Federalist vs Anti-Federalist

435 Words2 Pages
During the creation of Constitution, each state had to approve it. During this time there were people who supported it, Federalist and who did not, Anti-Federalists. I am siding with Anti-Federalist since they were right in thinking they did not want to give all their power away to the national government. If you lived in a state separate from where government state is established, how would you get your problems in your state solved if you had a government who was telling you what to do but not really knowing what problems you had in your state. If I lived back in that time, and having just finished the war with Britain where we finally got our independence, I would remind people all the issues we had. Britain was trying to tell us what we needed to do and how we needed to do things without really knowing what our problems were here. How is this new Constitution which gives a lot of power to the national government different from having Britain tell us what we needed to do. I would think if I lived back then I would say we are going from one wrong to another and I would oppose the Constitution. The Anti-Federalists did not want to ratify the Constitution. Basically, they said; • It gave too much power to the national government and not enough to the state governments. • There was no bill of rights. • The national government could maintain an army in even when there is no war • Congress would have too much power. • The executive branch held too much power. All these are valid points and I would say that they were right in resisting to sign the Constitution, specially with no limits on the rights the government would have over states. They wanted to make sure where the states would still have power over some of their issues. They had just faced having to take care of soldiers, being prosecuted without trials, not being able to talk
Open Document