As the table and map above reveal, acceptance of the Constitution was not universal. Many opposed its ratification and formed strong political opposition to its passage.
Waging battles throughout the states these Anti-Federalists saw tyranny in the Constitution. In their eyes the Constitution represented a betrayal of the revolutionary principles the nation had declared 11 years before and just finished fighting for a mere four years prior.
The Federalists strongly disagreed with the Anti-Federalist interpretation of the Constitution. In their mind this new document and the government it sought to create was a reasonable response to the uncertainty plaguing the nation.
As the two sides waged a tireless battle throughout the states contrasting visions of the proper role of government emerged. Consider this development as you respond to the prompt.
Who was right in the ratification battles? As you answer this question make sure to consider and detail both sides of the debate. Make sure you explain the Anti-Federalist opposition and the Federalist responses to the criticisms cast against the Constitution.
The Federalists won in the battle for ratification. The Anti-federalists debated that the Constitution would bring tyranny to America but instead of bring tyranny it brought democracy that was weak at first but slowly grew stronger. The Anti-federalists also said that the matter of rights was not anywhere in the Constitution. So in response the Federalists created the Bill of Right which contained 12 rights one of them was not ratified and the other took until fairly recently to pass.
ReplyDeleteIn my opinion the anti-federalist were more right. The federalists wanted a weak state government, long office terms, indirect election of officials, and government led by the elites. The Ant-Federalist wanted a strong state government, short office terms, rule by the common man, direct election of officials, and wanted protections for individual rights. The anti-federalist wanted to make sure the citizens had protected rights and liberties, such as a free country should have, I also agree more with them when it comes to direct election, they wanted to be as democratic as possible. Their fears of limited rights are what led up to the bill of rights. The federalists promised to add amendments to protect individual liberties. In the end with some cooperation the federalists won the battle for a constitution.
ReplyDeleteThe federalist was right in the ratification battles. The federalist created a document that was a response to the uncertainty of the nation. The anti-federalist thought the constitution was abusing the power of the government.
ReplyDeleteThe federalists were right in the ratification battles. The federalists promised to add amendments to the Constitution that would protect individual liberties because they feared the statements that personal freedoms would be restricted were persuasive. Anti-Federalists believed that the Constitution would weaken the power of the states and many state leaders feared it would diminish their power. The federalist did not have the majority so they specified that the Constitution could be ratified by special conventions in each state, not by state legislators.
ReplyDeleteThe anti-federalists believed the new government was an enemy of freedom, it would erode fundamental liberties. They believed in strong state governments, direct election of officials, shorter terms, rule by common man, and protection of individual liberties. The Federalists believed in weaker state governments with a strong national government, indirect election of officials, longer terms, and government by the elite. The federalists created the Bill of Rights in response to the worries that the Constitution would not protect individual rights.
The Federalists won the ratification battles. The anti-Federalists believed that the Constitution was going to bring tyranny to the states. They believed that it made the federal government too powerful and did not protect people’s rights and properties. Anti-Federalists wanted to keep state governments powerful and wanted to make sure the common man had an equal opportunity. The Federalists knew that by creating a republican democracy, it would give the common man a say in the government but gave the more educated elected officials the final say. They wanted a stronger federal government because without one, the states were not unified and were like independent colonies. To make the anti-Federalists happy they created the Bill of Rights in the beginning to give the state governments power, to protect the people, and to prevent the national government from becoming too powerful.
ReplyDeleteI think that the federalists were right in this debate because the system of checks and balances prevented from any one branch from becoming too strong, and thus preventing tyranny. But I can see why the anti-federalists opposed this form of government because it would be run by only a few, which may later lead to tyranny. The federalist responded to the anti federalists fear by creating separation of powers and the system of checks and balances. Also the Anti-federalists felt as though the Constitution cut down on their fundamental rights. The federalists responded to this by later adding the Bill of Rights to the Constitution.
ReplyDeleteThe federalists and anti-federalists had contrasting ideas about the Constitution. The federalists supported the Constitution and a strong national government. The Federalist Papers were written by James Madison, John Jay, and Alexander Hamilton to defend the Constitution detail by detail. The federalists wanted a strong central national government that had more power than the individual state governments. They liked that the government would be run by the elite that were indirectly elected and served longer terms. They expected few violations of individual rights from the new government. The anti-federalists believed that the Constitution and a new government would take away the freedom that they had just fought for and received. They wanted the states to have strong governments and the national government to be weak. They wanted officials to be directly elected and to serve shorter terms. They also wanted rule by the common man and stronger protections for individual liberties. I think that the federalist were right because the Constitution has been around for a long time and it has been the supreme law of the land for over 200 years.
ReplyDeleteIn the battle between the federalist and anti-federalist over the constitution both sides had reasonable arguments.
ReplyDeleteThe Anti Federalist believed the constitution was an enemy and that it favored an elite class over the other citizens. Anti-Federalist also feared that there was only going to be a small amount of people in government and that many individual rights were not protected. Anti federalist also feared that state powers would be weakened (which they were).
The federalist promised to add several amendments to the constitution to protect individual rights. James Madison created 12 amendments to alleviate the anti-federalist’s fears. These amendments also known as the bill of rights protected individual freedoms and restrain government from taking these freedoms away.
I feel that the federalist were the winners in this debate because the constitution was passed with very few changes to governments structure and they only had to pass several amendment that protected individual rights.
I think that the anti-federalist were right. They argued that there were no states rights and individual rights protected. In saying this they were correct. The constitution said little about people’s rights and gave too much power to the national government. It was not much of a democracy. The federalist on the other hand supported the constitution because they thought that the separation of powers stated would protect the rights of the people and never gain control over the other branches. They also figured that since they can’t list all the rights in the constitution then they should not list them at all and let the government decide the rights of the people. The anti-federalist decided that they would not vote to ratify the constitution. In response the federalist decided to get the anti-federalist to ratify they would create the bill of rights in order to list some of the individual and states’ rights that were protected.
ReplyDeleteBefore it is decided who was right in the ratification battles -the Federalists or the Anti-Federalists- the research needs to show both sides of the argument. The differences of beliefs between the Federalists and the Anti- Federalists made up the Constitution.
ReplyDeleteThe Federalists believed in the function of a strong national government. They wanted the government to be stable and have the power in political issues and officials elected. That’s why the delegates at the Continental Congress created a system where the people did not have that much direct political effect. The people could only vote for representatives and no one else in a political office. This proves that the Federalists did not believe that the common person was intelligent enough to make wise political decisions. Federalists Hamilton, Jay and Madison wrote the Federalists Papers, which were used to convince the state of New York to ratify the Constitution. These papers explained the political standpoint that the Constitution contained, and how this would change the nation for the greater good.
The Anti-Federalists, on the other hand, believed that the power should mostly rest with the people. The Anti- Federalists did not want the Constitution ratified because they feared a strong national government, and they felt the document did not protect the rights of the people. These men wanted the people to run the government, not those like the elites who wrote the Constitution. For the Anti’s to be for the ratification, the delegates of the Continental Congress added in the Bill of Rights, which are the first ten amendments to the Constitution. These ten amendments protect people rights such as freedom of speech, press, the right to bear arms and the right to a speedy public trial.
Looking from both sides of the debate, the Federalists and the Anti- Federalists were both right. The ideas of both of these groups did create parts of the Constitution. The Madisonian Model was the structure of the government’s power, as the federalist James Madison came up with. If it wasn’t for the opposition of the Anti- Federalists, then maybe the Constitution would have never had the Bill of Rights.
The Federalist won the ratification battle. The Anti-Federalists thought that the Constitution would bring tyranny to the United States. The Anti-Federalists wanted a strong state government, direct election of officials, shorter terms, and rule by the common man. They thought that the Constitution would weaken the states’ power. The Federalists wanted a strong national government, indirect election of officials, longer terms, and government by the elite. The Anti-Federalists feared that with the Constitution, individual rights would not be guaranteed. To reassure them, the Bill of Rights was added after the Constitution was written.
ReplyDeleteThe Federalists won the ratification battles. The Anti-Federalists believed that the new government was an enemy of freedom. The Anti-Federalists had fears because the new government would be run by a few people and it would take away fundamental liberties. They feared that the Constitution would restrict personal freedoms and weaken the power of the states. Anti-Federalists wanted to keep state government powerful and wanted to make sure people had equal opportunity. To make the Anti-Federalists happy the Federalists created the Bill of Rights to protect individual liberties and to prevent the national government from becoming too powerful. The Federalists did not have the majority so they said that the Constitution could be ratified by special conventions in each state instead of state legislators. The Federalists believed in a weaker state government with a strong national government, indirect election of officials and longer terms.
ReplyDeleteThe Federalists clearly won the ratification battles for various reasons. The Federalists supported weaker state governments with a strong national government. Due to the controversy between the anti they created the Bill of Rights to provide the state government's power, and to provide protection for the people. These also prevented the federal government from growing too strong. The federalist did not have the majority, which led to them having to say the Constitution could be ratified by special conventions in each state, rather than by state legislators.
