Federalists vs. Anti-Federalists :: essays research papers

Federalists vs. Anti-Federalists From 1787-1790 the development of the American penning was a battle between two opposing political philosophies. Americas best political minds gathered in Philadelphia and other cities in the north-east in order to find common ground in a governmental structure. The Federalists and the Anti-Federalists had both some political suppositions that agreed as comfortably as some political thoughts that disagreed. However, both parties would compromise and ultimately deduct together. The Federalist Party, led by James Madison, was in favor of the newly organize Constitution. One of the main objects of the federal constitution is to secure the union and in addition include any other states that would arise as a part of the union. The federal constitution would also set its aim on improving the infrastructure of the union. This would include improvements on roads, accommodations for travelers, and interior navigation. Another shape for the Federalist C onstitution would be in regards to the safety of apiece individual state. They believed that each state should find an inducement to mystify some sacrifices for the sake of the ecumenic protection. The Anti-Federalist Party, led by Patrick Henry, objected to the constitution. They objected to it for a few basic reasons. Mostly the Anti-Federalists thought that the Constitution created too strong a central government. They felt that the Constitution did not create a Federal government, but a single(a) national government. They were afraid that the power of the states would be lost and that the people would miss their individual rights because a few individuals would take over. They proposed a Bill of Rights, to make sure the citizens were protected by the law. They believed that no Bill of Rights would be equalize to no check on our government for the people.