Anti Federalism Pros And Cons
The draft of the Constitution was submitted to the states by congress in September of 1787. For the first time, the people were able to peacefully vote and discuss how their nation would be governed. Among the people, there were mainly two groups: The federalists and the anti-federalists. The federalists were people who supported and promoted the new constitution. These people actually had more of an advantage than their opponents, the anti-federalists. This was because many of their leaders were or had been members of the constitutional convention and were already familiar with the disputed issues in the document. (America, 199) The federalists were therefore much more organized and prepared. The anti-federalists were those who supported more of a
…show more content…
Most cordially took their defeat and some even went on to become prominent leaders in the federal government. (America, 200) The idea of the Bill of Rights was acknowledged and was believed to be something that could improve the constitution. A collection of essays called, The Federalist, were published in 1787 and 1788 and basically supported the ratification of the constitution and the idea of a national authority without the fear of tyranny in the new government. The anti-federalists responded to this with what they considered to be the dangers of a more powerful central government. The Constitution needed to be approved by only nine out of the thirteen states in order to be officially ratified. After New Hampshire, the document had been technically approved. But without the approval from the state of Virginia, the most populous state, the constitution could not succeed. By 1790, each of the thirteen states would approve of the constitution. Both the federalists and the anti-federalists could be considered the winners. This is because the Bill of Rights was proposed and put into the constitution which was something that the anti-federalists
Most cordially took their defeat and some even went on to become prominent leaders in the federal government. (America, 200) The idea of the Bill of Rights was acknowledged and was believed to be something that could improve the constitution. A collection of essays called, The Federalist, were published in 1787 and 1788 and basically supported the ratification of the constitution and the idea of a national authority without the fear of tyranny in the new government. The anti-federalists responded to this with what they considered to be the dangers of a more powerful central government. The Constitution needed to be approved by only nine out of the thirteen states in order to be officially ratified. After New Hampshire, the document had been technically approved. But without the approval from the state of Virginia, the most populous state, the constitution could not succeed. By 1790, each of the thirteen states would approve of the constitution. Both the federalists and the anti-federalists could be considered the winners. This is because the Bill of Rights was proposed and put into the constitution which was something that the anti-federalists