Essay Sample on The Rise of Federalists & Anti-Federalists

Introduction

1787 to 1788 marked one of the most prolific periods in American history. These years marked a period in which the constitution was drafted, proposed, and ratified. The ratification of the law led to a fierce debate which led to the rise of two groups, the Federalists and the Anti-Federalists. Federalists are a group of Americans that welcomed the new constitution without questioning, while the Anti-Federalists are those that opposed its ratification. Their opposition to the acceptance of the law was inspired by the thoughts that it would give birth to a very powerful national government, which would otherwise pose a threat to people's liberty since the bill of Rights was absent. As a result, their opposition led to the First Amendment and the Bill of Rights. The Anti-Federalists are the true heirs to the American Revolution. This paper will discuss the role of the Anti-Federalists in the American Revolution which gave birth to one of the best constitutions and regulatory documents in history.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

One of the things Anti-Federalists hugely contested against is the excessive power of the national government. The Anti-Federalists comprised of shopkeepers, small scale farmers, labourers and landowners (Oldham, 2018). Their voices could not be heard owing to their weak position in society. They preferred a government that comprised of a stronger state government with a more ineffective central government. Moreover, they advocated for short-term office bearing for office bearers who are elected by the citizens (Killenbeck, 2017). They also highly regarded holding the office bearers accountable for their positions as well as having strong individual liberty. Since the ratification of the constitution would mean that the national government would have excessive power, the Anti-Federalists countered the campaigns by the Federalists by writing articles and delivering speeches (Oldham, 2018). The articles and speeches were all countering the moves to ratify the constitution.

According to Killenbeck (2017), the Anti-Federalist's speeches and articles contained six-strong opinions. First, they were campaigning against the excessive power of the national government at the expense of the state government. Secondly, they did not agree with having the president's monarchical powers. Thirdly, they feared for the federal court system. Fourth, they feared that congress might amass a lot of capabilities to itself under the new constitution. Fifth, they were concerned whether the republican government could operate in a country, large as the U.S. (Jorke, 2019). Lastly, they argued that the bill of rights was absent. Thus, individual liberties could easily be manipulated. They sought protection for individual liberties.

Anti-Federalist arguments countered the Federalist arguments, which revealed that the federal government could not hold all the power since the presence of the three branches of government gave room for separation of powers. Federalists believed that since every branch represented a different category of people, they were equal and none could take total control over people (Killenbeck, 2017; Jorke, 2019). These views sent ripples of these messages across the country. The opponents of the constitution rallied in all states across the country to counter the extensive power given to the federal government which would make it tyrannical. For instance, Patrick Henry, the author of "Give Me Liberty or Give Me Death," gave a speech in Virginia in which he called the proposed constitution, "A revolution as radical as that which separated us from Great Britain" (Faber & Ragan, 2019). In another anonymous article whose author called himself Brutus, the author was worried about what the lack of limitation would make the government accomplish. He says it would make "the state governments... dependent on the will of the general government for their existence" (Faber & Ragan, 2019). Interestingly, these letters and speeches signify their revolutionary approach to having a sound constitution in the U.S.

Anti-Federalists spearheaded campaigns for the country to adopt the Bill of Rights. The Bill of Rights comprises ten amendments made to the constitution to secure the American's privileges and fundamental rights. These rights include the right to speedy trials, the right to free speech, protection against cruel and harsh punishment, and the right to due process under the law (Faber, 2019. To ensure that the federal government does not have excess powers, the Bill of rights also reserves some skills to the people and the states (Faber, 2019. Although Anti-Federalists could not prevent the nation from adopting the new constitution, they played a significant role in the adoption of the Bill of Rights. At first, the Federalists opposed any move to have the Bill of Rights before the ratification of the constitution. They proposed to have constitutional amendments that would protect individual liberties (Faber, 2019). Despite the passing of the constitution, 12 amendments were introduced to the congress by James Madison in 1789, 10 of which were approved and are today known as the Bill of Rights (Faber & Ragan, 2019). For many Americans, the Bill of Rights plays a significant role and has become an integral part of the constitution. Supreme Court cases have seen the amendments quoted and referred to many times compared to the Articles (Gilbertson, 2018). The changes have recently been quoted and referenced to protect the Americans against unlawful surveillance by the government, protect the human rights activist's freedom of speech, and grant Miranda rights to the citizens following an arrest. Had the Anti-Federalists kept silent and taken their comfortable seats, the shape this country would have taken is much predictable.

