the ability of each state to meet the needs of its citizens. More dramatically, the Antifederalists argued that the new national government, far removed from the people, would be all to quick to compromise their rights and liberties in the name of establishing order and unity.…

    • 1180 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Federalist and Antifederalist had different ideas and beliefs of the nation’s government. Antifederalist believed in more power for the states and did not agree with a strong central government. They preferred the Articles of Confederation. Antifederalist did not want to ratify the Constitution due the fact there was no bill of rights and there was too much power in the national Constitution and not the States. On the other hand, Federalist believed in a more centralized national government. Federalist propose the separation of powers, which the act of vesting the legislative, executive, and judicial powers of government in separate bodies.…

    • 261 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    In 1787 when the Constitution was created it caused many people to start a grand debate. Of course, there were people that supported the constitution and people that were afraid of the constitution. The Federalists and the Anti-Federalists created documents that are within the Constitution that have shaped United States political parties. The Federalists supported a strong central government because the Articles of Confederation didn’t have strong national power, and was very restrictive.A reason why The Federalist wanted to change the constitution was to add people’s opinion into the Constitution. The Anti-Federalists supported a strong state government because they believed that a strong national government would cause a monarch and they were afraid of who will have the power.…

    • 536 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    On the other hand, the Federalist favored a government that was constructed with broad powers. They were interested in a government that was able to fight against foes, guard against domestic strife, promote commerce, and expand the nations economy. The Anti-federalist believed some of this but just highly feared governmental power. The Federalist made a very important point. They stated that in order for the government to carry out these orders, they needed the necessary power to do so. They felt that the right way of controlling power abuse was not by depriving the government of power, but knowing that the governments power would be oversee by the Constitutions checks and…

    • 1323 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    The federalist beliefs on government .The federalists believed that the people neede a stronge government. One of the reasons the federalists thought a strong government was needed was to be able to handle trade desputes witch the articles…

    • 210 Words
    • 1 Page
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    Federalists were individuals who supported the ratification of the Constitution. Anti-Federalists opposed the Constitution as stated in the book, "the critics of the Constitution were by no means a unified group" (Faragher, 180). I found it interesting that the Constitution was initially influenced by the Federalist model in regards to interpretation but the pendulum has now swung in the opposite direction to a more Anti-Federalist approach (Content 8-2). The Constitution was ratified and the Federalists won for numerous reasons. The Anti-Federalists had delayed representation while the Federalists promised to amend the Constitution to better protect individual's rights (Faragher, 181). Overall, it was the Federalist representation, planning,…

    • 230 Words
    • 1 Page
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    The Constitution needed to be approved by only nine out of the thirteen states in order to be officially ratified. After New Hampshire, the document had been technically approved. But without the approval from the state of Virginia, the most populous state, the constitution could not succeed. By 1790, each of the thirteen states would approve of the constitution. Both the federalists and the anti-federalists could be considered the winners. This is because the Bill of Rights was proposed and put into the constitution which was something that the anti-federalists…

    • 464 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    The Anti-Federalists have their reasons & the Federalists have theirs. I’m against the idea of a central government and how the freedom of the states should be.…

    • 288 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays