They were saying that the Constitution was didn’t honor the liberty nor the self-government. Wood believes that the Federalists acted more creatively than any other generation in America history. He also believes that the Federalists of the 1790s feared the people, while the earlier Federalists didn’t and knew
The stark diffrences between the two parties lead the the demise of the Federalist Parties and the rise of the Democratic Republicans. The Federalist and the Democratic Republicans have many different views on how they believe the government should be and how it should be set up. The federalists lead by Alexander Hamilton believed that the United States should create the first national bank, to help fund the nations debt from the war and to establish a states government and not a central government , but the Democratic Republicans believed it was against the constitution to establish a national bank, the Democratic Republicans also believed that a strong central government should be established instead of a states government, and with this one currency instead of one for every state. The Federalists also believed that a protective Tariff should be put in place to shield infant industries, the Federalist also believed in commercial trade throughout the sea ports to other countries. The Democratic Republicans on the other hand believed that no special tariff should be put on the manufacturers, and didn't believe in commercial trade they believed in agriculture.
Nick Bennett AP US “Factions” DBQ After the American Revolution America struggled in ideas, compensation in debt, and compromising of ideas. The differences that many expressed made the division of government into two political parties inevitable. President George Washington warned that creating political parties would divide the American people apart. Despite his warning, two political parties arose from the different opinions expressed throughout politics. Hamilton and Jefferson’s plans differed opinionated, economically, and politically.
The Articles of Confederation were created as a new central government form after the American Revolution. The Articles still consisted of problems, specifically financial ones. Hamilton proposed a plan that would put U.S. finances on a stable foundation. He planned to lower national debt and strengthen the national credit because he believed that "a national debt was a national blessing". However, some people, such as Jefferson and small farmers opposed his ideas, because they believed in states' rights and a strict interpretation of the constitution, which led to the split of two different political parties.
Jefferson, however, argued that since the Constitution didn't state that it would allow a National Bank, it shouldn't be created. This is one example of how Hamilton and Jefferson felt that something should be changed, however, show differences in their opinions as to how to fix the problem. Another strong difference Hamilton and Jefferson have is their view on form of government. Alexander Hamilton is a strong Federalist, in which believed in strong government, similar to today's Democrats, while Thomas Jefferson was a strong Anti-Federalist, meaning he was against big government, which is like today's Republicans. This, again, indicates another example of how these two are so similar in views of things to change in government, however, have different visions on how to improve those things.
Hamilton was an ardent believer that the states were incapable of uniting the people politically and economically. He feared the interests of the states would lead to chaos due to “an excess of the spirit of liberty, which has made the particular states show a jealousy of all power not in their own hands” (Morse, 1890). Hamilton was leery of state power because of how ineffective the Articles of Confederation were in promoting a national identity capable of defending the homeland and creating the basic foundation for economic development. Unlike many of his colleagues, Hamilton did not grow up a child of privilege and carried with him the stigma of being a bastard because his mother was previously married and his biological father abandoned the family. He grew up on the small Caribbean island of Nevis that “generated more wealth for Britain than all of her North American colonies combined” (Chernow, 2004).
Both classes had disagreements with the Articles of Confederation. Federalists say that the articles were weak and ineffective because the state governments was too weak to apply laws and ordered for a national government instead. We Anti-federalists however believed that the Articles of Confederation was a good plan and that there should not be a government more powerful than the state governments. Believing that state governments should have more power compared to the national government was one of the big reasons why the anti-federalists supported the Articles of Confederation. How about the U.S constitution, what factors were held to point out?
The Watergate Scandal In the Federalist Papers #51, President James Madison argues that separations of power are necessary because “men are not angels”. This separation between the Executive, Legislative, and Judicial branches ensures that no one branch becomes too powerful, but with this separation ultimately problems are bound to occur. Over the history of the United States, many conflicts have arisen between the various branches over conflicting interests, with a notable conflict between the legislative and executive branches being the Watergate Scandal. This conflict, which took place during the Richard Nixon administration, resulted in the first resignation of a United States president in history. The Watergate was an American political scandal which occurred when Richard Nixon, the 37th President of the United States, was running for reelection against his democratic rival, George Stanley McGovern.
Major differences in political culture included the lack of a strong aristocratic class in America, the growing diversity and factional conflicts in different regions of the colonies, and the American view that members of their representative assemblies had the right to make changes in local constitutions. Americans had a long record of disobeying and rejecting acts of parliament. They thought the British discarded this common heritage of liberty that kept the empire together and felt there was a conspiracy to destroy it on both sides of the coin. Before the seven years war, the colonists had set up their own political arena though they were similar to England. When the war was over that is when the issue of taxation without representation started.
Anti-Federalist felt that the Constitution gave more power to central government and less to the states. They also argued that the constitution would become too weak because the central government wouldn’t be able to run all states as a result of being too distant and removed from interest of common citizens and farmers. They feared that the Federalists' new government would be too similar to the harsh regimes of Europe which held great power and thus repressed the people. Anti-Feds were extremely scared of a strong central government and the fact that under the new Constitution, the federal government was more powerful than individual states. Another argument was that the states could not print money