...FEDERALISTS The federalists wanted and believed in a central government that’s slip into branches and ran by the people. They really wanted a government that was strong and for the people. The anti-federalists wanted to stay under the control of the British in a monarchy government. The federalists wanted the constitution ratified just as it was immediately. FEDERALISTS vs. ANTI-FEDERALISTS The federalists and the anti-federalists had two totally different views on hot the U.S should be governed. They both had their own ideas of what they thought would help make our county better. The federalists believed and wanted a strong federal government, an army and a central bank. With our country in mind they felt that our country should be ran by the people. Stated by the federalist no.39 “It is essential to such a government that it be derived from the great body of the society, not from an inconsiderable proportion of a favored class of it; otherwise handful of tyrannical nobles exercising their oppression by a delegation of their powers might aspire the rank of republicans and claim for their government the honorable tittle of republic.” The federalists believed in separating the government into branches so that the government could be kept under control. Also, stated by the federalists no. 51 “It is evident that each department should have a will of its own; and constituted that the members of the others.. But the great security against a gradual concentration of the several...
Words: 667 - Pages: 3
...To Ratify or Nor? That is a question being asked over the centuries, and the answers have been the cause of serious controversies. Just like the founding fathers debated what was best for the country, by ratifying a Constutution. Today people still debate whether it was right or not to ratify the Constitution. What do you think? Today people have been able to see the benefits of having a constitution and it was proved many years ago when the Articles of Confederation did not work that a stronger central power was the solution to a better government. Of course a central power that would have checks and balances, there would not be any advantages of taking over the government. Many debates are being made, the antifederalists say the constitution is bringing a central government with too much power. “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.“ But even though the constitution gives a certain amount of power to the central government it still created a method of checks and balances to prevent a future dictatorship. Also it is known all the troubles that the country went through by giving supreme power to the states. And the constitution still makes clear the states rights. “In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty...
Words: 639 - Pages: 3
...The federalist structure of government is the one that is best for this nation. Federalists wanted to make a change; a change for the people. They want an established government that is ruled or governed by the people, unlike the Anti-Federalists who wanted to keep the same monarchy government and didn’t seek a change for the people. A monarchy has proven to be corrupt because only the higher-class had the right to power and the lower-class had no say. For this reason, the Federalists wanted to separate the powers of the government into their own branches in order to avoid a corrupt government. Because of this, Federalism would be the best option for this country. Federalists strongly desired a government for the people. They also wanted the constitution to be ratified as quickly as possible with the use of editing. Federalists also believed that some power should be taken out of the states and put into the government, and that the government should be respectfully separated into three branches. Federalist paper no. 39 states: “It is essential to such a government that it be derived from the great body of the society, not from an inconsiderable proportion or a favored class of it; otherwise a handful of tyrannical nobles, exercising their oppression by a delegation of their powers, might aspire to the rank of the republicans and claim for their governments the honorable title of republic.” By separating the government into different branches, the Federalists has the idea that...
Words: 615 - Pages: 3
...helpful to complete this Activity on Argument Writing before you begin. Steps Choose whether to argue as a Federalist or as an Anti-Federalist. Review the lesson to make sure you understand their main points. Using quotes from the Federalist and Anti-Federalist Papers, write an opinion article for a newspaper, or create a speech podcast to convince people in your state to agree with your position. Include the following in your speech or article: teens shaking hands after playing a game of tennis © 2012 Polka Dot/Thinkstock introductory paragraph that clearly states your position as a Federalist or Anti-Federalist at least two paragraphs describing differences between the Federalist and Anti-Federalist points of view. Use at least two quotes from each of the Federalist Papers and Anti-Federalist Papers. If you would like to explore more of the Federalist Papers and Anti-Federalist Papers to find your own quotes, these sites will be helpful. Federalist Papers American Studies at the University of Virginia The Avalon Project at Yale Law School The Law Center at the University of Oklahoma Anti-Federalist Papers Document Library by Teaching American History at least one paragraph to explain why you disagree with the opposing stance. For example, if you have chosen to argue as a Federalist, you will explain why you disagree with the Anti-Federalist position, using quotes from the documents to support your argument. strong concluding paragraph that summarizes...
Words: 430 - Pages: 2
...argue as a Federalist or as an Anti-Federalist. Review the lesson to make sure you understand their main points. Using quotes from the Federalist Papers, write an opinion article for a newspaper, or create a speech podcast to convince people in your state to agree with your position. Title (Are you a Federalist or Anti-Federalist) I am on the side of the federalist because they want alteration for the great unwashed where being a anti -federalist want to hitch within a monarchy. Being in a monarchy had already appearance to be problematic and they weren't willing to change much for themselves. Their politics was show to be corrupt because only their high course of instruction had power in the governance due to their wealth while lower category had no say, leading to a struggle for the lower class. Federalist wanted to separate the great power of the political science into their respected branches, avoiding a corrupt regime. I don't believe having a United States Army would take away from their indecorum because it was made to defend the rural area not cause bother with citizen which their officer had be seen doing. Federalist wanted a government for the masses. They believed in a strong central government campaign by the people and separated into branches. They wanted the Constitution ratified as it was and as soon as possible. Whereas anti-federalists wanted to stoppage in monarchy, causing aggressiveness between the citizens and government. Federalist and anti-federalists...
