Anti-Federalists vs. Federalists

357 Words2 Pages
Anti-Federalists vs. Federalists For as long as over 200 years, the Constitution of the United States has served as the under structure for U.S. government. When created in 1787, the U.S. Constitution builds and explain the basic outlines of a national government that combine the states in an sufficient political union. But the creation of the Constitution were hours of debate and compromise, and even when it was completed, it left some delegates unhappy. After having the document approved by the delegates, it had to be ratified by the states. However states that did not ratify the Constitution would not be considered a part of the Union so people started to form two groups, the Anti-Federalists and Federalists. Both groups did not agree on certain things the way the country should have been governed. Many people at that time opposed the creation of a federal or national government that would have power over the states. Those people were called Anti-Federalists. They believed that each state should have a self governed, and independent. Anti-Federalists also argued that there was no bill of rights, and the Congress and executive branch held too much power. But mostly the lack of a bill of rights was the focus of the Anti-Federalist against ratifying the Constitution. But Federalists on the other hand favored the creation of a strong federal government that would more closely unite the states as one large, continental nation of a strong federal government that would more closely unite the states as one large, continental nation. The Federalists like the separation of powers into three independent branches protected the rights of the people. Each branch would represent a different aspect of the people, and because all three branches being equal, not one group can assume control over another. Federalists also said listing of rights can be a dangerous thing. If the

More about Anti-Federalists vs. Federalists

Open Document