Federalist Vs Antifederalist

Improved Essays
Show More
The founding fathers believed in natural born rights like life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. In short, the Founding Fathers wanted pure American liberty. With all of its problems it was still better than the alternative. People who are free are happy, creative and productive and they thrive. They wanted a properly limited government and they designed one. Our forefathers used the ideas of federalism and anti federalism to come to a compromise to shape what our government is today. Federalist and antifederalist didn't disagree on everything; they shared some of the same views. For example they both supported the bill of rights along with citizens rights and individual rights. They were also against the Articles of Confederation and they wanted divided responsibility. We have meandered away from these basic tenants. The trend toward concentrated power must be …show more content…
A lot of people believe that if guns were taken away, this would solve the problem of Isis. There is other people who think President Obama will take away guns to try and protect us. Both of these statements come from an unreasonable and uneducated point of view. Taking away guns will not stop Isis from their intent. Their intent is to hurt us and eventually start World War III, taking away guns will not stop them from hurting the world, they will find another way to kill us. Even if guns were taken away, it would only affect the people in the U.S., not everyone around the world, so guns could still be in abundance. President Obama cannot take away guns; because of our system of checks and balances, it is highly unlikely Obama will take away guns or even put restrictions on them. He cannot change the Constitution or the Bill of Rights because that would go against everything American. America would not be a democracy anymore, it would be a monarchy. Since the first amendment is all about free speech, people would be exercising

Related Documents

  • Decent Essays

    Anti-Federalists: Compare And Contrast The Beliefs Of Adams And Hamilton
    • 319 Words
    • 2 Pages

    Anti-Federalists: Compare And Contrast The Beliefs Of Adams And Hamilton

    The anti-federalists feared that the central government would become too powerful and that if the government would commit an infraction on the states’ rights. The Federalists were in agreement with the constitution. The federalists were wealthy, well educated and were unified by the thought of higher power. The leaders of the Federalists included John Adams and Alexander Hamilton both yearned for an effective constitution. In contrast, the Anti-federalists were generally farmers and anybody that fell below the line of being wealthy.…

    • 319 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Decent Essays
    Read More
  • Improved Essays

    Constitution Guard Against Tyranny
    • 734 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Constitution Guard Against Tyranny

    There were many ways that the constitution guarded against tyranny. In 1787 ,fifty five delegates met in philadelphia to fix the articles of confederation. They decided to make a new government, called the constitution, that prevented tyranny. Tyranny is a noun that means a cruel or oppressive government or rule. The constitution prevents dictatorship and tyranny in four ways: federalism, separation of power, small states vs. large states compromise, and checks and balances system.…

    • 734 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
    Read More
  • Improved Essays

    Federalists Vs. Compare And Contrast The Federalist And The Anti-Federalists
    • 1014 Words
    • 5 Pages

    Federalists Vs. Compare And Contrast The Federalist And The Anti-Federalists

    Gage Lozano Perception Recently gaining independence from Great Britain was a notable achievement for the new country of America, but a great divide in the thoughts and actions that would determine the fate of the government became increasingly uneasy. Two opposing ways of thinking evolved and battled for how we would establish our country: the Federalists and the Anti-Federalists. While both seemingly concerned for the well being of the country, the predominant factor that separates Anti-Federalist Mery Otis Warren from Federalist James Madison is the perception they had over the citizens in their relation to the government. James Madison was concerned with the stability a republic could provide, while Mery Otis Warren wanted to ensure that the government was small, secure, and did not become to powerful or aristocratic. Raised by a wealthy family and very well educated, James Madison easily became a dominant figure in politics.…

    • 1014 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
    Read More
  • Improved Essays

    Federalist Shard Anti Federalists
    • 130 Words
    • 1 Pages

    Federalist Shard Anti Federalists

    Although the Federalist shard many of the same ideas of the Antifederalist such as individual rights (Oaks 223). The Anti-Federalists shared different view on how the government should be ran. Because of their experiences with the tyranny of Great Britain, they feared the establishment of a strong national government. The Anti-Federalists also did not accept the use of separation of powers and checks and balances, because they feared the branches of government would abuse the power and not serve the purpose of protecting the rights and freedoms of the individuals. It was evident in the way they thought things should be ran and why they thought they where right, being that they where from a old-line of republicans and did not favor a system…

    • 130 Words
    • 1 Pages
    Improved Essays
    Read More
  • Improved Essays

    Anti-Federalist Vs Anti Federalists
    • 473 Words
    • 2 Pages

    Anti-Federalist Vs Anti Federalists

    FEDERALIST/ANTI-FEDERALIST Political Viewpoint: ANTI-FEDERALIST 1. What fears does your side have about the future of the North American colonies? The Anti-Federalists feared that the Republican form of government formulated by the principles of the monarchy would be dominated by the features of aristocracy that allowed unwarranted stretch of power over the liberty, life and property of all its citizens. The federal government imposed secret deliberations and hasty plans for ratification which threatened the sovereignty and independence of all states.…

    • 473 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Improved Essays
    Read More
  • Improved Essays

    Compare And Contrast Federalist And Anti-Federalists
    • 898 Words
    • 4 Pages

    Compare And Contrast Federalist And Anti-Federalists

    Political parties have grown through the years, but how does one measure the success of them. George Washington had advised the nation to try and avoid them due to the possibility that it would divide everyone. Revolutionary War had just ended, and unity was still fragile and delicate. Even so, there were two parties that dominated the nation, Federalists and anti-Federalists. In many ways, the Federalists were successful because many of their party ideas about a strong central government is included in the Constitution.…

    • 898 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
    Read More
  • Improved Essays

    Anti Federalists Pros And Cons
    • 711 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Anti Federalists Pros And Cons

