First Short Essay
One thing was clear during the convention of 1787, there were an astonishing number of viewpoints that clashed wherever they could. The main topic for debate was the distribution of control. Who would make the decisions for the people the state government or national government? The worry was that if the state government had primary control over the people's interests, who would police them? The Federalists wanted to make sure that the state government officials did not influence political policy to further their own interests. In this short essay, I will briefly discuss Elitism and how the Federalist argument for a stronger central government uses the idea of pluralism. The way I view the Constitutional Convention and the debate over the ratification of the constitution in 1787 is a struggle between two points of view. On one side you have the Federalists and on the other Anti-federalists. Leading the Federalist enterprise was Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay who wrote eighty-five essays that were to convince the people of New York to vote for the newly written Constitution. The new …show more content…
To this day, both sides, Anti-Federalist and Federalist, sound persuasive. The Anti-Federalists focused on the American want for local governments that respond directly to popular concerns. The Federalists argued that only a national government could really protect the people’s rights and turn the new nation into a great power. But more than just this are many other issues including that smaller states, who feel that they are operating just fine, will get the short end of the straw. With smaller states, the idea of people governing themselves works. However, they wanted all the benefits of a larger government protection. As it stood before the Constitutional Convention, trade, money system, and property protection were not universally regulated and caused conflict for
One thing was clear during the convention of 1787, there were an astonishing number of viewpoints that clashed wherever they could. The main topic for debate was the distribution of control. Who would make the decisions for the people the state government or national government? The worry was that if the state government had primary control over the people's interests, who would police them? The Federalists wanted to make sure that the state government officials did not influence political policy to further their own interests. In this short essay, I will briefly discuss Elitism and how the Federalist argument for a stronger central government uses the idea of pluralism. The way I view the Constitutional Convention and the debate over the ratification of the constitution in 1787 is a struggle between two points of view. On one side you have the Federalists and on the other Anti-federalists. Leading the Federalist enterprise was Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay who wrote eighty-five essays that were to convince the people of New York to vote for the newly written Constitution. The new …show more content…
To this day, both sides, Anti-Federalist and Federalist, sound persuasive. The Anti-Federalists focused on the American want for local governments that respond directly to popular concerns. The Federalists argued that only a national government could really protect the people’s rights and turn the new nation into a great power. But more than just this are many other issues including that smaller states, who feel that they are operating just fine, will get the short end of the straw. With smaller states, the idea of people governing themselves works. However, they wanted all the benefits of a larger government protection. As it stood before the Constitutional Convention, trade, money system, and property protection were not universally regulated and caused conflict for