Both allow freedom of religion and promote due process of the law, giving a person accused of a crime a jury of one’s peers if there is a reliable witness. They also say that justice cannot be delayed or refused. These rights are the rights that lay out the basics for our democratic system of government. Another reason why I am convinced that the Constitution was greatly influenced by the Magna Carta is the conditions on which it was written in. In both instances, the authors of these documents were very unhappy with the current King of England, and the writers of the Constitution were scholars.
Professor of history Gordon S. Wood views the struggle for a new constitution in 1787-1788 as a social conflict between upper-class Federalists who desired a stronger central government and the “humbler” Anti-Federalists who controlled the state assemblies. He says that the writers and supporters of the Constitution were Federalists and they believed that the Constitution was a fulfillment. Which basically means, that those Federalists didn’t see anything wrong with the Constitution. Antifederalists said the Constitution was a denial of the principles of 1776. They were saying that the Constitution was didn’t honor the liberty nor the self-government.
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.
This quote by Ted Yoho asserts the importance of the United States Constitution in establishing our beliefs. Even though this document made a great impact on our nation at the time of its writing, the path to ratification was not straight forward. In the summer of 1787, debate was waged in the newspapers, articles, and state conventions regarding the division of power among groups. The Federalists favored a strong national government and therefore, supported the Constitution. The opponents, however, named themselves the Anti-Federalists, and they argued that the new plan handed too much power to the central government.
Hamilton and Jefferson’s plans differed opinionated, economically, and politically. Hamilton and his federalist standpoint were based on a strong central government, Strong national bank and an alliance with Britain. Jefferson however could be considered opposite. The anti-federalists opposed a strong central government and instead focused on a state government. They also opposed a national bank nervous it would give too much power to t he central government.
Federalists vs Anti-Federalists Political, economic and government views. After the American Revolutionary War, the founding fathers had to build a government virtually from scratch, they drew up the Articles of Confederation in 1781 as the first national law. But this was considered weak because it placed too much power in the hands of individual states without establishing an effective national government. The founders wanted a republican form of government where voters would elect officials to represent them. Many, like George Washington, were Federalists.
I believe the Constitution did a better job of protecting liberties, specifically in the areas of the federal court system, representation of the people, and the levy of taxes. Alexander Hamilton, statesman and economist, proclaimed "Laws are a dead letter without courts to expound and define their true meaning and operation”. The Articles of Confederation which gave rise to the Confederation government that took effect in March 1781, did not give the national government any means to enforce the federal laws. The states could, and often did, choose to interpret or enforce federal laws in any manner they saw fit. This led to disputes amongst the states that could not be readily settled, as it relied on each state’s court system which invariably chose to discount the ruling of the other states.
He though people could make their own good smart decisions. Jefferson was an anti-federalist, being that he started the republicans and was against the federalist, which Hamilton was. The constitution was used by Jefferson a lot because he wanted to limit the power of the central government and he wanted the power to be based around the legislative branch. Jefferson not just wanted wealthy people to do things but everyone because he knew that people had good enough knowledge. To conclude Jefferson did not want a strong central government.
The mistake that Madison made was going to war with Great Britain. They were worried because they believed that Americas “peace, prosperity and happiness… are in Great jeopardy… the general government have determined to make war on Great Britain” (I). There are many reasons that he should have not gone to war with Britain such as there is not enough troops to fight a good battle, this will only hurt our economy and bring us more into debt, and since we are always fighting Britain about something was this a real reason for a war? The first reason Madison should not have gone to war with Great Britain is this. There are not enough troops in America to successfully produce a war.
He deemed paying a poll tax, which was the law, was unjust; therefore, Thoreau questioned it and didn't pay the tax. He argued for resistance to civil government when he was against an unjust law. Martin Luther King Jr., like Thoreau, believed in bettering the government, but also improving the living conditions for African Americans. King was an active member of the civil rights movement in the 1960s. He was arrested more than once for resisting the government.