Words: 425 - Pages: 2
...Prof. Gillooly 03/06/2015 The Significance of the Federalist Papers The Federalist Papers, is a compilation of 85 articles, advocating the ratification of the proposed Constitution of the United States. These series of articles were published by Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay between October 1787 and May 1788. The overall intention of the Federalist Papers was to explain the advantages of the proposed Constitution over the prevailing Articles of Confederation. The Federalist Papers impacted the ratification of the Constitution by making some of their most important objections, including the significance of having a Constitution, acknowledging to the disagreements made by the Antifederalists, and defending conflicting arguments made against the attributes of the executive and judicial branch as specified in the proposed Constitution. Before the ratification of the Constitution, the central government under the Articles of Confederations was very weak and in jeopardy of falling apart. Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay, who were Federalists believed as well that the Articles of Confederation was too weak to maintain a powerful central government and needed to be restored by the U.S Constitution. The fundamental goal of the U.S constitution was to secure the rights of the U.S citizens and for the federal government to strive for the common good of the individuals. The Federalist Papers illustrates how the federal government is divided into three distinct...
Words: 1423 - Pages: 6
...Choose whether to argue as a Federalist or as an Anti-Federalist. Review the lesson to make sure you understand their main points. Using quotes from the Federalist and Anti-Federalist Papers, write an opinion article for a newspaper, or create a speech podcast to convince people in your state to agree with your position. Include the following in your speech or article: teens shaking hands after playing a game of tennis © 2012 Polka Dot/Thinkstock introductory paragraph that clearly states your position as a Federalist or Anti-Federalist at least two paragraphs describing differences between the Federalist and Anti-Federalist points of view. Use at least two quotes from each of the Federalist Papers and Anti-Federalist Papers. If you would like to explore more of the Federalist Papers and Anti-Federalist Papers to find your own quotes, these sites will be helpful. Federalist Papers American Studies at the University of Virginia The Avalon Project at Yale Law School The Law Center at the University of Oklahoma Anti-Federalist Papers Document Library by Teaching American History at least one paragraph to explain why you disagree with the opposing stance. For example, if you have chosen to argue as a Federalist, you will explain why you disagree with the Anti-Federalist position, using quotes from the documents to support your argument. strong concluding paragraph that summarizes your argument and encourage others to support you Your argument should be created...
Words: 382 - Pages: 2
...Federalist Papers Lab (worth 30 pts) Assignment: Federalist Papers. Written Document Analysis. Complete both section of the assignment. Go to: http://memory.loc.gov/ammem/help/constRedir.html or use a search engine to locate the documents. Scroll down and Under “Documents from the Library of Congress” Click on “The Federalist Papers.” Scroll and click on the document you selected. (A) Select Federalist Paper # 10 and answer the following questions. Next Select Federalist Paper #51 and answer the same questions: 1. Identify (a) Title of document; (b) Type of document; (c) Date of document; (d) Author(s)/ Creators of the document; (e) Where was the document published? 2. For what audience was the document written? Document Information: 3. List three things the author(s)/creators said that you think are important 4. Why do you think the document was written (purpose)? What evidence in the document helps you know why it was written? Quote from the document. 5. What do you consider the strengths and weakness of the document? (B) Scroll down to Federalists #85 and select the link to it. These concluding remarks to the Federalist Papers were written by Alexander Hamilton in order to persuade people to favor adoption of the new constitution. Read the document and answer the following questions: 1. Clarify the meaning of the four so-called defects to the Constitution that were listed in the second paragraph by Hamilton. 2. LIST at least five additional securities to...
Words: 299 - Pages: 2
...2.03 When choosing your position to be Federalist or Antifederalist, the best choice would be a Federalist. In being a Federalist, they agree on having a strong central government, under the Constitution. Unlike the anti-federalist how don’t agree with that. Anti- Federalists “As long as we can preserve our unalienable rights, we are in safety. “ Federalist "A pure democracy can admit no cure for the mischiefs of faction. A common passion or interest will be felt by a majority, and there is nothing to check the inducements to sacrifice the weaker party. Hence it is, that democracies have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property; and have, in general, been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths." These 2 quotes have the idea of security and safety. Being a federalist and under the Constitution, it is like choosing the stronger more central government. Which therefore will be the one to protect more efficiently. The anti-federalists where mostly farmer and workers when the federalists is everyone how is much bigger than them. They believed the Constitution made the nation too strong and took too much control over the individual states. Being strong is a good thing. We need control because without control there will be chaos. We wouldn’t be living the life were living right now without this protection and control. I disagree with the anti-federalist because I’m all about having a strong nation. I feel...
