Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Federalist vs anti federalist beliefs
Article of confederation vs constitution
Article of confederation vs constitution
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Federalist vs anti federalist beliefs
Perhaps the greatest document of all time, the Constitution of the United States of America was not easily created. Fifty-five great men were needed to hammer out all the details of the Constitution in a long grueling process. As James Madison, architect of the constitution said, “The [writing of the Constitution] formed a task more difficult than can be well conceived by those who were not concerned in the execution of it. Adding to [the difficulty] the natural diversity of human opinions on all new and complicated subjects, it is impossible to consider the degree of concord which ultimately prevailed as less than a miracle.” The “natural diversity of human opinions” which Madison spoke of can be split into two basic groups, Federalists, and Anti-Federalists. The Constitution took so long to be created because of the opposite views of the Federalists and Anti-Federalists.
The Federalists were extremely pleased with the ratification of the Constitution. Almost everything they wanted to be a part of the document was included. They felt that in order for the states to feel equal, they would all need to be part of a stronger, higher government, and the Constitution provided this. Each state would be governed by most of the same laws, and the people would all be equally represented in congress, therefore there was no reason for the people to feel that they weren’t equal to other states. The Federalists obviously wanted the government to represent the people, that is why they based the state’s representatives in congress on population. These representatives were a true representation of the people in their state. One other reason the Federalists were happy with the constitution was that…
Although many people were happy with the Constitution, many were not. These unhappy Americans were known as Anti-Federalists. There were many reasons as to why the Anti-Federalists were not happy, some more important than others. One of their biggest complaints was that every state was different, therefore they all needed to have their own separate governments. They felt it would be impossible to have a central ruling body, because the states all had their own identities. A lot of the states were similar in some ways, but no two were exactly alike. Another problem they had with the Constitution was that there was no Bill of Rights. The Anti-Federalists thought the people’s individual rights were not covered well enough in the document, and a Bill of Rights declaring these needed to be included.
The biggest appeal that Ehrenreich makes is after she ends up walking out of the housekeeping job/waitress job because she cannot handle it anymore." I have failed I don't cry, but I am in a position to realize, for the first time in many years, that the tear ducts are still there and still capable of doing their job." (Ehrenreich, 48) This is the biggest appeal because Ehrenreich is quitting on the whole project. She is basically telling the readers that it is impossible for her, a "well-off", woman to live the life of a low wage worker.
Both groups came to agreement and agreed that there needed to be a stronger authority requiring an independent salary to function. They both also agreed that they needed to raise safeguards against the tyranny. The anti-Federalists would not agree to the new Constitution without the “Bill of Rights.” The Federalists ended up including the Bill of Rights into the Constitution. The Bill of Rights protects the freedoms of people. It reassured the anti-Federalists the government could not abuse their power by taking it out on the people. The Federalists included the Bill of Rights to get the anti-Federalists votes and support in the Constitution to actually get it
From 1787-1790 the development of the American Constitution was a battle between two opposing political philosophies. America’s best political minds gathered in Philadelphia and other cities in the Northeast in order to find common ground in a governmental structure. The Federalists and the Anti-Federalists had both some political thoughts that agreed as well as some political thoughts that disagreed. However, both parties would compromise and ultimately come together.
In today’s society, the question of minimum wage is a large political topic. Many people argue that it is impossible to live on a minimum wage lifestyle. In her novel Nickel and Dimed, Barbara Ehrenreich looks into this issue. In an experiment in which she mimics the life of a single woman, she moves into the low-wage workforce in three different cities in America. Within these cities, she attempts to make a living off of low-wage work and records her experiences, as well as the experiences of the true low-wage workers around her. Throughout Nickel and Dimed, Barbara Ehrenreich utilizes both vivid imagery and data in order to persuade the audience to agree that the low-wage lifestyle is truly un-livable.
The Constitution of the United States is one of the most iconic and important documents of all time. However, when it was first generated, its writing and ratification caused some major concerns. The purpose of the Constitution was to address the great number of issues of a new nation. To be more specific, the Constitution was meant to resolve the political, economic, and social problems of the country. Nevertheless, the document spurred much discussion and concern over people’s rights, the economy, and political corruption.
