1 / 15

Federalists and Anti-Federalists

Federalists and Anti-Federalists. What’s the difference?. Enter the Time Machine. The year is 1787 The Revolutionary War is over, and the United States of America is now on its own to decide how to rule itself Being a new country isn’t easy:

warren-huber
Télécharger la présentation

Federalists and Anti-Federalists

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Federalists and Anti-Federalists What’s the difference?

  2. Enter the Time Machine • The year is 1787 • The Revolutionary War is over, and the United States of America is now on its own to decide how to rule itself • Being a new country isn’t easy: • The states disagree about what kind of government they want • The framers disagree about what kind of government they want • People are becoming frustrated and rebelling against the current government

  3. Enter the Constitution • At the Constitutional Convention, representatives from each state (except Rhode Island) begin to write a list of rules to replace the weak Articles of Confederation • Most delegates want a strong national government • However, they also wanted to have strong local governments • After much debate, the Constitution was finally signed in September 1787 • It was then sent to the states to be approved

  4. Enter the Anti-Federalists • Some framers thought the Constitution gave the government too much power • Congress held too much power, given in the “necessary and proper clause” • The executive branch held too much power and could easily become a king • They argued that states should have more power because they were closer to the people…what could a national government possibly know about state and city problems? Elbridge Gerry - Antifederalist

  5. Enter the Anti-Federalists • Also, there was no Bill of Rights • How could they ensure that the national gov’t wasn’t going to take away personal freedoms? • This point was the focus of the Anti-Federalists campaign against ratification of the Constitution

  6. Patrick Henry, Anti-Federalist “The necessity of a Bill of Rights appears to me to be greater in this government than ever it was in any government before…All rights not expressed an unequivocally reserved to the people are implied and incidentally relinquished to the rulers…If you intend to reserve your unalienable rights, you must have the most express stipulation; for…if the people do not think it necessary to reserve them, they will supposed to be given up”

  7. So…Do You Agree? • What do you think… • Is the national government too big? • Do we really need a Bill of Rights? • What’s better for the people – a strong national government or a strong state government?

  8. Enter the Federalists • The Federalists supported the Constitution as it was • The Constitution had a strong sense of CHECKS AND BALANCES, or a balance of power between the three branches of the national government and the local and state governments

  9. Enter the Federalists • They also argued that by listing specific rights the gov’t might be able to violate others that were left off • Why list some if you can’t list them all?

  10. The Federalist Papers • The Federalists wrote the “Federalist Papers” to encourage states to approve the Constitution • They argued that without a strong nat’lgov’t the country would fall into anarchy • Also claimed that because 8 states already had Bills of Rights in their state constitutions then there was no need to add another

  11. So…Do You Agree? • What do you think… • Does the national government work fine the way it is? • Do we really need a Bill of Rights if everything is so well done in the Constitution?

  12. Enter the “Fight” • The Constitution needed 9 of the 13 states to approve it in order for it to become law • Both sides (the Federalists and the Anti-Federalists) tried to convince people their side was correct • After great debate, the states finally ratified the Constitution…only if there was a Bill of Rights

  13. Enter the Bill of Rights • While Federalists didn’t think it was really necessary, they agreed to add a Bill of Rights so that both sides would be happy • The rights would be added as amendments…meaning they were seen as “official changes, corrections, or additions” • The Bill of Rights were based upon the constitutions developed by the states • There were a total of ten amendments added…and they became known as “The Bill of Rights”

  14. Who Was Right? • Which side had the best argument…the Federalists or the Anti-Federalists? • Why? • Does the Constitution really need a Bill of Rights? Why or why not? • If you were alive back in 1787, how would you vote?

  15. Assignment In partners, create a two-sided poster. On one side, create an advertisement for the Federalist position. On the other side, create an advertisement for the Anti-Federalist position. You must include at least two arguments made by each side. Use the following resources as needed:

More Related