ANTI-FEDERALIST VS FEDERALIST
The Federalist was a political party formed by Alexander Hamilton (the treasury secretary) during the reign of George Washington to promote their political views. It existed between 1792 and 1824 and was also used to describe the new constitution supporters. He had a vision of that composed of a strong economy and national government. He came up with a complicated multi-faceted program to accomplish that objective and concurrently handle the debt problem for most of the nations. Hamilton developed a system of finance for international and national stability that comprised of infrastructure laying and paying off debts of the state for further development of the economy.
While the Republicans (Anti-Federalists)were an American group of people who opposed the central government in the US, they strongly opposed the new constitution claiming that it would lead to a consolidated government, which in return may cause disaster. This was driven by state secretary James Madison and Thomas Jefferson (Routledge, 2017). In comparison to the Federalists, the Anti-Federalists agreed with the construction of strict constitution interpretation and rejected many of Hamilton’s proposals, particularly the national bank as unconstitutional. The party also supported the rights of the state as a measure in opposition to a tyrannical centralized government that they were afraid of the Federal government could turn to.
Alexander Hamilton’s Federalists, and Thomas Jefferson and his Republicans (Anti-Federalists) had the following philosophical similarities and differences:
Similarities on social philosophies
They both had a similar personality and could stand to defend their honor at all costs.
They both believed in themselves and always based their actions on principles.
Similarities on economic philosophies
Both of them upheld the central bank creation and excise law’s passage policies.
Both of them believed that global commercial growth would enhance self-reliance and ensure American economic independence.. Don't use plagiarised sources.Get your custom essay just from $11/page
Similarities on political philosophies
They both believed in a national government with strong fiscal backgrounds.
Both of them were against the England rule and wanted to be free from it.
Differences in social philosophies:
The Anti-Federalists believed in exercising democracy and giving all individuals a voice, while the Federalists believed that only literate people should be allowed to decide.
The Federalists insisted on keeping separate issues about the church from the state, while the Anti-Federalists were against omitting any of the church references (American Journal of Legal History 56, no. 1 (2016): 21-28).
The Republican party believed that a stable national government could deny people of their liberties, while the Federalists believed that this was the best method to offer services.
The Federalists felt like the new constitution was adequate and did not require a bill of rights, while the Anti-Federalists thought it was necessary to ensure justice to the average American citizens.
Differences in economic philosophies
The Federalists felt that most people and different monetary policies caused financial struggles and state weakness. In contrast, the Anti-Federalists felt that nations should be left to manage their economy and use their revenue as free agents.
The Federalists reinforced a National Bank to help them regulate money policy, while the Anti-Federalists opposed it.
Many Federalist representatives were productive while the Anti-Federalists promoted the welfares of farm owners and shopkeepers.
Differences on political philosophies:
Hamilton’s Federalists were in support of the development of a federal régime and constitutional ratification while Jefferson and his Anti-Federalists opposed it.
The Anti-Federalist group stood to support the inclusion of Jefferson’s Bill of rights while the Federalists were against it (NYUJL & Liberty 12 (2018): 451).
In the year 1787, political factions emerged due to the following reasons:
In the year 1787, several political factions emerged. The first faction to be formed was the Federalist led by Alexander and other leaders.
The leading cause of political faction emergence was the convention of the constitution. At this time, a significant number of delegates wanted a stable state government like the case in Britain. Led by their secretary Alexander Hamilton, their group was called Federalists.
Ideological differences amongst constitution writers were also the cause for party formation.
Some individuals wanted to gain political control and decided to do so through specific parties.
Different groups of individuals decided to endorse different statutory agendas. This would be best done through factions.
Political parties were also caused by their disagreements on strong federalism and states’ rights.
The two movements had different opinions on how they wanted to be ruled. This led to the emergence of political factions.
The two parties had different views on each other as below:
The anti-Federalists felt that the Federalists group only wanted to embrace a government with too much power leaving local governments weak.
They also felt that Federalists wanted to deprive them of their fundamental rights considering that the constitution did not comprise a bill of rights (University Press of Kansas, 2019).
The Anti-Federalists were against the expansion of the national rule
The Federalists believed that by embracing federal courts, citizens would be safe from government exploitation.
The Ant-Federalists feared that a centralized government would only be dominated by the rich, leaving the average citizens un at stake.
The anti-Federalists believed that the centralized government would be far from ordinary citizens, and this will not be able to offer justice.
The two factions drew their support from the following:
Federalist party; Along with James Madison and Alexander Hamilton, The Federalist party got their support from the New England Congregations and the Episcopes.
Anti-Federalists; Besides George Mason of Virginia, the Anti-Federalist got more support from American citizens, especially leading yeomen farmers from rural America and other marginal denominations.
Their view on slavery
According to the Federalist’s paper penned by James Madison, slaves were perceived to be properties at the same time people who require representation.
While for the Anti-Federalist party, they were against slavery provisions in the constitution.
Slavery remained one of the issues that caused debate division on constitutional ratification.
Was this the precursor to the debate over slavery in the Antebellum period?
History highlights that during the invention of cotton in the year 1793, the value of slavery was high. The expansion for America’s westward in the 19th century, together with the Northern anti-slavery movement, incited a slavery debate. This is one of the factors that triggered the American Civil War, which lasted between 1861 and 1865.
It is also proved that during the American revolution time, slavery institution was firmly established in the American colonies.
It is, therefore, my view that this was not the predecessor of the slavery debate, which led to the American Civil war.
Bibliography
Bradford, Melvin Eustace. A better guide than reason: Federalists and anti-federalists. Routledge, 2017.
Cornell, Saul. “Constitutional Meaning and Semantic Instability: Federalists and Anti-Federalists on the Nature of Constitutional Language.” American Journal of Legal History 56, no. 1 (2016): 21-28.
Oldham, Andrew S. “The Anti-Federalists: Past as Prologue.” NYUJL & Liberty 12 (2018): 451.
Faber, Michael J. An Anti-Federalist Constitution: The Development of Dissent in the Ratification Debates. University Press of Kansas, 2019.