Anti-Federalist :: essays research papers

Most Americans were very suspicious of government, but the Anti-Federalist was really mistrustful of the government in general and strong subject government. This mistrust was the basis of their opposite to the opus. They feared it had created a government the people could not control. Many distinguished Americans were Anti-Federalists. Leaders included George Mason and Elbridge Gerry. Both attended the Philadelphia Convention but had refused to sign the constitution. The Anti-Federalist argued that the record had many flaws. The thought that it should have been developed in meetings whose proceedings was open to the public. And it would undermine a republican form of government. It gave too much power to the national government at the expense of the powers of state governments. It gave too much power to the executive branch of the national government at the expense of the other branches. It gave too much power because of the necessary and proper clause. It did not adequately s eparate the powers of the executive and legislative branches. In addition, it allowed the national government to keep an army during peacetime. And likewise it did not include a bill of rights. They feared that because of these flaws in the Constitution, the new national government would be a threat to their national rights. They also thought that the constitution had been developed by an elite and privileged group to create a national government for the purpose of serving its own selfish interest. They thought the whole safe government that if it had a local and closely linked with the will of the people. And controlled by the people, by such means as we have yearly elections and alternate peopled in key positions often.The Federalist knew that many members of Congress and the state governments were against the new Constitution, largely because it reduced their powers. So the federalist decided not to ask the Congress or state governments to approve the Constitution, even though they were expected to do so. Today, now that the Constitution has worked successfully for 200 years, it would be easy to ignore the anti-federalist of 1787 and 1788 as an baseless historical force, a collection of no constructive reactionaries and cranks. Actually, the anti-federalist may well have represented the views of the majority of the Americans, whose reasons for preferring the old Articles of Confederation were firmly within the classless tradition.Among the anti-federalist were fiery old patriot leaders who feared