Creating the Constitution

2111 Words5 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: The dispute between the federalist and the anti-federalist

The words spoken by man have the power to shape and ratify everything in its path. These following questions will do just that. Is not the strengthening of our federal government essential to the maintaining of a stable bureaucracy? Must we forego the strong fundamental structure that will ensure that every man will benefit immensely from a nation governed by those of the utmost intelligence and experience? We as a nation must procure a stance that will enforce and implement the necessary laws by any means possible. This can only be obtained only if all parties are on one accord with an understanding that the rights of the people and their protection are our governments’ only concern. The strong structure of a government can only promote strong commercial growth and prosperity (Constitution). The Anti-Federalist, who oppose the governments full induction and running of the lives and functioning of each state, desiring to create a framework that will eventually promote discord on a potentially catastrophic level. They believe the Constitution only supports the wealthy; that it suppresses liberty and the rights of man, (Anti-Federalists versus Federalists 1) those words hold no truths. As stated by our comrade Alexander Hamilton, “Why has government been instituted at all? Because the passions of man will not conform to the dictates of reason and justice without constraint” (Famous Quotes). The Federalist Party was one of the first two political parties to form in the United States history. The Federalist name was applied to the group that favored ratification of the Constitution. Their members favored a strong central government which supported a more consolidated government rather than a loose “confederation” of semi-soverei... ... middle of paper ... ...89-1860." Academic American History. N.p., n.d. Web. 4 Sept. 2011. http://www.academicamerican.com/research/democracy/parties.htm. Semonche, J. “The Debate Over the Constitution: Federalists vs. Antifederalists” n.d. Web. 6 Sept 2011. http://www.dlt.ncssm.edu/lmtm/docs/fed_vs_anti/script.pdf. ThinkQuest. “Federalists and Anti-Federalists.” N.p., n.d. Web. 5 Sept. 2011. http://library.thinkquest.org/11572/creation/framing/feds.html. "ThisNation.com--Ratification." ThisNation.com-American Government & Politics Online United States Federalists N. p., n.d. Web. 9 Sep 2011. http://www.law,jrank.org/Constitution-United States-Federalists. U.S. History. "Federalists." United States American History. N.p., n.d. Web. 8 Sept. 2011. http://www.u-s-history.com/pages/h375.html. Wills, Garry. Explaining America: the Federalist. London: Penguin Books, 1982. Print.

Show More
Related

  • The Pros And Cons Of The Anti-Federalists

    835 Words  | 2 Pages

    Federalists were supporters of the Constitution and wanted a stronger government. The leaders of the Federalists were Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay. This group had more advantages because the leaders were already members of the constitutional convention. Since they were a part of the constitutional convention, they were well-known with the issues the document had to offer. They were also organized

    Read More

  • Dbq The Beliefs Of The Federalist And Anti-Federalists

    576 Words  | 2 Pages

    This party developed because of the ratification of the constitution process; one way the Federalists tried to persuade people that their views were right about a strong central government during the ratification process was through several articles, which became known as The Federalist Papers. The Federalists argued that the people needed a strong central government to keep order and protect the union (Doc 1). They believed that this form of government was needed because the Articles of Confederation was proof that the union needed a strong central government. They argued that the Articles of Confederation gave the central government too little power and as a result the Union, faced economic difficulties, foreign problems and state quarrels (Doc 3). They processed Checks and Balances, which was a system designed so that the central government would not get more powerful than the other would, and was intended to counter arguments being made by the Anti-federalists (Doc

    Read More

  • Political Party System: The Federalists vs. the Republicans

    1439 Words  | 3 Pages

    As the Constitution of 1787 was introduced, two political parties were present in Congress. One of them was the Federalists and the other was the Republicans. The Federalists were led by George Washington and John Adams. They were composed of elites and favored trading with Britain. Their supporters were mainly merchants, farmers, lawyers, and established political leaders. They believed that freedom “rested on the deference of authority” (Foner 288). The Republicans were led by James Madison and Thomas Jefferson. They believed in democratic self-government and favored agricultural. Their supporters composed mainly of farmers. Their goal was to establish a “limited government [that] allowed its citizens to be ‘free to regulate their own pursuits’” (Foner 303). According to Foner, “[The Republicans] were far more critical than the Federalists of social and economic inequality, and more accepting of broad democratic participation as essential to freedom” (Foner 289).

