Philadelphia Convention Aftermath

In 1787, after the Philadelphia Constitutional Convention, the Federalists and Anti-
Federalists locked horns over the ratification of the US Constitution, which was to
replace the Articles of Confederation, thus starting off a debate which refuses to die
down.
The basic difference between the Federalists and Anti-Federalists revolves around
the definition of the two concepts. While 'federalism' refers to a system in which the
administrative power is shared between the national and state governments, 'anti-
federalism' is a system which believes that states should be more powerful than the
national government. The Anti-Federalists are of the belief that the national
government can either be as powerful as, or less powerful than, the state
government, but cannot be superior to the latter.

Federalists Versus Anti-Federalists

With reference to the US politics, the Federalists are the people who support the
present relationship between the federal government and governments of the fifty
states, which came into effect with the ratification of the US Constitution in 1787. In
contrast, the Anti-Federalists are those who oppose the current political structure.
The tussle between these two groups can be traced back to the 18th century, when
the committee which met to revise the Articles of Confederation concluded that its
revision was not feasible and the entire constitution had to be rewritten.

The move was opposed by Anti-Federalist leaders who opined that the Articles of
Confederation was apt for the future of the United States, and that the new
Constitution defied the very concept of democracy. When these groups were pitted
against each other over the ratification of the Constitution, one of the main issues
was the inclusion of Bill of Rights, which the Anti-Federalists thought was necessary.
It was this support for the Bill of Rights that gave them the much-needed momentum
in their campaign. Anti-federalist leaders also argued that the newly drafted
Constitution was against the democratic goals of the American Revolution.

In the end, the Federalists did manage to get all the thirteen states to ratify the
Constitution, with the last state, Rhode Island coming on board on May 29, 1790. It's
worth mentioning that the Federalist Papers, which were written by Alexander
Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay, played a crucial role in convincing the
states to ratify the new Constitution. The adoption of the new constitution―the end
of the American Civil War as some sources put it―marked the beginning of the
power shift from the state governments to the national government, and the
emergence of federalism in the United States.

Key Differences

In essence, a federalist is an ardent advocate of federalism―a political system in

which sovereignty is divided between a central governing authority (the federal
government) and constituent political units (the fifty states). On the other hand, an
anti-federalist is an opponent of this concept. Instead, he believes that the state
government should be the supreme authority. The difference of opinion is not just
restricted to power sharing, but goes well beyond that.

Political Orientation
✦ The Federalists were of the belief that the Federal government should be the
supreme authority of the land, with powers to keep the states in control.✦ The Anti-
Federalists were of the opinion that state governments should be the supreme
authority, with the national government simply acting as a link between states.
Stakeholders
✦ The Federalists mostly comprised businessmen who took part in the American
Revolutionary War.

Noteworthy Federalist Leaders: George Washington, James Madison, Alexander

Hamilton, John Adams, and Benjamin Franklin.✦ The Anti-Federalists mostly
comprised labor class from the rural areas of the country.

Noteworthy Anti-Federalists Leaders: Patrick Henry, George Mason, Samuel Adams,

Robert Yates, and Richard Henry Lee.
US Constitution
✦ The Federalists were in favor of the new United States Constitution which was
adopted on September 17, 1787.✦ The Anti-Federalists were strongly against the
Constitution; their argument, it gave more power to the national government.
Articles of Confederation
✦ The Federalists opposed the Articles of Confederation, as they thought it reduced
the national government to a toothless organization which was at the mercy of the
states.✦ The Anti-Federalists believed that it was possible to retain the Articles of
Confederation by amending it, instead of replacing it with an entirely new
Constitution.
Bill of Rights
✦ The Federalists argued that the Constitution and state governments were enough
to protect individual freedoms of the citizens of the country, and therefore, there was
no need of the Bill of Rights.✦ The Anti-Federalists argued that the Bill of Rights was
necessary, as they believed that lack of the same would give the Constitution the
power to overwrite the rights of citizens followed by the states.
Separation of Powers
✦ According to the Federalists, the distribution of power in three independent
branches ensured efficient administration with due respect to people's rights.✦
According to the Anti-Federalists, the different branches of administration, especially
the executive branch, was given too much power.
The anti-federalist belief that the state governments should have more power than
the national government was something that the Articles of Confederation also spoke
of, which is why the Anti-Federalists supported the Articles as against the new
Constitution. As opposed to this, federalist beliefs highlight the need of having a
national government which is more powerful than the state governments to ensure
that the states are kept in control.

Nevertheless, we can't ignore the fact that we got the US Constitution―the supreme
law of the land today―in its present form only because of this tussle between the
Federalists and Anti-Federalists. Absence of either group would have had made a
huge difference. Even today, there are people who go by the belief that it would have
been better if the Articles of Confederation was altered in a manner which would suit
the confederation. At the same time, there is no dearth of people who believe that
America is indebted to the new Constitution for the position it holds in the world
today.
Read more at Buzzle: https://www.buzzle.com/articles/federalists-vs-anti-
federalists.html