ReplyDeleteThe Anti-Federalists however, held the thought that the Constitution would bring tyranny within the states. They also held the belief that the Constitution would not hold protection against the people’s rights and properties, due to the Constitution neglecting written words describing the people’s rights, they were no where to be found in the written document. As well as providing the federal government with too much power, they favored keeping the state government's powerful. In conlcusion, they wanted to see the common man have an equal opportunity.
I say the anti-federalists were right because nowhere in the Constitution does it state that such and such rights are being protected, and many states wanted those written down in the constitution to at least be able to point to a law and say it is protected, they however were wary of a centralized government, fearing a strong government that could oppress the people.
ReplyDeleteThe federalists were in favor of a centralized government and did not think that the rights of the citizens should be written down because they were natural rights everyone had and knew about and that the government was set up to protect the rights of the people.
The federalist won in the battles of writing the constitution. The anti-federalists wanted a strong state government, not a strong national government, so they did not approve of the making of the constitution. The federalists had promised to make amendments to the constitution. They also had some background in government. Anti-federalists wanted to keep everyone unified and be ruled by the common man. The federalists did make The Bill of Rights in order to help protect individual rights. Although the Federalists did not have the majority of supporters, they did end up winning the battle in the end. They knew legislatures were skeptical of their idea, but we remain under the rule of the constitution still, today.
ReplyDeleteThe federalists were right in the battles of ratification. In the federalist minds’ they supported the constitution and they thought it was the right way to stop the uncertainty in the nation. The anti-federalists opposed and objected to this, they saw tyranny and that the constitution was representing betrayal, they believed the new government was an enemy of freedom. Anti-federalist believed and preferred that the national government should be weak and the state government should be strong, and the federalists believed the exact opposite that we should have a weak state government and a strong national government that is held by the elite instead of a common man as anti-federalists would prefer. The anti-federalists had many fears, not just that the government would be run by a few, but that the liberties that were fundamental to them, would be taken. Due to this fear the federalists promised that they would add amendments, which would protect their individual rights, to the constitution. The promise was kept and James Madison proposed twelve amendments, and which ten of them were ratified, becoming known as the Bill of Rights.
ReplyDeleteThe Federalists were right in the ratification battles with the Anti-Federalist. Though many were opposed to the new Constitution it was the right thing to do.
ReplyDeleteThe Anti-Federalists did not think the Constitution would give many individual rights, or it would take the ones they already had, given to them by the states, away. The Anti-Federalists felt if they gave the National government too much power they would take over and become a monarchy or dictatorship, so they preferred the National government to have less power than the states. Anti-Federalists did not see why the Federalists would want to create a new government.
The Federalists wanted to show the public and Anti-Federalists that the Constitution would be a better government than they had, so they wrote the Federalists Papers. In these papers they explained what the new Constitution would do for them and how it worked. The Federalists gave the National government more power than the states but with the separation of powers and checks and balance systems the National government can never become too powerful.
In the end the Constitution got ratified. The Anti-Federalists were still worried they would not have very many individual rights. In a compromise the Federalists said they would add the Bill of Rights, which states the citizens’ rights and freedoms.
The federalists were right in the ratification battles. They felt the constitution was a way to clear up all the issues people of our nation were uncertain about. They felt this document would help strengthen the nation by laying down the foundation for government. The anti-federalists who opposed this document felt that in strengthening the national government would set up a system that is subject to tyranny. There were people on both sides of this issue which created intense debates I’m sure, but ultimately the constitution was ratified so the federalists won in the end.
ReplyDeleteThe federalists were right in the ratification battles. Anti-Federalists believed that the Constitution would make the federal government too powerful and would take away person liberties, as well as property. Anti-Federalists wanted a strong national government, direct election of officials, short office terms, along with rule by the common man and protection of their individual rights. The Federalists wanted to create a republic democracy, knowing that the common man would be very much involved, but educated elected officials the final say. Federalists believed in a strong national government and a weaker state government, along with longer terms and government ruled by the elite. In response to the Anti-Federalists, the Bill of Rights was created to protect individual rights. Through all the disagreements, the Federalists won the battle of ratification, creating the Constitution we all know today.
ReplyDeleteThe federalists were right in the battle for ratification. The Anti-federalists thought that the constitution would take away there indvidual rights. However, the federalists promised to create the Bill of Rights to help protect the states individual rights. Also, Anti-federalists thought that the constitution would only bring tyranny to the states. The federalists made a republican democracy to help ensure the people had some say in the government. This is why the federalists are right in the ratification battle.