Words: 293 - Pages: 2
...2.03 The Antifederalist Assessment So I have chosen to use Federalists because our government is strong and it is beneficial to our country, the federalists wanted a change in the government, while the Anti-Federalists wanted a monarchy. The Anti-Federalists way would have led our country to corruption. The federalists covered the worries of the people and the corruption of the government while adding in people opinions. Anti-Federalists refer to a coalition of people that opposed the creation of the Constitution that would lead to a stronger U.S. federal government. They believed that the greatest threat to the future of the United States would be because of the governments growing power. The previous constitution, known as the Articles of Confederation, gave the states more authority. “Rouse up, my friends, a matter of infinite importance is before you on the carpet, soon to be decided in your convention: The New Constitution. Seize the happy moment. Secure to yourselves and your posterity the jewel Liberty, which has cost you so much blood and treasure, by a well regulated Bill of Rights, from the encroachments of men in power.“ The group of supporters that wanted to put the Constitution into place were known as the Federalists, they got their name from the term “federalism” which implies a strong central government. Federalism is a system based upon democratic rules in which the power to govern is shared between the state and national governments, creating a federation...
Words: 297 - Pages: 2
...Hannah Carr United States Government March 18, 2015 Horton 2.03 The Antifederalist Assessment So I have chosen to use Federalists because our government is strong and it is beneficial to our country, the federalists wanted a change in the government, while the Anti-Federalists wanted a monarchy. The Anti-Federalists way would have led our country to corruption. The federalists covered the worries of the people and the corruption of the government while adding in people opinions. Anti-Federalists refer to a coalition of people that opposed the creation of the Constitution that would lead to a stronger U.S. federal government. They believed that the greatest threat to the future of the United States would be because of the governments growing power. The previous constitution, known as the Articles of Confederation, gave the states more authority. “Rouse up, my friends, a matter of infinite importance is before you on the carpet, soon to be decided in your convention: The New Constitution. Seize the happy moment. Secure to yourselves and your posterity the jewel Liberty, which has cost you so much blood and treasure, by a well regulated Bill of Rights, from the encroachments of men in power.“ The group of supporters that wanted to put the Constitution into place were known as the Federalists, they got their name from the term “federalism” which implies a strong central government. Federalism is a system based upon democratic rules in which the power to govern is shared between...
Words: 306 - Pages: 2
...2.03 The Anti-federalists My position as a federalist is to ratificate the constitution while also creating a strong central government by separation of both of the powers combined. All the federalists were always strong believers in the constitution, believing that this ratification was the only way they were all able to achieve a fair society where all people can all have their rights to liberty, life and the pursuit of happiness, while also wanting to help shape future analysis of the Constitution for the better and in beneficial ways. By them being able to build a sufficient government with the foundation of the basis of popular sovereignty, without the need of sacrificing any sovereignty of the varied states fairness of the new government, it can be secured and work as it should. The rich would be happy in this case, because they would feel like the new Constitution was benefcial on their part, because the fact that rich's votes would earn much more value than the less fortunate in the states like what they wanted to achieve. They can possibly keep the potential of tyranny from becoming something dangerous to their people and they know that safeguards they have with the government will keep it from overpowering. The constitution should be ratified as a Federalist because the nation might of never survived without the constitution by their side leading them and a stronger government was necessary at this very point in desperate time. The federalists explained...
Words: 875 - Pages: 4
...RETHINKING THE EAST ASIAN MIRACLE JOSEPH E. STIGLITZ AND SHAHID YUSUF Editors RETHINKING THE EAST ASIA MIRACLE JOSEPH E. STIGLITZ AND SHAHID YUSUF Editors A copublication of the World Bank and Oxford University Press i Oxford University Press Oxford • New York • Athens • Auckland • Bangkok • Bogotá • Buenos Aires • Calcutta • Cape Town • Chennai • Dar es Salaam • Delhi • Florence • Hong Kong • Istanbul • Karachi • Kuala Lumpur • Madrid • Melbourne • Mexico City • Mumbai • Nairobi • Paris • São Paulo • Singapore • Taipei • Tokyo • Toronto • Warsaw and associated companies in Berlin • Ibadan © 2001 The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development / The World Bank 1818 H Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20433, USA Published by Oxford University Press, Inc. 198 Madison Avenue, New York, N.Y. 10016 Oxford is a registered trademark of Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the prior permission of Oxford University Press. Cover design and interior design by Naylor Design, Washington, D.C. Manufactured in the United States of America First printing June 2001 1 2 3 4 04 03 02 01 The findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed in this study are entirely those of the authors and should not be attributed in any manner to the World Bank, to its affiliated organizations...
Words: 190305 - Pages: 762
