Federalist/Antifederalist - Essay Sample

The great debate between the Federalist and Antifederalist, especially concerning ratification of the constitution, is intriguing. While the Federalists are in great need of constitutional ratification, the anti-federalists could not hear any of it. I think anti-federalists are right to argue that the constitution gives the federal government a lot of power. Also, the constitution has failed to have the bill of right to protect its people. The individual state has little power, as well (Gilhooley, 2019). Without the government's protection of the bill of Rights, citizens' liberty would be compromised. In America, the wealthy, educated, business people, and landowners dominate the nation’s politics. The government system has silent controllers who have their hidden interests. The interest groups are evident and control the US government. The interest groups are looking for a change of policies to favor their big business, such as carbon emission laws and regulations. The current US president sometimes back pulled off from one of the most significant climate change plans implemented by former US president, Barrack Obama, citing that the plan is costly and fruitless. Therefore, this implies that the poor American people will suffer from climate change consequences. The industry owners gain by reaping more profits from the businesses.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Order now

On man's view, the federalists do not make a persuasive argument like the anti-federalists. According to federalists, the man’s dominant interest is self-interest, and the most important thing is to put it into an advantage (Gilhooley, 2019). it implies that self-interest should be acknowledged. For instance, there are many wealthy and educated individuals who influence government decisions and policy implementation due to their self-interest. Conversely, the ordinary American citizen suffers from oppression and low employment policies since the bill of the right is not protected.

Generally, anti-federalists made a powerful argument compared to the counterpart. For instance, the anti-federalists claim that the government is a necessary evil and, as such, needs to be limited, monitored, and continuously reviewed. A strong government is mostly dominated by a wealthy individual who acts in favor of their self-interests. Giving a lot of power to the government automatically reduces the power of citizens. The argument made by the anti-federalists favors the majority of the group in the US. For example, the federalist claims that the public should be educated and have the free government make sound decisions.

Furthermore, federalists only see the future in terms of big commerce, urban society, and mercantilism. This is contrary to the anti-federalist who see the future in terms of those struggling. Anti-federalists are concerned with the majority members of the country, including rural society, small and independent landowners. Focusing on the less developed population leads to the prosperity of everyone. The disparity in resource distribution is reduced as well. However, giving opportunities to big industry owners and the elite group only result in an increased disadvantaged population.

I have come across one view from my fellow student that is suppressing. I'm afraid I disagree with the argument claiming that the federalist's view is more persuasive. According to the post, federalists’ view on the government and the state government is unbiased, transparent well-crafted, and makes more practical sense than the anti-federalists. I'm afraid I disagree with this assertion because the government is already made strong to accomplish the few individuals' interests.

Similarly, another post I disagree with maintains that the federalists' view on the constitution is persuasive. According to the post, the constitution is only a Broad document, and the government plays a role in maintaining, stability remaining optimistic, and perform greater leadership (Faber, & Ragan, 2019). As a result, federalist tend to be more rational and logical as thus becoming influential. I think the constitution is not merely a document, but it directs the government on what to do.

References

Gilhooley, S. (2019). An Anti-Federalist Constitution: The Development of Dissent in the Ratification Debates. By Michael J. Faber. Lawrence: University Press of Kansas, 2019. 536p. $49.95 cloth. Perspectives on Politics, 17(4), 1159-1160. https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/perspectives-on-politics/article/an-antifederalist-constitution-the-development-of-dissent-in-the-ratification-debates-by-michael-j-faber-lawrence-university-press-of-kansas-2019-536p-4995-cloth/F70252AAF734B4820F809C38FEDF1F35

Faber, M. J., & Ragan, R. (2019). Organized Opposition: The Anti-Federalist Political Network. In Public Choice Analyses of American Economic History (pp. 51-71). Springer, Cham. https://sci-hub.st/10.1007/978-3-030-11313-1