ReplyDeleteThe Federalists won the ratification battle that was occurring in the United States. The federalists believed in a stronger national government than state governments, but they did not believe the constitution need a Bill of Rights. The anti-federalists however did, feared that the constitution would give the government to much power and they wanted the state to have most of the power, and felt it necessary to protect individual rights. The Constitution was a class based document in the eyes of the anti-federalists. The federalists compromised with the anti-federalists in that there is a Bill of Rights in the constitution.
ReplyDeleteIn the ratification battles both sides were right. Each side had their own opinions and reasons for believing that the Constitution should be passed or should not passed. The federalists wanted it to be passed because they were for it they understand how it would work and they believed that it included every right that needed to be included while on the other hand the Anti-Federalists thought that the some rights were violated in this document. The Anti-Federalists thought that if the rights weren’t written down that they weren’t included into it. They said that without a Bill of Rights that it wouldn’t be right to the people. Later on the Federalists did pass a Bill of Rights that became known as amendments. In the end of the battle the Federalists won the battle and got the Constitution ratified.
ReplyDeleteThe Federalist won the ratification battle. The Anti-Federalists thought that the Constitution would bring tyranny to the United States. The Anti-Federalists wanted a strong state government, direct election of officials, shorter terms, and rule by the common man. They thought that the Constitution would weaken the states’ power. The Federalists wanted a strong national government, indirect election of officials, longer terms, and government by the elite. The Anti-Federalists feared that with the Constitution, individual rights would not be guaranteed. To reassure them, the Bill of Rights was added after the Constitution was written.
ReplyDeleteThe Federalist was right in adopting the Constitution. The Articles had no executive branch, no national courts and one house of Congress with little money to raise an army. Congress could not regulate commerce and the national government was limited under the Articles of Confederation. With the new Constitution, the Congress can have more rights granted. The Federalist promised to add an amendment protecting individual rights and to decentralize power.
ReplyDeleteThe Anti-Federalist thought nothing of their government but criticized a government they have never experienced. They believed that under the Constitution, too many rights are granted to the elites and that the states would be tyrannize. The Constitution’s goal was to make sure that the elites controlled public parties. They supported the stronger state government and had strengthened protections for individual liberties. Both the graphs showed that more delegates were in favor of throwing out some ideas of the Articles adopting the new Constitution.
The Federalists won the ratification battles. The Anti-Federalists believed that the new government was an enemy of freedom. The Anti-Federalists had fears because the new government would be run by a few people and it would take away fundamental liberties. They feared that the Constitution would restrict personal freedoms and weaken the power of the states. Anti-Federalists wanted to keep state government powerful and wanted to make sure people had equal opportunity. To make the Anti-Federalists happy the Federalists created the Bill of Rights to protect individual liberties and to prevent the national government from becoming too powerful. The Federalists did not have the majority so they said that the Constitution could be ratified by special conventions in each state instead of state legislators. The Federalists believed in a weaker state government with a strong national government, indirect election of officials and longer terms.
ReplyDeleteThe Federalists were correct in the ratification debates. While the Anti-Federalists feared a strong national government, the Federalists realized that a strong national government was necessary for an effective government. Without the powers given to the national government by the Federalists, the national government could not collect enough money to run. The Anti-Federalists also feared tyranny from the new proposed form of government. However, the Federalists instilled separation of powers and checks and balances throughout the Constitution so no single party or group could gain absolute control. Also, the Federalists established a representative democracy that started out giving the people little power in choosing government officials, but over time, grew strong and gave the people much more say in the government. The Anti-Federalists were right on one issue, however. The Constitution never outlined the people’s rights. This dispute was settled though when the Bill of Rights was added to the Constitution.
ReplyDeleteUltimately, the Federalists were right in the ratification battles. This is because a constitution was created, against the wishes of the Anti-Federalists. This does not mean they didn’t have a valid argument that opposed the creation of a constitution. Whilst they did not support the constitution, this does not make them unpatriotic. They were just untrusting of a new government because they had fought so hard to obtain their freedom from the United Kingdom. They also supported a weak national government and a strong state government because they wanted their individual rights and liberties to be preserved. The Federalists are the exact opposites of this, favoring a strong national government and a weak state government. They supported a creation of a constitution because they sought political and economical order. Anti-Federalists just wanted to make sure they kept their freedoms while Federalists wanted a government that could and take care of the country properly. A national government would be more effective than individual state governments. The Bill of Rights brought ease to the mind of Anti-Federalists, ensuring them freedoms and liberties.
