Federalists versus Anti-Federalists, Video 1
History
Florida Joint Center for Citizenship Presents Federalists vs Anti-Federalists
The Florida joint center for citizenship presents, federalist first anti federalists, part one oh, hey there. You're just in time for our first review session on federalist first anti federalists. Under the United States Constitution, our system of government is a federal one, where the central government shares power with the states, but did you know we almost didn't get our constitution? That's right. It almost didn't happen because our founding fathers didn't originally agree about whether there should be a federal system as the United States national government.
So let's learn just why they might have disagreed. In this video, you will learn about the viewpoints of the federalists and the anti federalists regarding the ratification of the constitution and inclusion of a Bill of rights. After watching this video, you will be able to identify the viewpoints of the federalists and anti federalists about the ratification of the U.S. Constitution. So let's get started. Following the American Revolution when the colonists rejected the British Crown declared independence from Great Britain and established the United States, the Continental Congress ratified the Articles of Confederation as the governing document of the newly created nation. At the time the Continental Congress was fearful of a national government with power concentrated in the strong executive. The perfect alternative they believed was establishing a confederacy or a government where power is held by the individual states and not with the central power. However, they soon learn the government established under the Articles of Confederation was not able to handle the problems of the new nation.
It became clear that an order for the United States to survive something had to be done with the Articles of Confederation. So at the urging of George Washington and others, a meeting was called to take place in Philadelphia. This meeting is known as the constitutional convention. As the meaning convened in debate began multiple views on how to fix the existing government of the United States began to emerge. Based on their views, the man who crafted the constitution of the United States can be divided into two sides. The federalists and the anti federalists. The federalists, who shared their ideas in the federalist papers, believed that the way the government was set up under the proposed constitution would fix the weaknesses that existed under the Articles of Confederation, unify the 13 states and protect the people and the rights from a strong national government. So let's take a couple of minutes and look at what they argued. First of all, the federalists argued that the enlightenment ideas of separation of powers and checks and balances were put into the proposed constitution to protect the people from a strong national government, guaranteeing no branch of government could get too strong.
At the same time the federalists argued that the inclusion of a Bill of rights in the constitution wasn't necessary because the people were better protected than they would be if such a list was included. The federalists believed it would be impossible to think of all of the rights to which citizens were entitled, and by including a list of specific or enumerated rights might mean the government could limit any unenumerated or rights not listed in the proposed constitution. And finally, the federalists thought that the proposed constitution would better unite the 13 states and would lead to the growth of more business and trade benefiting the entire country. They believed that the Articles of Confederation had failed to do these things, which is why they felt the proposed constitution was necessary. So then, to recap, the federalists thought the proposed constitution would fix the weaknesses that existed under the Articles of Confederation, unify the 13 states, and protect the people and the rights from a strong national government. That's great, right? Well, hold on a minute, not everyone believed the constitution was necessary or would do a good job protecting the rights of citizens.
These folks were known as the anti federalists. The anti federalists believed the constitution should not be ratified or formally adopted for a number of reasons. They shared these reasons and the anti federalist papers and there are more than a couple. First, the anti federalists thought too much power would be taken from the states. Because they thought power could be abused, they argued the proposed constitution needed a Bill of rights to protect the people from the power of the national government. In addition, they were worried about Congress. The necessary improper elastic clause of the constitution would give too much power to Congress. Let's read it to make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers and all other powers vested by this constitution and the government of the United States or in any department or officer thereof. But wouldn't the Congress be checked by the executive branch for the anti federalist that wasn't enough. The executive branch, the president and those who worked with him would be too strong under the proposed constitution.
Furthermore, the system of government federalism described in the proposed constitution was new and untested, no government anywhere else in the world had tried federalism before. And finally, the United States was too large for one central government to manage. So to recap, the anti federalists thought the proposed constitution went too far in strengthening the powers of the national government and did not do enough to secure the rights of the people by not including a Bill of rights. Those are quite a few different viewpoints between the federalists and anti federalists and their evaluation of the post constitution. Let's think about this for a minute and make sure we understand. Let's check in. How did the federalists share their ideas about the constitution? Answer, the federalists wrote the federalist papers. Question two, which enlightenment ideas that the federalists believe would keep the government from getting too powerful. The concepts of separation of powers and checks and balances. Question three, why did the federalists suppose a Bill of rights? Answer, the federalists thought a written list of rights would limit how many rights people had.
Question four, why did the anti federalists want a Bill of rights? Answer, the anti federalists thought a written list of rights would protect the people from the national government. Great job thinking about those questions, and the next video we'll dive deeper and compare the federalist and anti federalist viewpoints regarding ratification of the U.S. Constitution, thanks for watching. This video is produced for educational purposes by the Florida joint center for citizenship. Video produced and edited by Ashley and Brian for gionee.