Drew Hysjulien James Madison Paper 3
Despite endorsing radically different visions for the institutional set up of government, both the federalist and anti-federalists had very similar end goals to their governmental system. Revolutionary leaders from both sides agreed that it was essential for government to protect the rights and liberties of their citizens, promote the common good, and that governments were to be republican and endorsed by popular sovereignty. The Anti-Federalist feared a consolidation of the states, whereas the Federalists feared the anarchy of sovereign states. In regards to popular rule the Anti-Federalists believed this would be best obtained from state governments, as they were closest to the people and best reflected …show more content…
In Federalist 48 James Madison quoted Thomas Jefferson, “All powers of government, legislative, executive, and judiciary, result to the legislative body. The concentrating these in the same hand is precisely the definition of despotic government…one hundred and seventy-three despots would surely be as oppressive as one…an elective despotism was not the government we fought for” (Carey, McClellan Pg. 258). In Vices of the Political System of the United States, James Madison would speak of the injustices of state law, and comment that “brings more into question the fundamental principle of republican Government, that the majority who rule in such governments are the safest Guardians both of public good and private rights” (Greene, Pg. 517). They factions in the states were stepping on the rights and liberties of other citizens. Because of this the Federalist sought a more national solution to ensure liberty of …show more content…
In Brutus VI it is stated, “that a simple free government could not be exercised over this whole continent and that therefore we must either give up our liberties and submit to an arbitrary one, or frame a constitution on the plan of confederation” (Storing 138), and in Brutus I, Montesquieu was sited writing “in a large republic, the public good is sacrificed to a thousand views….in a small one, the interest of the public is easier perceived better understood” (Storing, 113). The Anti-Federalists believed that, due to different climates and cultural factors, interests throughout the country were so different that one consolidated government could not promote a common good. Furthermore they believed that a national government would only represent the elites in society. In Brutus III it is stated that, “The natural aristocracy of the country will be elected. Wealth always creates influence…this class in society will forever have a great number of dependents: besides, they will always favour each other-it is in their interest to combine-they will therefore constantly unite their efforts to produce men of their own rank to be elected” (Storing 125). Anti-Federalists thus feared that a national government would come to be controlled by wealthy factions who would not be able to relate to the common person throughout the country and
Despite endorsing radically different visions for the institutional set up of government, both the federalist and anti-federalists had very similar end goals to their governmental system. Revolutionary leaders from both sides agreed that it was essential for government to protect the rights and liberties of their citizens, promote the common good, and that governments were to be republican and endorsed by popular sovereignty. The Anti-Federalist feared a consolidation of the states, whereas the Federalists feared the anarchy of sovereign states. In regards to popular rule the Anti-Federalists believed this would be best obtained from state governments, as they were closest to the people and best reflected …show more content…
In Federalist 48 James Madison quoted Thomas Jefferson, “All powers of government, legislative, executive, and judiciary, result to the legislative body. The concentrating these in the same hand is precisely the definition of despotic government…one hundred and seventy-three despots would surely be as oppressive as one…an elective despotism was not the government we fought for” (Carey, McClellan Pg. 258). In Vices of the Political System of the United States, James Madison would speak of the injustices of state law, and comment that “brings more into question the fundamental principle of republican Government, that the majority who rule in such governments are the safest Guardians both of public good and private rights” (Greene, Pg. 517). They factions in the states were stepping on the rights and liberties of other citizens. Because of this the Federalist sought a more national solution to ensure liberty of …show more content…
In Brutus VI it is stated, “that a simple free government could not be exercised over this whole continent and that therefore we must either give up our liberties and submit to an arbitrary one, or frame a constitution on the plan of confederation” (Storing 138), and in Brutus I, Montesquieu was sited writing “in a large republic, the public good is sacrificed to a thousand views….in a small one, the interest of the public is easier perceived better understood” (Storing, 113). The Anti-Federalists believed that, due to different climates and cultural factors, interests throughout the country were so different that one consolidated government could not promote a common good. Furthermore they believed that a national government would only represent the elites in society. In Brutus III it is stated that, “The natural aristocracy of the country will be elected. Wealth always creates influence…this class in society will forever have a great number of dependents: besides, they will always favour each other-it is in their interest to combine-they will therefore constantly unite their efforts to produce men of their own rank to be elected” (Storing 125). Anti-Federalists thus feared that a national government would come to be controlled by wealthy factions who would not be able to relate to the common person throughout the country and