Federalists vs. Anti-Federalists
Before long, the Articles of Confederation proved to be insufficient in establishing law and order in early America. A Constitution was drafted, giving more power to the national government and setting up an intricate system to balance this power. Federalists, supporters of this constitution, debated with their opponent Anti-Federalists regarding whether or not to ratify the newly proposed system. Federalists advocated allowing the national government to pass laws and later judge their "constitutionality". In order to accomplish this without the government getting too powerful, the proposed regime was broken into three branches, each keeping the other two in check. Under
Further, he conjectured that the people of all the states must be willing to come together and follow the same laws, which in his opinion is unlikely. To Anti-Federalists the system seemed fundamentally flawed in that the legislature could be influenced by a few powerful men, changing power from the hands of the many to those of the few and thus ignoring most people's interests. Anti-Federalists responded to this with criticism. In the proposed system, representative legislature would prevent smaller faction's interests from being completely ignored. Luther Martin argued that the constitution should be developed by the states, providing the example of the peaceful state-led compilation of the Articles of Confederation. Martin claimed the constitution is "incompatible with the political happiness and freedom of the states in general". Further, Anti-Federalists criticized the lack of clear assertion of the Bill of Rights. Findley, Whitehill, and Smilie asserted that the nation should be a confederation of republics, with each state having its own representative legislature, and the national government having none. Lee stated that Federalists wanted to adopt the constitution only as a "stepping stone" to give themselves more power and influence. Protecting the minority was a Federalist priority. Anti-Federalists argued that the constitution would take too much power from the states and give too much to the national government. Individual states would still have the power to pass their own laws. Federalist James Madison believed the "states have much of their sovereignty" under the proposed government. this system, the government would be able to create laws which apply to all the states. Anti-Federalists Findley, Whitehill, and Smilie believed the basis of liberty and privilege were these "fundamental and unalienable" rights and that it could not exist in a land where they were omitted from the constitution.
Common topics in this essay:
America Constitution,
Confederation Protecting,
Whitehill Smilie,
James Madison,
Henry Lee,
Luther Martin,
Articles Confederation,
national government,
findley whitehill smilie,
Findley Whitehill,
power national government,
argued constitution,
power national,
lee stated,
proposed system,
articles confederation,
findley whitehill,
whitehill smilie,
representative legislature,
|
Acceptance Essays
