(Introduction)
The Articles of Confederation was created as the first American form of government. The Articles of Confederation were meant to take away power from the central government and give more power to the states. Although with this came consequence and issues. Due to the fact that the national government was without enough power they weren’t able to tax which left them begging states to pay for war and other government functions. The also struggled in many areas such as Executive, Commerce, Amendment, and Domestic Order. It was these flaws that started the Constitutional Convention.
(Introduction)
The Constitutional Convention was a group of delegates that met in secret to help fix the problems of The Articles of Confederation. Although they abolished them all together and created a new form of government. All of their secret meetings were recorded and can be used to reveal the live debates. Before all of this happened there was an event that was referred to as “Ratification Tension” The Federalist supported ratification because they believed that the country needed a stronger national government. To prove this many famous essays were written by James Madison, Alexander Hamilton, and John Jay. Anti-Federalist on the other hand opposed the ratification of the Constitution because they believed that it gave too much power to the national government and wanted more power to the states. Although their side of the argument is usually overlooked due to the fact they lost.
(Introduction)
Referring back to the Paper Laws crucial debates were made. The Federalist and Anti-Federalist were both fighting for liberty but at different levels. The Federalist created a National Constitution that excluded the Bill of Rights due to the fact that they believed their Constitution already guaranteed individual rights. The Anti-Federalist were also fighting for liberty but they wanted more. They wanted a nation full of liberty and prosperity they wanted America to strive and for all individuals have the freedom of speech, religion, etc., therefore they wanted the Bill of Rights in their Constitution.
(Summary I)
In Federalist No.1 the Federalist are fighting against those is disagreement of the Constitution. They wanted Americans to follow under one national rule. While still allowing individual rights, those rights weren’t entirely specified. This would lead to common debates and the want for “wiggle” room in the Constitution, which means more specific rights to help accommodate those who don’t walk the same path as everyone else. The Federalist also wanted Americans to jump on this chance for us to choose our own government. If we didn’t it would be proven that human beings just inherit bad government by accident or at the hand of despots. They also believe that the Anti-Federalist are trying to destroy liberty and that they are the greatest enemies.
Liberty is what builds America and what it is today. The Federalist wanted to create a government based on energy and efficiency for that purpose exactly. Although there was slight flaw due to the fact that those who were seen as popular leaders actually seemed to end up as greater threats to liberty. Concluding in the Federalist No.1 liberty was top priority and if we didn’t adopt the Constitution the Union of States would fall. Referencing to Federalist No.84 there were many state constitutions that did not apply the bill of rights. For example New York citizens opposed the Federal Constitution even though both the Federal and State Constitution didn’t have the Bill of Rights. Their argument was that either way both the Federal and State Constitutions guaranteed individual rights.
(Summary II)
In Brutus No.1 the Anti-Federalist were speaking up against the Federalist and their want to ratify the Constitution. Ratifying the Constitution would either mean security for the people or putting their rights on the line. During this decision Anti-Federalist began speaking out towards those who were for it. They wanted to spread the word of what the ratification can do to our nation as a whole. Dealing with such a widely dispersed and diverse group of people and putting them under one Constitution can lead to major controversies in the future. The Anti-Federalist wanted to put it off, they knew The Articles of Confederation had its flaws but their goal was to change that. To assure the people that with their new government their rights would be secure, more flexible towards people of every, race, religion, ethnicity, etc. Ensuring that means a better future. A future that is full of opportunity and freedom. Not everyone is under the same command and people have the right to be different. Due to the Articles of Confederation not aiding in all the problems the government faced a new solution came about. The new Constitution written during the convention in Philadelphia was hoped to help the problems and create a better form of government. If the government proved successful it could lead to liberty, the growth and prosperity of the nation and people will advance in knowledge and virtue. Although Anti-Federalist feared the failure of the new government such as the loss of liberty which will lead to the failure of America for future generations that will blame us for their suffering.
(Analysis and Academically Grounded Opinion)
History has shown us that the Anti-Federalist were correct regarding the necessity of the Bill of Rights. One example being freedom of religion. One of the first issues that was brought up was when it came to people's’ individual freedom of religion. Citizens were getting reprimanded at their jobs due to their religious practices off the clock. Referencing to the Federalist Constitution this debate would have been overpassed due to the fact that the Bill of Rights was not included. The Bill of Rights is what gives individuals more specific freedom that is backed up by the government. If we look back at the Anti-Federalist arguments towards including the Bill of Rights and how it can benefit the nation, it fights for just that type of movement. The people want to be heard and they want to be their own person, the only way to do that was to assure individual liberty under the government's radar to set legal boundaries to assure safety as well.
(Analysis and Academically Grounded Opinion)
Considering our future now The Anti-Federalist argument was the best prediction of the future. The Anti-Federalist argued that without a strong government based on necessary and proper laws the United States would not strive and it was true. If we would have followed under Federalist rule we would have more strikes and debates than we have now due to the restrictions their Constitutions had. Once we found a good government system America was thriving full of prosperity and citizens exercising their individual rights, just like the Anti-Federalist wanted.
(Conclusion)
After all the research and readings it is seen that the Anti-Federalist had a broader view when thinking about the Constitution and individual rights than the Federalist did. The Federalist did have their points, by ratifying the Constitution it would create energy and efficiency in our government. Having those values in our government could prove very helpful but it also limited thousands of people around us. Our future now is based on the Anti-Federalist way of thinking. We are the United States and we are diverse and each and every one of us have different values we stand by. The Anti-Federalist also seemed to stand more by Civil Liberties than Civil Rights. I saw that because not only did they want rights for everyone they wanted the nation to be free. Freedom of Speech, Freedom of Religion, Black Rights Movements, everyone deserves to be heard and that is what they were fighting for.