    Read More

  • Creation of the United States Constitution

    1236 Words  | 3 Pages

    The Articles of Confederation was America’s first constitution. The Articles of Confederation failed to create a strong central government, however. With the demise of the states in sight, the need for a stronger and more structured central government became apparent. An invitation was sent to all thirteen states in February 1787 by the Confederation Congress to resolve the matter. The events that took place over the next several months would create the United States Constitution. Going down in history as a revolutionary form of government, the U.S. Constitution would give life to a country that is still running strong over 200 years later.

    Read More

  • The Inevitable Two-Party System in the U.S.

    1535 Words  | 4 Pages

    The first political parties in America began to form at the end of the 18th century. "The conflict that took shape in the 1790s between the Federalists and the Antifederalists exercised a profound impact on American history." The two primary influences, Thomas Jefferson a...

    Read More

  • George Washington's Two Political Parties

    1252 Words  | 3 Pages

    After the creation of the United States Constitution, George Washington was elected as the first president. During Washington’s two terms, two political parties emerged: the Federalists and the Democratic-Republicans. In determining the catalyst for these parties surfacing, it is important to look at the viewpoints each group held in areas including the economy, politics, and foreign affairs. Political parties rose in the 1790s as contrasting opinions on economic plans and foreign affairs ultimately led to opposing political perspectives.

    Read More

  • Andrew Jackson Dbq

    1002 Words  | 3 Pages

    After James Monroe’s second term as the fifth president of the United States ended, preparations were already underway for the next election to determine who would become the president. There were four prominent candidates running. They were Henry Clay, John Quincy Adams, William H. Crawford, and Andrew Jackson. John C. Calhoun, who was Secretary of War under Monroe, was originally thinking of running as president but dropped out in the hope of becoming Vice President. Clay was the Speaker of the United States House of Representatives, Adams was the Secretary of State under President Monroe, Crawford was most notably Secretary of the Treasury under Monroe, and Jackson was a war hero during the War of 1812. For the first time, none of the men who were running for office identified as Federalists. A Federalist is someone who believes in a strong central government. All four men said that they were Democratic-Republicans. The Democratic-Republicans, who were also known as the Republican party, generally opposed the viewpoints that the Federalists held. They believed in states’ rights; that is that the states should be more powerful than the National government....

    Read More

  • political views of federalists and republicans

    357 Words  | 1 Pages

    The federalists view saw the republicans view as a weakness. They insisted on a stronger common government. The federalists had an understanding that there could only be one sovereign in a political system, one final authority that everyone must obey and no one can appeal. They thought this was the only effective way in creating an effective central government. The independent states seemed to think it was clear that each one of them were independently sovereign, although based on history only small countries were suitable for the republican government. With history proving the republicans wrong for trying to create a republican government in the states the federalists were slowly trying to create a stronger central government. There first step was making the sovereign states agree to the Articles of Confederation which established a close alliance of independent states. The federalist central government was referred to as a “confederacy”.

    Read More

  • Essay On Ratification Of The Constitution

    1213 Words  | 3 Pages

    While the Federalists believe in a strong, central government, the Anti-Federalists believe in the shared power of state and national governments to maintain the rights of all Americans .The Anti-Federalist favored a confederated government were the state and national governments could share power ,protect citizen’s freedom ,and independence. The Anti-Federalists found many problems in the Constitution. Many were concerned the central government take was all individual rights. Anti-Federalist primarily consisted of farmers and tradesmen and was less likely to be a part of the wealthy elite than were members of their rival the Federalist. Many Anti-federalists were local politicians who feared losing power should the Constitution be ratified and argued that senators that served for too long and represented excessively large territories would cause senators to forget what their responsibilities were for that state. They argued that the Constitution would give the country an entirely new and unknown form of government and saw no reason in throwing out the current government. Instead, they believed that the Federalists had over-stated the current problems of the country and wanted improved characterization of power allowable to the states. They also maintained that the Framers of the Constitution had met as a discriminatory group under an order of secrecy and had violated the stipulations of the Articles of Confederation in the hopes for the for ratification of the Constitution. The Anti-Federalist were sure that the Constitution would take away the rights of the American citizens and fought hard to stop the ratification on the

    Read More

  • Factionalism in America

    1750 Words  | 4 Pages

    Following the failure of the Articles of Confederation, a debate arose discussing how a centralized government ought to be organized. The prevailing opinion ultimately belonged to the Federalists, whose philosophy was famously outlined in The Federalist Papers. Recognizing that in a free nation, man would naturally divide himself into factions, they chose not to remedy this problem by stopping it at its source; instead, they would limit its effects by placing strict structural safeguards within the government's framework. The Federalists defined a facti...