While the government of the United States owes its existence to the contents and careful thought behind the Constitution, some attention must be given to the contributions of a series of essays called the Federalist Papers towards this same institution. Espousing the virtues of equal representation, these documents also promote the ideals of competent representation for the populace and were instrumental in addressing opposition to the ratification of the Constitution during the fledgling years of the United States. With further reflection, the Federalists, as these essays are called, may in turn owe their existence, in terms of their intellectual underpinnings, to the writings of the philosopher and teacher, Aristotle.
The United States' Constitution is one the most heralded documents in our nation's history. It is also the most copied Constitution in the world. Many nations have taken the ideals and values from our Constitution and instilled them in their own. It is amazing to think that after 200 years, it still holds relevance to our nation's politics and procedures. However, regardless of how important this document is to our government, the operation remains time consuming and ineffective. The U.S. Constitution established an inefficient system that encourages careful deliberation between government factions representing different and sometimes competing interests.
During the late 18th century the Antifederalists argued against the constitution on the grounds that it did not contain a bill of rights. They believed that without a list of personal freedoms, the new national government might abuse its powers and that the states would be immersed in an all too dominant and influential national government. The Antifederalists worried that the limits on direct voting and the long terms of the president and senators, supplied by the constitution, would create a population of elites and aristocrats, which in turn would eventually take away power from the people. They also feared that the president might become another monarch. In other words, the Antifederalists ultimately felt that the new Constitution was undemocratic.
After he concluded his study in Philadelphia, Du Bois accepted a teaching position at Atlanta University, where he taught economics, history, and sociology. While in Atlanta, Dubois published a many books, and wrote many essays. He concentrated his focus on the study of black social lives. He studied different topics that were issues in the black community. Topics like, black morality, urbanization, African American in business. He also looked into things like black church, and black crime, and the education of black people. In 1903, Dubois published his most famous book called The Souls of Black Folks. In that same year his influential essay “The Talented Tenth” was published in his book The Negro Problem. His essay “The Talented Tenth” Du Bois writes about how important it is for black men to become leaders of their race. That they can become leaders by continuing their education, writing books, or becoming involved in social change. The other book that he wrote also in 1903, called The Souls of Black Folks was very controversial because it criticized and scrutinized the philosophies of Booker T. Washington.
Marshall and Essig come to an agreement when talking about the death penalty specifically. They both believe that it is unconstitutional, unfair, and ineffective. In Essig’s article, he uses examples of prisoners who sought to have a more painful death in order to highlight the hypocrisy of “painless execution.” For example John Byrd, who was a convicted murder in Ohio, specifically requested to be electrocuted rather than the needle itself. The legislature abolished electrocution and forced him to die by lethal injection. Another example is a prisoner named Earl Bramblett who declared: “ I am not going to lay down on a gurney and have them stick a needle in my arm and make it look like antiseptic execution”(Essig, 2003, p. 2). The author mentions both of these prisoners because he wants the reader to visualize the actual brutality of capital
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
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.
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.
When one thinks of meditation, what comes to mind? Does one think of group of 1970’s hippies sitting in a circle singing about peace? How about relaxing music being played? How about trying to form one’s body into a pretzel-like shape? What if meditation has nothing to do with the background music being played or what position one’s body is in? Meditation is defined by the Merriam-Webster Dictionary as “the act or process of spending time in quiet thought” (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/meditation). Meditation is just simply sitting in a quiet room and thinking about one’s life. The act of meditating is much simpler than many people think. Through deep concentration and relaxation, meditation becomes an altered state of consciousness.
Meditative practices will also help people deal with their distress when they're going through great periods of stress. The side effects of existence altering episodes like losing a family member or perhaps a divorce could be reduced through meditation. This might be credited to one benefit of meditation which involves a rise of serotonin production within the brain. Reports say that elevated serotonin levels might help improve an individuals emotions.