Eleanor Finch
In the debate over the ratification of the U.S. Constitution in the late 1780s, small farmers and rural Americans were most likely to oppose the proposed constitution. They feared that the new constitution would create a strong central government that would benefit wealthy elites at their expense. This group, known as Anti-Federalists, favoured strong state governments, a weak central government, the direct election of government officials, short term limits for officeholders, and the strengthening of individual liberties. They were suspicious of a distant national government that might not understand their needs or local issues.
| Characteristics | Values |
|---|---|
| Political Power | Those opposing the proposed constitution wanted to keep most political power at the state and local level, limiting the powers of the national government. |
| Type of Government | Opponents of the proposed constitution favored strong state governments, a weak central government, the direct election of government officials, short term limits for officeholders, accountability by officeholders to popular majorities, and the strengthening of individual liberties. |
| Economic Concerns | Small farmers feared that the Constitution would create a strong central government that would benefit wealthy elites at their expense. |
| Profession | Small farmers, landowners, shopkeepers, and laborers were among those who opposed the proposed constitution. |
Explore related products
What You'll Learn
Small farmers
The opposition of small farmers was influenced by their geographical location and economic interests. Being in remote areas, they feared that their voices would be drowned out in a national system dominated by urban elites. Their opposition was also driven by the perception that the Constitution favored a strong centralized authority, which they believed would not represent their local interests adequately. This concern was heightened by the absence of a bill of rights in the proposed Constitution.
The Anti-Federalists, including small farmers, played a crucial role in the adoption of the Bill of Rights. Their opposition brought to light important debates about political power and federalism. They argued that the Constitution would lead to the destruction of state sovereignty and the consolidation of power in a national government, which they saw as a threat to American liberties and republicanism. These concerns were articulated by writers like Federal Farmer, whose true identity remains a mystery, although some scholars attribute the writings to Melancton Smith or Richard Henry Lee.
How Did This Get Made? A Night at DAR Constitution Hall
You may want to see also
Landowners, shopkeepers, and labourers
The Anti-Federalists included small farmers, landowners, shopkeepers, and labourers. When the Constitution was sent to the states for ratification, supporters of the document called themselves Federalists and dubbed those who opposed ratification as Anti-Federalists. The Anti-Federalists believed that the new American Constitution would give the federal government too much power, and they favoured strong state governments, a weak central government, and the direct election of government officials. They also supported short term limits for officeholders, accountability by officeholders to popular majorities, and the strengthening of individual liberties.
Landowners who opposed the Constitution were concerned about the potential loss of property rights and the power of the central government to override state laws. They also believed that the Constitution did not adequately protect individual liberties and states' rights. Shopkeepers, on the other hand, were concerned about the economic impact of the proposed Constitution, including the establishment of a national bank and the assumption of state debts. They also feared that the strong central government could interfere with their businesses and impose taxes and regulations that would hurt their livelihoods.
Labourers who opposed the Constitution were worried about the potential loss of rights and protections, as well as the power of the federal government to act directly upon individuals. They also believed that the Constitution favoured the wealthy and privileged classes and did not adequately represent the interests of the common people. Many labourers also supported the direct election of government officials and strong state governments that could better represent their interests and address their concerns.
Overall, landowners, shopkeepers, and labourers who opposed the proposed Constitution shared a common concern for limiting the power of the central government, protecting individual liberties and states' rights, and ensuring that the government remained accountable to the people. They also favoured a government that was closer to the people and more responsive to their needs and concerns. Their opposition played an important role in shaping the eventual adoption of the Bill of Rights, which included the First Amendment and other amendments that guaranteed certain fundamental rights and freedoms.
The Constitution's Court System: How It Works
You may want to see also
Rural Americans
One of the primary worries for rural Americans was the
Congress Powers: 5 Key Abilities of US Lawmakers
You may want to see also
Explore related products
Those seeking to protect state rights and individual freedoms
The Anti-Federalists, those who opposed the proposed Constitution, were a varied group that included small farmers and landowners, shopkeepers, and labourers. They were united by a desire to protect state rights and individual freedoms. This group, which included figures like Patrick Henry, feared that the new Constitution would lead to a concentration of power among the wealthy, which would negatively impact the rights and freedoms of average citizens, particularly farmers. They believed that the new government would prioritise the interests of big business and property owners, rather than the needs of everyday farmers.
The Anti-Federalists favoured strong state governments and a weak central government, with direct elections of government officials, short term limits, and accountability to popular majorities. They wanted to limit the powers of the national government and keep most political power at the state and local levels, where it had always been in America. They were suspicious of a distant national government that might not understand their needs or local issues. This was particularly true for rural Americans, who made up the majority of the population at the time and so had a significant influence on the ratification process.
The Anti-Federalists also sought to protect individual liberties and believed in the strengthening of these rights. They demanded a more concise and unequivocal Constitution, one that laid out for all to see the rights of the people and the limitations of the power of government. They attacked the proposed Constitution for its vagueness and lack of specific protections against tyranny.
The political division between the Federalists and Anti-Federalists began in 1787 when delegates met to draw up a new plan of government to replace the government under the Articles of Confederation. The Anti-Federalists believed that the Articles of Confederation, which created a confederal government with limited authority and states retaining primary sovereignty, were preferable to the proposed Constitution, which created a federal government with supreme national laws.
Amending the Constitution: What's Required?
You may want to see also
Those who believed the constitution would lead to a concentration of power among the wealthy
The Anti-Federalists, who opposed the ratification of the Constitution, included small farmers and landowners, shopkeepers, and laborers. They favored strong state governments, weak central government, and the direct election of government officials. They believed that the proposed Constitution would lead to a concentration of power among the wealthy.
Anti-Federalists like Patrick Henry attacked the proposed Constitution for its vagueness and lack of specific protection against tyranny. They demanded a more concise and unequivocal Constitution that explicitly laid out the rights of the people and the limitations of the government. They believed that the brevity of the document only revealed its inferior nature.
Bryan, another Anti-Federalist, echoed the fear that the new government would become one controlled by wealthy established families and the culturally refined. He believed that the common working people were in danger of being subjugated to the will of an all-powerful, inaccessible authority. This was the kind of authority, he argued, that Americans had fought against only a few years earlier in the Revolutionary War.
The Anti-Federalists' opposition was an important factor leading to the adoption of the First Amendment and the other nine amendments that constitute the Bill of Rights. Their demands for a stronger protection of individual liberties and a clearer delineation of governmental powers were eventually addressed through the amendments to the Constitution.
Lincoln's Document: Abridging or Protecting the Constitution?
You may want to see also
Frequently asked questions
The Anti-Federalists were those who opposed the ratification of the U.S. Constitution in the late 1780s. They included small farmers and landowners, shopkeepers, and labourers.
The Anti-Federalists favoured strong state governments, a weak central government, the direct election of government officials, short term limits for officeholders, accountability by officeholders to popular majorities, and the strengthening of individual liberties.
Small farmers feared that the Constitution would create a strong central government that would benefit wealthy elites at their expense. They believed that the new government would prioritise the interests of big business and property owners, rather than the needs of everyday farmers.
