Preview

Arguments Against Tyranny And Corruption

Good Essays
Open Document
Open Document
279 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Arguments Against Tyranny And Corruption
In fear of tyranny and corruption, two arguments against the ratification of the Constitution were that if they increased the power of the central government they would be too far away to help the citizens with their concerns, instead they favored the rights of the states and the active representation of the average citizens. They also argued to keep the unicameral legislature, they believed that local and state governments represented voters more fairly. They also argued that the newly ratified Constitution didn’t guarantee protection for some basic liberties.They also believed that the Constitution gave too much power to the federal court, they said that the federal courts wouldn’t be able to provide justice to the average citizen like state
Continue Reading
View Writing Issues

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Good Essays

    Compare And Contrast The Federalist And The Anti-Federalists Dbq
    • 536 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Compare And Contrast The Federalist And The Anti-Federalists Dbq

    The Anti-Federalists believed that a strong state government was needed because if you have a strong central government than the people’s rights will not be ensured. (Doc. 4) Patrick Henry opposed the ratification of The Constitution because he believed that without it containing the Bill of Rights it would not allow the people have their natural rights. Anti-Federalist didn’t want to have a stronger national government because it could destroy the liberties of America that have been won during the Revolutionary…

    • 536 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    Analyze the Reason for the Anti-Federalist’ Opposition to Ratifying the Constitution
    • 466 Words
    • 2 Pages

    Analyze the Reason for the Anti-Federalist’ Opposition to Ratifying the Constitution

    Anti-Federalist felt that the Constitution gave more power to central government and less to the states. Anti-federalist saw the constitution as a sinister plot by an Elite leader; “to lord it over to the rest of their fellow citizens, to trample the poorer part of the people under their feet that they may be rendered their servants as slaves.” They also argued that the constitution would become to tyrannical because the central government wouldn’t be able to run all states as a result of being too distant and removed from interest of common citizens and farmers.…

    • 466 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    Dbq4: Ratifying the Constitution
    • 390 Words
    • 2 Pages

    Dbq4: Ratifying the Constitution

    The major arguments in the debate over the ratification over the U.S Constitution were the rights of individuals verses the rights of the states, the supporters and the opponents, were the Federalists and the Anti-Federalists. Both sides the Federalists and the Anti-Federalists are debating to win the support of our nation.…

    • 390 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Satisfactory Essays

    The Pros And Cons Of Supporters Of The US Constitution
    • 206 Words
    • 1 Page

    The Pros And Cons Of Supporters Of The US Constitution

    debates. People that supported the Constitution argued that many state constitutions already did the job of protecting citizens’ rights. Supporters of the Constitution believed that these rights already existed as natural rights, even though they were not listed. The anti-federalists disagreed and believed there should be a list of rights. They feared that the stronger national government would abuse individual rights. The anti-federalists basically wanted a list of individual…

    • 206 Words
    • 1 Page
    Satisfactory Essays
    Read More
  • Powerful Essays

    Federalist vs. Anti-federalist Perspectives on the Constitution
    • 1009 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Federalist vs. Anti-federalist Perspectives on the Constitution

    "A free republic cannot succeed over a country of such immense extent, containing such a number of inhabitants......as that of the whole United States." (Brutus I) First of all, anti-federalists thought that a republic must be small and uniform to survive. The United States was a large country that had 1200 miles long and 200 miles inland, and it also had big population which had wide range of religions and races. They thought if a national government had a strong power that would insulate from the people and would abuse the power to deprive the powers belonged to the states. For instance, the legislature of the U.S had great and uncontroulable powers: the Congress would tax heavily from the states and regulate the inter-states trade; the Supreme Court would overrule state courts; and the president would come to raise and support large armies. Brutus noted Article I, Sec. 8 implied powers "the necessary and proper." It meant that the states reserved certain powers, and considerable powers could be added. Also, a strong central government would threaten the rights of common people. Because the Constitution was created by…

