Search results
Mar 4, 2020 · The words of the Anti- Federalists give us an effective warning about the perils of a government that is no longer accountable to the people. The Federalists, in their response to the Anti- Federalists, show the proper way to maintain those checks against the progress of a government toward tyranny. The Founders’ words still have wisdom today.
- The Constitution's Alleged Deficiencies
- Leaders and Adherents
- Ratification Debate Dynamics
- Legacy
- Bibliography
The Constitution was made public in September 1787 and faced opposition almost immediately. Controversy exists over the primary motivation of the anti-Federalists. Some think they opposed the Constitution primarily for economic reasons. Others argue that they wanted to protect their own political power. Still others find that they were influenced m...
Some of the nation's best-known political leaders were among those who opposed the Constitution. Famed orator Patrick Henry led the anti-Federalists in Virginia, joined by the author of the Virginia declaration of rights, George Mason, who had attended the Constitutional Convention but refused to sign the document. Governor George Clinton organized...
Several practical matters complicated the anti-Federalists' quest to alter or defeat the Constitution. The call to form a convention came from the Federalists. They were interested in making radical changes to the structure of the national government and were highly motivated to attend the Philadelphia Convention. Anti-Federalists wanted less far-r...
Though the Constitution was ratified, the anti-Federalists did not leave the fight empty-handed. They expected that the recommended amendments would be seriously considered even though the push for a second convention failed to have an impact. Yet few anti-Federalists were elected to the new Congress. With massive Federalist majorities in both the ...
Banning, Lance. "Republican Ideology and the Triumph of the Constitution, 1789–1793." William and Mary Quarterly,3rd ser., 31 (1974): 167–188. Cornell, Saul. "The Changing Historical Fortunes of the Anti-Federalists." Northwestern University Law Review84 (1989): 39–73. ——. The Other Founders: Anti-Federalists and the Dissenting Tradition in America...
People also ask
What did anti-federalists believe?
Why did the Anti-Federalists ratify the Constitution?
How did the Federalists respond to the Anti-Federalists?
Why did anti-federalists oppose the Constitution?
Even though they ultimately lost the argument, and the Constitution was ratified, the Anti-Federalists made an important contribution by stressing the Constitution’s major deficit: it lacked a Bill of Rights to protect the people. Interestingly, the Bill of Rights is said to have been fathered by two men—one Federalist and one Anti-Federalist.
This lesson focuses on the chief objections of the Anti-federalists, especially The Federal Farmer (Richard Henry Lee), Centinel, and Brutus, regarding the extended republic. Students become familiar with the larger issues surrounding this debate, including the nature of the American Union, the difficulties of uniting such a vast territory with a diverse multitude of regional interests, and ...
Sep 27, 2017 · While each of the Anti-Federalists had their own view for what a new constitution for the United States should look like, they generally agreed on a few things. First, they believed that the new Constitution consolidated too much power in the hands of Congress, at the expense of states.
The stated purpose of the Philadelphia Convention in 1787 was to amend the Articles of Confederation. Very quickly, however, the attendees decided to create a new framework for a national government. That framework became the United States Constitution, and the Philadelphia convention became known as the Constitutional Convention of 1787.
THE RATIFICATION CAMPAIGN. On the question of ratification, citizens quickly separated into two groups: Federalists and Anti-Federalists. The Federalists supported it. They tended to be among the elite members of society—wealthy and well-educated landowners, businessmen, and former military commanders who believed a strong government would be better for both national defense and economic growth.