    Federalists and Anti-Federalists The feud between the Federalist and Anti-Federalist party was based on the ratification of the Constitution. Even though both groups believed that the principal purpose of government is to secure individual rights and that the best instrument for that purpose is some form of limited republican government. They also agreed that the individual has the right to do anything that the government has no power to keep him from doing.…

    • 711 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
    Read More
  • Improved Essays

    Similarities And Differences Between The Federalist And Anti Federalists
    • 1265 Words
    • 6 Pages

    Similarities And Differences Between The Federalist And Anti Federalists

    After the American Revolution where they fought for the independence of the United States. The important people who believed in different things separated themselves apart to two different political parties the Federalist and Anti-Federalist. The first was The Federalist a party who believed in a strong national government who live in the rural area. The second group is the Anti-Federalist they opposed a big government, but they did believe in state rights who live in the countryside. Although some may argue that during the 18th century both groups had some similarities with government but in reality they had opposing views of how to run the country between big government that would help more people or states running on their own that might…

    • 1265 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Improved Essays
    Read More
  • Improved Essays

    Similarities Between Colonists And Anti Federalists
    • 1202 Words
    • 5 Pages

    Similarities Between Colonists And Anti Federalists

    They believed that the powers of the government under the constitution would threaten their “liberties” and individual rights. The Anti-federalist weren’t a very centralized group they didn’t agree on a lot of things. For example, Some of the Anti-federalist opposed the constitution because they believed that having a strong central government would threaten popular sovereignty. As others believed that the government would turn out like Great Britain to were the government would become to powerful and it would be hard to resist the government.or fix it. After a lot of arguments the Anti-federalist and federalist came to a compromise and the constitution was then created in 1787 which included the Bill of…

    • 1202 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
    Read More
  • Improved Essays

    Anti Federalists Arguments
    • 993 Words
    • 4 Pages

    Anti Federalists Arguments

    The Anti-Federalists had the better argument overall because they had clear instances showing how a strong central government could become corrupt and lose interest in its citizens. They wanted the power to stay in the states because it would allow more control over what was happening within the nation and it would give citizens more protected rights. In the end, after several debates between the groups, they agreed on creating the Bill of Rights, which gave the citizens protected rights. In addition, they agreed on forming one central government that was made up of three branches, all with restricted powers because of the checks and balances between them.…

    • 993 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
    Read More
  • Improved Essays

    Controversy: Gun Control And Its Impact On Society
    • 1808 Words
    • 8 Pages

    Controversy: Gun Control And Its Impact On Society

    Going back to the idea that the government could take away all the firearms from civilians, we have to face the fact that even that would not protect anyone. Instead, it would put many people in danger. The law to take away guns would not affect criminals, because criminals do not follow the law. Without guns for protection, the law-abiding citizens would be helpless to defend themselves against the criminals who would now be the only citizens with guns. The law that was meant to protect would actually lead to the victimization and possible death of law-abiding citizens.…

    • 1808 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Improved Essays
    Read More
  • Improved Essays

    Federalist Vs. Anti-Federalists
    • 1080 Words
    • 5 Pages

    Federalist Vs. Anti-Federalists

    AJ Siciliano, Federalists Vs. Anti-Federalists Essay Before the ratification of the constitution, two original political parties fell consistent during the 1700’s, Federalists and Antifederalists. In shorter terms, Federalists wanted a stronger central government to have overall power of the states, rather the Antifederalists wanted something similar to the Articles of Confederation, where the states as individuals, had more power than the central government. Both, although strongly contrasting, contained one main similarity, thirst for the creation of a new country, just with different ideas of how it should function.…

    • 1080 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
    Read More
  • Great Essays

    Logical Fallacies In Bowling For Columbine
    • 1499 Words
    • 6 Pages

    Logical Fallacies In Bowling For Columbine

    This way of thinking ignores the existence of the 2nd Amendment in the United States Constitution. Abolishing guns altogether would not solve anything. This would only raise the sales on guns in the black market. Violence would increase drastically because if the government tried to take away one the rights given in the Constitution people would try to overthrow the government. In the documentary, Bowling for Columbine, Michael Moore interviewed some of the members in a militia in Michigan and the members were discussing that their duty was to protect the American people incase if the government became too powerful.…

    • 1499 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Great Essays
    Read More
  • Improved Essays

    Compare And Contrast Federalist And Federalists
    • 722 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Compare And Contrast Federalist And Federalists

    The Republican Party was formed in 1854 by former members of the “Whig Democratic” and “Free Soil” parties who chose the party’s name to recall the Jeffersonian Republican’s concern with the national interest. The Republican Party is a more conservative while Democrats are more liberal. The Democratic Party was formed in 1790 as a group of Thomas Jefferson’s supporters. They demonstrated their beliefs in the principle of popular government and their opposition to monarchism. Democrats won every presidential election in the years of 1836-60, but the slavery issues split the party.…

    • 722 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
    Read More
  • Improved Essays

    Why Guns Should Be Banned
    • 1761 Words
    • 8 Pages

    Why Guns Should Be Banned

    After obtaining guns, children and adults collect them and proceed to improve their accuracy in shooting, but getting rid of them would make the world a dangerous place. Many people who believe that guns are the leading cause of death in the United States, are incorrect. A gun is not a person, it has no feelings nor can it move on its own it cannot be personified nor be blamed for any of the actions. A gun must be wielded by a person and that person is the one responsible for pulling the trigger. If guns were banned and somehow a criminal couldn’t get his hand on one illegally, they can still kill.…

    • 1761 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Improved Essays
    Read More

Related Topics

Ready To Get Started?
Discover
Company
Follow
©2024 Cram.com
Privacy Policy |  About Ads |  Site Map |  Advertise  | 
  • Cookie Settings