    • 1009 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Powerful Essays
    Read More
  • Powerful Essays

    U.S Constitution DBQ
    • 1101 Words
    • 5 Pages

    U.S Constitution DBQ

    The writing of the U.S Constitution generated many concerns over the amount of power to be allowed in the Federal Government. Political parties of Federalists and Antifederalists formed, sparking debate over the issue. As Federalists supported the proposed U.S Constitution, Antifederalists supported the government formed under the Articles of Confederation. Federalists felt that a strong central government would give protection to public and private credit. Many large landowners, judges, lawyers, leading clergymen, political figures, and merchants were in favor of ratifying the U.S Constitution. James Madison writes in Federalist Papers #10, “Complaints are everywhere heard from our most considerate and virtuous citizens, equally the friends of public and private faith and public of personal liberty, that our governments are too unstable” (Doc. A). Congressmen such as Madison strongly supported a stronger Federal Government. The existing government under the Articles of Confederation needed to be altered to ensure more control over the states. Federalists believed that if change wasn’t made the nation would fail. “Either the…

    • 1101 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Powerful Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    Ratification Of The Constitution Dbq Essay
    • 549 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Ratification Of The Constitution Dbq Essay

    In the late 1700s, there was a surplus of arguments supporting or fighting against ratifying the Constitution. Ratification of the Constitution is not what's best for U.S citizens because although the Bill of Rights was proved to be successful, the insecurity of rights amongst the people, as well as the massive amount of influence that the people of power had; this will not lead to a successful nation. Documents three points out many major holes in the ratification of the Constitution such as insecurity in rights. Document four gives a supporting view as to why the United States should ratify the Constitution, it discusses how Massachusetts solved one problem, the insecurity of rights. Document five points out the people’s fear in the…

    • 549 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Ratification Of The Constitution Dbq
    • 303 Words
    • 2 Pages

    Ratification Of The Constitution Dbq

    When the U.S. constitution was made it there was a long debate over the ratification of the constitution. There were two sides in the debate, the Federalists, who were supporter of the new constitution, and were better, organized than their opponents, and the Federalists had the support of the most respected men in America, George Washington, and Benjamin Franklin. The other side of the debate was the Antifederalists, who opposed ratification; although they weren’t as organized as the Federalists they did have some dedicated supporters. One major argument used by the supporters’ side in the debates over the ratification of the U.S. constitution is that there would be disorder without a strong central government.…

    • 303 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    Federalist vs Anti-Federalist
    • 1180 Words
    • 5 Pages

    Federalist vs Anti-Federalist

    The debates over ratification of the Constitution represent the most important and intellectually sophisticated public debates in American history. On the one side, the supporters of the Constitution, or "Federalists," argued that the nation desperately needed a stronger national government to bring order, stability and unity to its efforts to find its way in an increasingly complicated world. Opponents of the Constitution, or "Antifederalists," countered that the the governments of the states were strong enough to realize the objectives of each state. Any government that diminished the power of the states, as the new Constitution surely promised to do, would also diminish the ability of each state to meet the needs of its citizens. More dramatically, the Antifederalists argued that the new national government, far removed from the people, would be all to quick to compromise their rights and liberties in the name of establishing order and unity.…

    • 1180 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    What Are The Arguments Against The Ratification Of The Constitution Dbq
    • 629 Words
    • 3 Pages

    What Are The Arguments Against The Ratification Of The Constitution Dbq

    People didnt want a Constitution and believed that things were just fine the way they were and everything should be left alone. In Document 2 we see that Mercy Otis Warren was an opponent. He had fear that the Constitution would threaten the rights of conscience and liberty of press. Patrick Henry was also against ratifying the Constitution. In Document 4, he says that a Constitution would endanger the rights and privileges that the people had and they would lose sovereignty, the freedom from an external control. In Document 5, Amos Singletree also opposed the ratification of the Constitution. But he doesn’t only fear the possible threat of people’s rights, he, being poor, was afraid that only rich learned men would be able to have power, and will have total rule over the poor…

    • 629 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    Dbq Anti Federalists
    • 477 Words
    • 2 Pages

    Dbq Anti Federalists

    The Anti-Federalist had concerns almost immediately after its release. One of the concerns was how much power would be held by Congress. There was a clause in the Constitution that allowed Congress to make laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into ongoing powers. The Anti-Federalists often argued that this would allow the national government to create any law it wished. Importantly they did not want laws that would be harmful and unrepresentative for the people. In addition, the Constitution contained a supremacy clause that recognized the national government as the final arbiter of its disputes for the state which did not seem to be a fair option for the Anti-Federalists. This clause caused the anti-Federalists to believe that states and their citizens would be at the mercy of the national…

    • 477 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    Compare And Contrast Federalist And Anti Federalists
    • 591 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Compare And Contrast Federalist And Anti Federalists

    The Powers of the national government were not well defined in the constitution. The Anti-Federalists opposed this, and they also took issue with the elastic and supremacy clause which they felt could give the national government the power to increase its own power. The Anti-Federalists wanted more defined powers of the national government in the Constitution.…

    • 591 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Satisfactory Essays

    The Anti-Federalists Argumentative Analysis
    • 271 Words
    • 2 Pages

    The Anti-Federalists Argumentative Analysis

    Their main concerns included the power that the government held and the natural rights that the people could have. The Constitution was thought to be “radical in this transition; our rights and privileges are endangered, and the sovereignty of the states will be relinquished… The rights of conscience, trial by jury, liberty of the press … are rendered insecure” (Henry 1). Not only were they afraid of falling into another monarchy, they also believed that the rights of each man would be terminated after the Constitution is put into effect. Anti-federalists doubted the effect of the Constitution in the future due to their stances on natural rights for the people and the control that the national government had over the…

    • 271 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    Anti Federalism Dbq
    • 819 Words
    • 4 Pages

    Anti Federalism Dbq

    under the Articles of Confederation, just edit it a little. They wanted the states to hold the supreme power rather than the national government. Most feared that the constitution would turn our government into a monarchy. Brutus I made the statement, “And are by this clause invested with the power of making all laws, proper and necessary, for carrying all these into execution; and they may so exercise this power as entirely to annihilate all the state governments, and reduce this country to one single government.“ The name Anti-federalist is actually misleading, they were actually more for federalism than the federalist, as they wanted the power more separated to the states. Their thoughts were that a government under the constitution would lead to corruption as the power hungry federal government would become corrupt and try to consolidate all of the power.“In the new Constitution, the President and Senate have all the executive, and two thirds of the legislative power. In some weighty instances, (as making all kinds of treaties, which are to be the laws of the land,) they have the whole legislative and executive powers. They, jointly, appoint all officers, civil and military; and they (the Senate) try all impeachments, either of their own members or of the officers appointed by themselves.“ -Richard Henry…

    • 819 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Better Essays

    Articles Of Confederation Analysis
    • 1139 Words
    • 5 Pages

    Articles Of Confederation Analysis

    Federalists, most notably, Publius, argued it would be easier to protect liberty in a large and diverse republic.” (Keene, Cornell, & O’Donnell, 2013) Another fear and argument was that “Virginia’s George Mason, who was less concerned about the Constitution’s antidemocratic features and more worried about the centralization of power. Mason feared that liberty would be annihilated if a central government gained too much power.” (Keene, Cornell and O’Donnell, 2013). Ratification sparked some interesting publications and occasional acts of vandalism however the debate over ratification continued until, “June1788, when New Hampshire brought the total number of states that had approved the document to the required threshold of nine.” (Maier, 2010) difficulty now was getting anti-federalists to accept and abide by the new law.…

    • 1139 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Better Essays
    Read More