Federalists vs Anti-Federalists

In the same sense that some democratic countries have the administration and opposition, a giant power such as the U.S. also has the existence of the federalists and anti-federalists most especially during the time of the crafting of their national Constitution. These two factions clash both in ideologies and beliefs.

The basic distinction between their positions is that the federalists believe in a stronger power concentrated at the central or federal government. This government is pictured as having great power and exercises control over almost all things within the country. This group fully supported the ratification of the American Constitution.

By contrast, those that are against the concept of central, federal governance were named anti-federalists. They believe that each of the many states of the U.S. should be strong enough because they are a bit suspicious about concentrating all the power into one, central government. So they were in many ways against the ratification of the U.S. Constitution. One of the reasons for the doubt is that the Constitution was mostly crafted by the aristocrats. Thus, it is poised to leave the common people and the poor class out of the scene, they said. Anti-federalists also feared that these aristocrats may later on control the lower class if their proposed Constitution is ratified.

In addition, one of the main objections of the anti-federalists back then was the lack of a Bill that would grant rights to the public in relation to freedom of speech and religion. The good thing, though, is that the federalists later agreed with the opposition with respect to their proposal for the inclusion of a certain Bill of Rights. Nevertheless, they still believed that the Articles of Confederation were somewhat ineffective unlike how the other party believes otherwise.

Some of the other most salient positions that the federalists reiterated were the clear separation of the State and the Church and ratifying the Constitution using any means possible, even if the Articles of Confederation obliged the approval of unanimous consent. Also, they highlighted the need for a central government to control any state that does not support the main federation. To this, the anti-federalists claim that the existence of so much power in a central government only means threatening the autonomous power of these minor states.

Summary:

1.The anti-federalists have suspicions in solely placing utmost power in a central, federal government.
2.The federalists believe that it is best for the country to gather most of the authoritative and political power in one central government.
3.The anti-federalists were the first to raise the concern for the lack of a set of Bill of Rights that would delineate the people’s right to freedom of speech and religion.
4.The anti-federalists have high regard or respect for the Articles of Confederation unlike the federalists.

Sharing is caring!