    Read More

  • Drafting the Constitution

    2555 Words  | 6 Pages

    By the late eighteenth century, America found itself independent from England; which was a welcomed change, but also brought with it, its own set of challenges. The newly formed National Government was acting under the Articles of Confederation, which established a “firm league of friendship” between the states, but did not give adequate power to run the country. To ensure the young nation could continue independently, Congress called for a Federal Convention to convene in Philadelphia to address the deficiencies in the Articles of Confederation. While the Congress only authorized the convention to revise and amend the Articles the delegates quickly set out to develop a whole new Constitution for the country. Unlike the Articles of Confederation, the new Constitution called for a national Executive, which was strongly debated by the delegates. There were forces on both sides of the issue trying to shape the office to meet their ideology. The Federalists, who sought a strong central government, favored a strong National Executive which they believed would ensure the country’s safety from both internal and external threats. The Anti Federalists preferred to have more power in the hands of the states, and therefore tried to weaken the national Executive. Throughout the convention and even after, during the ratification debates, there was a fear, by some, that the newly created office of the president would be too powerful and lean too much toward monarchy.

    Read More

  • Democracy In The 19th Century

    1358 Words  | 3 Pages

    During the construction of the new Constitution, many of the most prominent and experienced political members of America’s society provided a framework on the future of the new country; they had in mind, because of the failures of the Articles of Confederation, a new kind of government where the national or Federal government would be the sovereign power, not the states. Because of the increased power of the national government over the individual states, many Americans feared it would hinder their ability to exercise their individual freedoms. Assuring the people, both Alexander Hamilton and James Madison insisted the new government under the constitution was “an expression of freedom, not its enemy,” declaring “the Constitution made political tyranny almost impossible.” (Foner, pg. 227) The checks and balances introduced under the new and more powerful national government would not allow the tyranny caused by a king under the Parliament system in Britain. They insisted that in order achieve a greater amount of freedom, a national government was needed to avoid the civil unrest during the system under the Articles of Confederation. Claiming that the new national government would be a “perfect balance between liberty and power,” it would avoid the disruption that liberty [civil unrest] and power [king’s abuse of power in England] caused. The “lackluster leadership” of the critics of the new constitution claimed that a large land area such as America could not work for such a diverse nation.

    Read More

  • The Creation Of The Constitution

    1073 Words  | 3 Pages

    In creating the Constitution, the states had several different reactions, including a rather defensive reaction, but also an understanding reaction. As a document that provided the laws of the land and the rights of its people. It directs its attention to the many problems in this country; it offered quite a challenge because the document lent itself to several views and interpretations, depending upon the individual reading it. It is clear that the founders’ perspectives as white, wealthy or elite class, American citizens would play a role in the creation and implementation of The Constitution.

    Read More

  • Anti-Federalist vs Federalist

    2017 Words  | 5 Pages

    After winning the Revolutionary War and sovereign control of their home country from the British, Americans now had to deal with a new authoritative issue: who was to rule at home? In the wake of this massive authoritative usurpation, there were two primary views of how the new American government should function. Whereas part of the nation believed that a strong, central government would be the most beneficial for the preservation of the Union, others saw a Confederation of sovereign state governments as an option more supportive of the liberties American’s fought so hard for in the Revolution. Those in favor of a central government, the Federalists, thought this form of government was necessary to ensure national stability, unity and influence concerning foreign perception. Contrastingly, Anti-Federalists saw this stronger form of government as potentially oppressive and eerily similar to the authority’s tendencies of the British government they had just fought to remove. However, through the final ratification of the Constitution, new laws favoring state’s rights and the election at the turn of the century, one can say that the Anti-Federalist view of America prevails despite making some concessions in an effort to preserve the Union.

    Read More

  • Essay On Federalism

    1180 Words  | 3 Pages

    In conclusion Federalism is a big part of our country. Federalism does have its pros and cons but it’s safe to say that it has so far worked out fairly well. Still, we must keep in mind that federalism does affects our everyday lives and many times we take for granted that the individual in political parties will make the right decisions for the well-being of the public, though at times it is not always be the case. We must remember that for change to happen we must be involved and ready to learn and see and understand ways that we can make a difference, for at the end of the day it is our lives that are affected with every single decision that is made.

    Read More

More about Creating the Constitution

Open Document