Despite the compromise that led to the adoption of the new constitution, there were significant tensions that led to the formation of political parties and the split of the cabinet. The fiscal policy created a tense atmosphere that created division in the cabinet in1792 (Faber & Ragan, 2019). The Federalist Party was formed by the supporters of Alexander Hamilton and his aggressive policies. On the other hand, Thomas Jefferson's supporters formed the Jeffersonian Part which later became the Republican (Democratic-Republican) Party. This party was led by Jefferson and James Madison (Gilbertson, 2018).

The Alien and Sedition Acts sponsored by the Federalists were rejected following Jefferson's election in 1801. Jefferson's election marked the first time party politics came into existence in U.S. history. It also marked the beginning of time for the Democratic Party to dominate U.S. politics because of the nature of its politics and policies (Gilbertson, 2018). Most importantly, Jefferson's election marked the rejection of the Alien and Sedition Acts sponsored by the Federalists. These Acts placed much difficulty for foreigners and immigrants to get citizenship in the U.S. Moreover, and the Acts criminalized any criticisms against the government and its officials (Faber & Ragan, 2019). It also highlighted the significance of coalitions between political parties.

Federalists and Anti-Federalists influenced the American government in many ways. The discussions, campaigns, and speeches that followed the ratification of the constitution brought sobriety among Americans. It is these arguments that put the government on toes to adopt the bill of rights that has been an essential part of the constitution to the American people. People enjoy the freedom of speech, immigrants can get American citizenship, and people are protected against police brutality by the aftermath of the Federalist vs. Anti-Federalist debates (Gilbertson, 2018). Besides, it gave birth to party politics which has shaped the political landscape in America.

Conclusion

In conclusion, there is no doubt that Anti-Federalists are the true heirs to the American Revolution. Although they lost their bid to counter the adoption of the constitution, they succeeded in pushing for the approval of the Bill of Rights which has been a helpful tool in the U.S. constitution. Besides, Anti-Federals brought party politics in the U.S. and have ever since brought sober political discussions based on policy and agenda. The Bill of rights has been an essential tool in protecting citizens against unlawful government surveillance, brutality and harassment by the police, given them the right to speedy trials, and finally, gave them freedom of speech. Without the Anti-Federalists, the shape America could have taken a matter to be discussed as it would have unleashed a monarchial and brutal government in place that does not value humanity and the dignity of its citizens.

References

Faber, M. J. (2019). An Anti-Federalist Constitution: The Development of Dissent in the Ratification Debates. University Press of Kansas.

Faber, M. J., & Ragan, R. (2019). Organized Opposition: The Anti-Federalist Political Network. In Public Choice Analyses of American Economic History (pp. 51-71). Springer, Cham.

Gilbertson, N. (2018). Return of the Skeptics: The Growing Role of the Anti-Federalists in Modern Constitutional Jurisprudence. Geo. JL & Pub. Pol'y, 16, 255.

Killenbeck, M. R. (2017). Crossroads for Liberty: Recovering the Anti-Federalist Values of America's First Constitution.

Jorke, D. (2019, August). The Democratic Federalism of the Anti-Federalists. In Theories of Modern Federalism (pp. 119-136). Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft mbH & Co. KG.

Oldham, A. S. (2018). The Anti-Federalists: Past as Prologue. NYUJL & Liberty, 12, 451.