Anti Federalists Essay

Improved Essays
Register to read the introduction… Two of the major leaders of this group were Patrick Henry and Thomas Jefferson, who was overseas during this time. The Anti-Federalists thought that under the Articles people had the rights that they rightfully deserved. Under the Articles, the poor people benefitted greatly. During the process of trying to get the new Constitution ratified the Anti-Federalists felt that under this new government the rich had all of the power instead of the people (Doc 5). Under the Articles the states had the power to make laws and do whatever they pleased, and to some of the states the idea of changing to a government that the central government had all the power was absolutely absurd. Other people felt as if the new Constitution had no separation of powers. They felt as if the branches had too much power and there was nothing keeping one branch from becoming too powerful (Doc 2). The Anti-Federalists did not want to be in the same kind of government they fought so hard to get away from.
The Anti-Federalists were also frustrated with the fact that the new Constitution laid out all the rules, but did not list any rights the people had. So Federalists came up with the Bill of Rights as a way to get the Constitution ratified. The Bill Of Rights lead the Anti-Federalists to be less fearful of the new Constitution (Doc 6). This guaranteed that the people would still remain to have rights, but the strong central government that the country needed would be approved and put into

Related Documents

  • Improved Essays

    This branch does not work to cooperate with the other branches to take over the United States and gain complete control of everyone inside the country. The anti federalists see the federal government as one that agree with each other and that will simply pass any law that they wish in order to make them richer and stronger, but in reality only truly necessary laws would be allowed to pass. They forget what happened back in the late 1700s when states and their governments power were greatly uneven. The states that could offer more economically would inevitably have more power leaving other states weak. The federal government helped fix this problem by creating a Union that helped every state.…

    • 856 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    Extended Republic

    • 1812 Words
    • 8 Pages

    The Feasibility of an Extended Republic in America Governments are only as effective as their structure allows them to be. A government that is large and unwieldy will rarely be efficient due to the red tape and bureaucracy bogging it down. The power structure in a monarchy differs from the structure in a republic. When deciding the shape of the American government, the Founding Fathers carefully considered all shapes and sizes of government to try and find what would suit the new nation the best in the wake of the Articles of Confederation. Their decision to establish an extended republic was a revolutionary idea that attracted much criticism and attention because it was an untested idea.…

    • 1812 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    It only gave people something like the Bill of Rights because it would get the people’s approval and not because they cared about the people. Many at the Convention felt that only the prosperous should be involved in politics because the common people were not trusted to make important decisions. The Electoral College was created to ensure that the general public would not elect the president through popular vote because they did not have the best judgement and were the “most ready to lament and condemn” (Zinn) when they got what they asked for and it turned out to be not what they wanted. Despite John Roche’s view that the Framers mainly thought of the people when creating the Constitution, he had weak arguments and did not really give a convincing…

    • 1704 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    The question of the proper role and scope of government has remained one of the fundamental conflicts in the United States since its inception. The nation’s Founding Fathers were all ultimately skeptical of government, but in very different ways. While the Federalists favored a stronger, more structured Federal level governed by a central Constitution, the Anti-Federalists feared centralized power and Constitutional control over the states – who in their minds were more responsive to their citizenry and more accurately reflected the desires and wishes of their respective populations. Both groups, however, were ultimately attempting to preserve liberty – simply disagreeing on the best method to do so. The Federalist approach believed that a…

    • 1233 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    It became clear soon after the Articles of Confederation were implemented that the document had certain flaws that weakened the newly created United States. A new document, the Constitution, was drafted to replace the Articles. Many people supported the Constitution, but some disagreed with it. Both the Federalists and the anti-Federalists provided valuable insight into the creation of the Constitution. Some of the arguments presented by the anti-Federalists were that it lacked a Bill of Rights, which would guarantee citizens freedoms; that the strong central government would be unable to govern such a large territory; and that the government that was established was too close to the British system they had just overcome.…

    • 1330 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    . .” (Reader, pp. 448-449) These unalienable rights mentioned are rights that are presumed to be natural, as in universal to all people, but when the colonists were not being fairly represented by the government of Great Britain, which they were still expected to abide by, they felt like those rights were not being given to them, and so they revolted against their homeland. Prior to the beginning of the revolution, Great Britain had been doing things such as sending troops to wage war in the colonies, imposing unfair taxes and blocking off trade to other parts of the world, and making legislative decisions for the colonists without any say from the colonists themselves. (Reader, p. 450) The extensive listing of grievances to the king just went to show how fed up the colonists were, and made the revolution seem justifiable under the circumstances given.…

    • 1152 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    The violence and taxes was too much for them, and it was time where they said enough is enough. From the Common Sense pamphlet, the colonists figured out why independence was necessary, and that the King did not care for the welfare of the Americans. Paine 's pamphlet caused the colonists to unite and stand up for each other as a nation. They wanted to be self governed and wanted their own democracy. After all, if the King read the Olive branch petition, maybe the Loyalist still would have stayed loyal to him, making the Common Sense pamphlet useless, but since it did not happen, America was now in a revolution for…

    • 1325 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    It gave them a chance to start a new form of government without a king. The only problem was Hamilton and Jefferson did not have the same idea of the type of government they wanted to accomplish for their new nation. Hamilton wanted to accomplish a strong central government. He wanted a government that would be able to control the people’s behavior. He understood that “sometimes good people do bad things and bad people do good things”, this gave Hamilton an advantage because Jefferson did not recognize this.…

    • 829 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    The philosopher failed to realize that what he believed to be productive hurt the nation. When the power was divided the decision making process was slow and in certain occasions, like a war situation, not having an immediate resolve hurt the State because someone always disagreed and when the people 's opinions were obtained it was a slow process to take all voices in mind to reach a conclusion. The time situation was definitely an inconvenience in urgent situations in a democracy. Therefore, once again it was proved absolutism was a necessity for any society which hoped to be ruled in tranquility. Ultimately, Absolute Monarchy Most importantly this form of government incorporated obedient citizens who felt obliged to be compliant, other than for their own peace,…

    • 1047 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Congress decided their current form of government, the Articles of Confederation, had many flaws. It was too weak to stop things such as Shay’s Rebellion. Because of this they organized a convention, many state representatives showed up, but some did not because they were pleased with how it was and didn’t want to change this. The people who were against changing the Articles of Confederation are called Anti-Federalists, and people that were for this are called Federalists. As a Federalist I believe the people of the United States should ratify the Constitution because we would fall to pieces without it.…

    • 693 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays