Preview

Compare And Contrast Federalist Vs Anti Federalism Essay

Good Essays
Open Document
Open Document
487 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Compare And Contrast Federalist Vs Anti Federalism Essay
The Federalist vs. Anti-Federalist debate has been seen time and time again throughout U.S history. The Federalists argue that a strong central government is necessary to protect the country and solve domestic problems. Whereas the Anti-Federalists argue that a strong central government cannot be trusted and that the states should have more power. This issue is an important concept today because it can be applied to so many of the debates on hot button issues such as abortion, government surveillance, gun rights, The ACA and many more. For example; in the issue of government surveillance the side that is most like the federalists in this case are those for government surveillance. They argue that it has been effective in the fight against terrorism and that it is important to keep the U.S safe. …show more content…
national governments powers. The idea of federalism is mentioned in the constitution and it is the division of powers between state and national governments, however there are often conflicts between these state governments with the national governments on which laws that states can and cannot enact. The tenth amendment of the constitution states the Constitution's principle of federalism by providing that powers not granted to the federal government by the Constitution, nor prohibited to the States, are reserved to the states or the people; This is known as the reserve clause and the powers obtained by states from this are known as the reserved powers. The problem with this is that there are many modern day issues that the constitution does not cover such as the topic of abortion. So depending on your interpretation of the constitution you could argue that decisions on abortion should be made by the national government, however you could also argue that since the states and federal governments are both not granted powers on this issue in the constitution that it should automatically be granted to the

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Good Essays

    The Federalists believed that a strong central government was needed because of the cruel remarks that were made against America in European courts. (Doc. 1) These remarks led the…

    • 536 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    During the 1700’s, the first political parties formed over disagreements in the government. The two parties were the federalists and Antifederalists. Federalists made up the people who felt that the stronger government was better for the country and supported the Constitution. The federalists had felt as if different “fiscal and monetary policies” were a weakness for the national economy. Also, the federalists supported banking("Anti-Federalist vs Federalist"). Federalists wanted to fight for stronger governments, managing the country’s debt and ratification. Antifederalists were people who opposed the Constitution of 1788 and disagreed with a stronger federal government. The Antifederalists wanted to keep the power to be for states and local…

    • 183 Words
    • 1 Page
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    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
  • Powerful Essays

    Before the state convention, there is a great issue about liberty. One proponents of the Constitution are federalists who favor to establish a stronger national government; one opponents of the Constitution are anti-federalists who favor to establish a weaker national government. Federalists think only a stronger national government have an ability to keep the states in control. Anti-federalists think the states should have more power than the national government. Even though the conflict between federalist and anti-federalist doesn't stop, whether it is a federalists or anti-federalists, they have the same dream to united the states to become a strong country. The perfect decision is to use the best way to administrate the country and stabilize the society. In my opinion, a stronger national government will keep the country developing.…

    • 1009 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    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
  • Good Essays

    On the other hand, the Federalist favored a government that was constructed with broad powers. They were interested in a government that was able to fight against foes, guard against domestic strife, promote commerce, and expand the nations economy. The Anti-federalist believed some of this but just highly feared governmental power. The Federalist made a very important point. They stated that in order for the government to carry out these orders, they needed the necessary power to do so. They felt that the right way of controlling power abuse was not by depriving the government of power, but knowing that the governments power would be oversee by the Constitutions checks and…

    • 1323 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Federalists were individuals who supported the ratification of the Constitution. Anti-Federalists opposed the Constitution as stated in the book, "the critics of the Constitution were by no means a unified group" (Faragher, 180). I found it interesting that the Constitution was initially influenced by the Federalist model in regards to interpretation but the pendulum has now swung in the opposite direction to a more Anti-Federalist approach (Content 8-2). The Constitution was ratified and the Federalists won for numerous reasons. The Anti-Federalists had delayed representation while the Federalists promised to amend the Constitution to better protect individual's rights (Faragher, 181). Overall, it was the Federalist representation, planning,…

    • 230 Words
    • 1 Page
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    A collection of essays called, The Federalist, were published in 1787 and 1788 and basically supported the ratification of the constitution and the idea of a national authority without the fear of tyranny in the new government. The anti-federalists responded to this with what they considered to be the dangers of a more powerful central government.…

