At the Constitutional Convention, Federalists argued strongly in favor of a strong central government, asserting that it was essential for maintaining order, ensuring national security, and promoting economic stability. They believed that a unified approach would prevent the chaos and inefficiency seen under the Articles of Confederation, and that an energetic federal authority would protect the rights and freedoms of citizens more effectively. Conversely, Anti-Federalists expressed deep concerns about the potential for tyranny and the erosion of individual liberties that they believed a powerful central government could bring. They feared that a distant federal authority would become unresponsive to the needs of local populations and that it could threaten the rights of states and individuals by accumulating excessive power. While Federalists viewed a strong central government as a means to facilitate progress and security, Anti-Federalists emphasized the risk of centralized control and the importance of preserving state sovereignty and personal freedoms. This fundamental disagreement highlighted the balance between liberty and order that would shape the new nation's political framework.
In a paragraph, compare and contrast the arguments made by the Federalists and the Anti-Federalists at the Constitutional Convention about the benefits and problems of a strong central government. (4 points)
1 answer