Philanthropos Arguments Against The Ratification Of The Constitution

Philanthropos, the anonymous author of Antifederalist No. 7, wastes no time in making his argument against the ratification of the Constitution. His main argument is that the adoption of the Constitution, as it stood at the time before ratification, would lead to a civil war. He claims that “the time in which the constitution or government of a nation undergoes any particular change, is always interesting and critical.” As a result of this statement, the author goes on to argue that adopting the new Constitution will cause instability and unrest among the people, ultimately resulting in war. Philanthropos uses dramatic language and exaggerated claims in order to get his point across. An example of this comes when he states: “Were they mine enemies, the worst imprecation I
The author provides many reason to back up his claim regarding his view on ratification. He highlights the amount of power that is given to Congress which goes unchecked at the current point in the drafting. They include: the Congress’s having power without control-to borrow money on the credit of the United States; their having power to appoint their own salaries, and their being paid out of the treasury of the United States…their being the judges of the qualification and election of their own members, by which mean they can get men to suit any purpose.

Philanthropos brings up a fear of many people, that of an oppressive government. Many people feared a powerful government since that is the very thing the United States just fought to gain freedom from. As a result, the author suggests that the Articles of Confederation, which established a weak central government, is a better fit for America. He states, “our present Constitution, with a few additional powers to Congress, seems better calculated to preserve the rights and