ReplyDeleteThe federalist were right in the ratification battles because they got the constitution ratified. The anti federalist thought that the constitution did not protect people’s rights and property. They thought it would bring tyranny to the states. They though that the national government was to strong and it would destroy the states powers. The anti federalist wanted right that made everyone equal, and have equal opportunities.
ReplyDeleteThe federalist wanted to create a republican democracy, so everyone could have a say in government by voting (indirect elections). The federalist wanted a strong national government to hold the country together. There responses to the criticisms cast against the constitution is to promise to make amendments to protect individual rights , give some power to the state government. These amendment became to be known as the bill of rights.
The Federalist won the ratification battles. The Federalists supported the constitution and wanted to create a republican democracy, and knew it would give the common man a say in the government but gave the more educated the final decision. Also they believed that separation of power and a system of checks and balances would protect Americans from tyranny of a centralized authority. The Anti- federalists believed that the constitution lacked protection of individual rights. Also they wanted to keep state governments powerful and wanted to make sure the common man had an equal opportunity.
ReplyDeleteThe Federalists were right in the ratification battles. They wanted a strong national government that would be able to function efficiently while still giving people a say in their government. The Anti-Federalists feared that a strong national government would bring tyranny to the country. In response to the criticism of the Constitution, the Federalists added the Bill of Rights to the Constitution and made the country a democratic republic. This led to a compromise between the Federalists and the Anti-Federalists, which led to the ratification of the Constitution.
ReplyDeleteThe Federalists were right in the ratification battles. The Federalists supported a strong national government and weaker state governments. They believed in few violations of individual liberties.The Anti-Federalists were localists who were large landowners, and generally wealthy individuals who supported strong state governments and a weaker national government. The Anti-Federalists feared that the Constitution would bring tyranny to the states, fearing it made the national government too powerful and it did not look after people’s individual rights. The Federalists wanted wanted a strong national government to keep the country a union, not independent states. The Federalists and Anti-Federalists discussed the Constitution and add decided it would be best to add the Bill of Rights, found in the beginning of the Constitution. (Amendments 1-10).
ReplyDeleteThe Federalists were right in their way of thinking. Under the Articles of Confederation, the U.S. had a weak central government with a declining economy. States were taiffing other states and printing their own money. The federalists sought to fix the economy and build a stronger central government with the Constitution. The anti-federalts were against the Constitution because they thought it created an overpowering leader that they had fought long and hard to defeat and escape from, and many of the anti-federalists were wealthy farmers and thought that this new reform to government weakened their business. Federalists in response wrote a collection of articles and letters to fight the critiscism of the Constitution and explain it step by step.
ReplyDeleteThe federalists were right in the battles of ratification. In the federalist minds’ they supported the constitution and they thought it was the right way to stop the uncertainty in the nation. The anti-federalists opposed and objected to this, they saw tyranny and that the constitution was representing betrayal, they believed the new government was an enemy of freedom. Anti-federalist believed and preferred that the national government should be weak and the state government should be strong, and the federalists believed the exact opposite that we should have a weak state government and a strong national government that is held by the elite instead of a common man as anti-federalists would prefer. The anti-federalists had many fears, not just that the government would be run by a few, but that the liberties that were fundamental to them, would be taken. Due to this fear the federalists promised that they would add amendments, which would protect their individual rights, to the constitution. The promise was kept and James Madison proposed twelve amendments, and which ten of them were ratified, becoming known as the Bill of Rights.
ReplyDeleteThe federalist were right in the ratification battles. The federalist created a document that was a response to the uncertainty of the nation. This document is still around today so something must have been right. The anti-federalist thought the constitution was abusing the power of the government. They thought it took away individual rights.
ReplyDeleteAlthough the Federalist won the war when the Constitution was ratified, the Anti-Federalist won the battle. The Anti-Federalists didn’t like that the Constitution didn’t secure individual freedoms and didn’t have a bill of rights. They also thought that the state governments were going to be too weak and the national government too strong. I say that the Anti-Federalist won the battle because in order for the Federalist to get the Constitution ratified they had to compromise with the Anti-Federalists and ultimately add the Bill of Rights.
ReplyDeleteThe federalists were right in the battle for ratification. The Anti-federalists thought that the constitution would take away there indvidual rights. However, the federalists promised to create the Bill of Rights to help protect the states individual rights. Also, Anti-federalists thought that the constitution would only bring tyranny to the states. The federalists made a republican democracy to help ensure the people had some say in the government. This is why the federalists are right in the ratification battle.
ReplyDelete