Those who supported the Constitution and a stronger national republic were known as Federalists. Those who opposed the ratification of the Constitution in favor of small localized government were known as Anti-Federalists.

What were views of the Anti-Federalists?

Many Anti-Federalists preferred a weak central government because they equated a strong government with British tyranny. Others wanted to encourage democracy and feared a strong government that would be dominated by the wealthy. They felt that the states were giving up too much power to the new federal government.

What did the federalist and anti federalist disagree on?

Federalists believed that a stronger national government would improve relationships between states and help create, as the Constitution stated, a “more perfect union.” Anti-Federalists, on the other hand, worried that a federal government with more power would be prone to tyranny.

What were the main arguments between the federalists and Anti-Federalists?

The Anti-Federalists feared the Constitution would create a central government that would act like a monarchy with little protection for civil liberties. Anti-Federalists favored power for state governments where public debate and citizen awareness had opportunities to influence and direct state and national policies.

What did the Federalists believe in?

They favored weaker state governments, a strong centralized government, the indirect election of government officials, longer term limits for officeholders, and representative, rather than direct, democracy.

What describes the main difference between the Federalists and the Anti-Federalists?

What was the main difference between the Federalists and Antifederalists? The Federalists supported the Constitution and wanted a stronger national government. The Antifederalists opposed the Constitution because they wanted more power to remain with the states.

What were the 3 main arguments of the Anti-Federalists against the Constitution?

Anti-Federalists were concerned about excessive power of national government

  • the excessive power of the national government at the expense of the state government;
  • the disguised monarchic powers of the president;
  • apprehensions about a federal court system;

Who has the better argument Federalists or Anti-Federalists?

As in any debate there were two sides, the Federalists who supported ratification and the Anti-Federalists who did not. We now know that the Federalists prevailed, and the U.S. Constitution was ratified in 1788, and went into effect in 1789. Read about their arguments below.

Did Anti-Federalists want a bill of rights?

Antifederalists argued that a bill of rights was necessary because, the supremacy clause in combination with the necessary and proper and general welfare clauses would allow implied powers that could endanger rights. Federalists rejected the proposition that a bill of rights was needed.

What was the main objection of the Anti-Federalists?

The Anti-Federalists opposed the ratification of the 1787 U.S. Constitution because they feared that the new national government would be too powerful and thus threaten individual liberties, given the absence of a bill of rights.

When was the federalist vs anti federalist?

In early August 1787, the Constitutional Convention’s Committee of Detail had just presented its preliminary draft of the Constitution to the rest of the delegates, and the Federalists and the Anti-Federalists were beginning to parse some of the biggest foundational debates over what American government should look
Aug 8, 2019

What were the Anti-Federalists major arguments against the Constitution?

The Anti-Federalists believe that the Constitution gives the federal government too much power and the states with not enough power. The Federalists believe that the a strong central government is necessary, but the Constitution will protect the state governments.

Did the Anti-Federalists support slavery?

Northern Anti-Federalists criticized the three-fifths compromise and the temporary continuation of the slave trade. Southern Anti-Federalists like Patrick Henry warned their constituents that a more potent national government with a northern majority might abolish slavery altogether.

Did Anti-Federalists want a bill of rights?

Antifederalists argued that a bill of rights was necessary because, the supremacy clause in combination with the necessary and proper and general welfare clauses would allow implied powers that could endanger rights. Federalists rejected the proposition that a bill of rights was needed.

Why did the Anti-Federalists want a bill of rights?

Anti-Federalists wanted to protect against a powerful central government taking away the freedoms they had fought a revolution to preserve. They believed a bill of rights needed to be added to the Constitution so that citizens would be protected against the government infringing upon rights.