EssaysForStudent.com - Free Essays, Term Papers & Book Notes
Search

Federalist Vs Anti-Federalist

By:   •  Essay  •  916 Words  •  March 22, 2010  •  1,095 Views

Page 1 of 4

Federalist Vs Anti-Federalist

John Adams stated that “Government is instituted for the common good; for the protection, safety, prosperity, and happiness of the people; and not for profit, honor, or private interest of any one man, family, or class of men; therefore, the people alone have an incontestable, unalienable, and indefeasible right to institute government; and to reform, alter, or totally change the same, when their protection, safety, prosperity, and happiness require it.” Federalists believed this, and fought verbal and written battles against the Anti-Federalists, who disagreed with John Adams. Anti-Federalists believed that in an elite democracy, the elite’s would get greedy and selfish, and only worry about themselves. As I’m on the Federalist side, I believe that John Adams was correct in his statement, and that the government is only trying to uphold the rights and liberties that each citizen ought to have.

According to Elite Democrats, political representatives “should filter the views of the people through their superior expertise, intelligence and temperament”. Federalists were very intelligent when it came to people’s attitudes and personality. People are very self-centered and egotistical, only looking out for themselves. Having a spokesperson chosen by the people would help them with their problems, and to get their word across. In my opinion, elites who have studied politics in college, and who know the government well are obviously more intelligent than the citizens when it comes to representation. They would have a better understanding of what to do in a situation compared to the people.

Anti-Federalists believed that a representative should not “filter out” the people’s requests, but reflect on them exactly as the people asked. I feel this is totally incorrect, because if a person’s opinion is wrong, and it won’t benefit the country, then why should the representative follow through with it. Anti-Federalists are trying to appease the people instead of helping them and doing what’s best for them, even if the people disagree with it. That’s why the representative must be educated, and “have a good head on his shoulders”.

Elite Democrats believe that the majority of people are not interested in politics as much as their interested in their own private lives and wellbeing. People aren’t concerned with politics unless it pertains to their own lives, which is what the Anti-Federalists believe. However, I disagree that if people don’t feel like getting involved with government and politics, it’s not the democratic system’s fault. In my lifetime, I’ve observed that people didn’t involve themselves in politics until a tragedy happens, or if they want to place the blame on someone. Part of people’s nature is that people like to find scapegoats to take the blame away from them. When it comes to the country’s problem, the government, and especially the president get blamed for everything.

Federalists feel that the kindness and honesty is only found in the elites. I believe that’s only true when it comes to government and politics. As we’ve seen, when people disagree with an event or a choice by the government, they get violent. As many of the founding fathers believed, debates between people would inevitably end in mob rule. The only way people

Download as (for upgraded members)  txt (5.6 Kb)   pdf (82.5 Kb)   docx (11.8 Kb)  
Continue for 3 more pages »