    • 464 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    When deciding whether the Constitution better embodied the American commitment to democracy (republicanism), or whether it produced a greater compromise to it, one must define the nature of a republican government. Both the Federalist and Anti-Federalist set forth their distinctive views on the quality of representational government, but it was James Madison and Alexander Hamilton vision I feel was the most correct. By accepting their view, it is clear that they propose the best arguments for why the Constitution establishes a greater democratic state then the Articles of Confederation. In their opposing arguments, Samuel Adams and Richard Henry Lee see the two distinctive problems with the Constitution, with regard to its democratic nature: the character of the judiciary and the process by which the executive is put into office. I will argue that federalist provide greater justification for why these two branches enumerated in the Constitution are indeed democratic (as examined through the Federalist view of republican government). First I will discuss how each side's view of "republican" government differs.…

    • 1265 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    The Anti-Federalists have their reasons & the Federalists have theirs. I’m against the idea of a central government and how the freedom of the states should be.…

    • 288 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    Imagine living in a society where everyone gets along and agrees with everything. Thankfully, we live in a society where people have their sets of beliefs and tend to disagree with one another. When creating the Constitution there was a huge debate regarding the future of the United States and how it was going to be regulated. This was one of the biggest debates to be known throughout United States history. It led down to two different opposing groups the Federalists and the Anti- Federalists. There are pros and cons about people disagreeing. For instance, the Federalists and the Anti- Federalists both had some of the similar political thoughts as well as some political thoughts that they did not agree with one another. Though, both of the parties had different outlooks on what they thought, they would eventually come together and decided what is better for everyone as a nation.…

    • 925 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    We Federalist’s believe that the government needs to be divided into three parts, with equal powers and balances and checks, for it to work effectively. Now the Anti-Federalist’s believe that we are trying to give all power to the larger states in the North and ignore the needs of our brethren the South states. We are not. We are just trying to create a fair government.…

    • 565 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    For example, the Federalists were going for the Constitution and they wanted a centralized government. They believed in the Bill of Rights and have two representative from each state. In addition to that, they wanted Congress to have the power over tax and to be able to regulate trade. They wanted the separation of powers into three independent branches protected the rights of people and each branch represented a different part of the people, so all three branches were equal, then there were not specific group could assume control over another group. The Federalists wanted to ratify the Constitution. James Madison argued that, “A dependent on the people is, no doubt, the primary control on the government; but experience has taught mankind the necessity of auxiliary precautions” (Scott 112). For the Anti-Federalists, they were going for the Articles of Confederation and they wanted State's Right. They believed that an all power government is abstruse, or difficult to understand. Also, they believed that having a president in a central government would ended up with the people seeing the president as a king. They did not want to ratify the Constitution. When it came to voting, they wanted each state to act as a whole, and have one vote for each state. James Winthrop argued that “To promote the happiness of the people it is necessary that there should be local laws; and it is…

    • 617 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    According to Mr. Budas, an eighth grade Social Studies teacher at McCord Junior High there are three major differences between the Federalist and the Anti Federalist. The first major difference is, the federalist believed in a strong central government and were for a new constitution. The Anti Federalist opposed the constitution. They believed that it would give the federal government too much power and they would revert back to how it was with Great Britain. Another major difference is, the federalist believed in representation and that it should be based on the population of the state. The anti federalist believed that states should have the same representation in Congress and that one person was not enough to represent so many people.…

    • 153 Words
    • 1 Page
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    They have the same goal in mind of how to make this country better, but have totally two different ways to approach the matter. The Anti-Federalists want the states to be in control. They believe that strong central government would threaten the people liberty and freedom. Their ideal government is the states and its people to be in charge, and the reason why is mainly because they do not want to have the same system of government like England. But, for the Federalists, they want to have a strong central government. The Federalists argued that, if the states were to have control, the country would be teared apart. On the Federalist #10 written by James Madison, he wrote that “There are again two methods of removing the causes of faction: the one, by destroying the liberty which is essential to its existence; the other, by giving to every citizen the same opinions, the same passions, and the same interests.” The Federalists were afraid that by having too group of individuals with power, it can cause chaos by everyone have a voice and their interests. The Federalists wants a strong central government, so it can represent the people interest. Also, the Federalists think that with the check and balance system, the people freedom and liberty would be protected. According to the Federalist No. 51, it says “In order to lay a due foundation for that separate and distinct exercise of the different powers of government, which to a certain extent is admitted on all hands to be essential to the preservation of liberty, it is evident that each department should have a will of its own; and consequently should be so constituted that the members of each should have as little agency as possible in the appointment of the members of the others.” The Federalists want each branch of the government has its own agenda and power. But, no branch can overpower the others, so therefore the people freedom can be protected because no…

    • 762 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays