Federalists vs. Anti-Federalists :: essays research papers

Federalists vs. Anti-Federalists From 1787-1790 the development of the American Constitution was a battle between two opposing political philosophies. America’s best political minds gathered in Philadelphia and other cities in the Northeast in order to find common ground in a governmental structure. The Federalists and the Anti-Federalists had both some political thoughts that agreed as well as some political thoughts that disagreed. However, both parties would compromise and ultimately come together. The Federalist Party, led by James Madison, was in favor of the newly formed 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 consideration for the Federalist Constitution would be in regards to the safety of each individual state. They believed that each state should find an inducement to make some sacrifices for the sake of the general 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 national government. They were afraid that the power of the states would be lost and that the people would lose their individual rights because a few individuals would take over. They proposed a â€Å"Bill of Rights†, to make sure the citizens were protected by the law. They believed that no Bill of Rights would be equal to no check on our government for the people.