Federalists and Anti Federalists
Soon after the end of the Revolutionary War -- if not before -- itbecame clear that the Articles of Confederation were not a workablearrangement. Wartime contingency measures might have papered over the mostimmediate problems, but with the coming of peace something more regular wasneeded. The defects of the Articles produced a host of disputes amongstates, which could not be resolved under its terms, and which times wereserious enough to lead to militia skirmishing. More broadly, a fundamental issue had been left unresolved: Was the"United States" a nation in its own right, or a mere confederation of s
Both Federalists and Anti-Federalists thereupon engagedin a propaganda battle. Their local standing would bediminished in a more unified national political structure. The memory of this early dispute is preserved mainly by the fact that theBill of Rights -- which we think of as so integral to our system, and whichhas given rise to so much of constitutional law -- was not part of theoriginal document, but a compromise addendum, added to the Constitution asamendments immediately after its initial adoption. The Constitutional Convention was initially convened merely to patchup the Articles of Confederation, but it was dominated by proponents ofstronger central government. The Federalists won this in a mismatch: theFederalist has gone down as a political classic, while the Anti-Federalistwritings have all but vanished from memory. By and large,commercial interests were interested in a strong national government,creating an internal free-trade zone and consistent legal rules concerningtrade. However, the concerns in even Federalist circles about the despoticpotential of a strong central government that ratification of theConstitution was made effectively contingent on the immediate adoption of aset of amendments, the Bill of Rights. emi-autonomous states' This was not just an abstract question -- a great manygroup and individual interests were wrapped up in it. The Constitution itself wasadopted. Instead of modifying the Articles it threwthem out entirely. Other wealthy interests, however, had mainly local influence --large landowners, for example, who in this era might still expect a quasi-feudal deference from tenants and neighbors. Most of its measures providedspecific individual rights, though some also had rather vaguely wordedexpressions of powers that remained vested in individual states. However, eventhese interests conceded that the original Articles were unworkable, whileon the other hand many proponents of a stronger central government stillhad anxieties that it might become authoritarian, in 18th century languagedespotic.
Common topics in this essay:
Articles Confederation,
Bill Rights,
Federalists Anti-Federalists,
Constitutional Convention,
Revolutionary War,
central government,
proponents stronger central,
stronger central government,
stronger central,
bill rights,
articles confederation,
proponents stronger,
|
Acceptance Essays
