Federalists vs. Democratic Republicans

In: Historical Events

Submitted By speak5554
Words 906
Pages 4
The United States of America was founded on a Constitution that was supposed to preserve our freedoms and certain liberties. All Americans at that time wanted to keep America a free an independent nation with rights for its people. However there was two different groups, the Federalists lead by Alexander Hamilton and the Democratic-Republicans led by Thomas Jefferson, which thought this could be achieved in very different ways. Thomas Jefferson and Alexander Hamilton were very different in their methods to try and develop America as a nation. The two were very much alike because they both were avid Americans, and wanted to see the nation succeed. Both men were very involved in the U.S. Government and tried to voice their opinions on the best method for success. Neither of them would give any ground on their ideas, which created great conflict in the first years of the U.S. Government. Alexander Hamilton was a member of the Federalist Party. He supported a larger central government where the states had less power than the Federal government. Hamilton believed that bigger central government would provide assistance to programs and business to help them succeed. “Not only the wealth but the independence and security of a country appear to be materially connected with the prosperity of manufacturers” (Document C).Hamilton thought that the U.S. should lean more towards a manufacturing economy opposed to an agricultural one. Along with that idea Hamilton thought that a Central Bank was best for the economy to maintain a national debt that would ensure credibility, and to establish taxes. Hamilton was also supportive of the wealthy aristocrats having more influence in government he believed that the common people were not suited for making decisions, and if they did the U.S. would turn to Anarchy. This view is shown by his statement in the Federal…...

Similar Documents

Democrat vs. Republican

...we think that the two main political parties of America, the Democratic Party and the Republican Party are complete inverse. When we look closer, the several gatherings are as a matter of fact exceptionally comparative. Their strategies may be unexpected, but the roots that they are determined from are the same. . These two parties dominate America’s politics but differ significantly in their beliefs. Some instances, many beliefs overlap. So what are the differences between Democrats and Republicans? There are clear principles that distinguish Republicans from Democrats. Republicans are conservative while Democrats are liberal. Republicans believe that taxes shouldn’t be increased for anyone, and wages should reflect the free market. Whereas, the Democrats favor minimum wages and progressive taxation i.e. higher tax rates for higher sections. Democrats support abortion. Republicans oppose abortion. Democrats prefer to keep the law as it is and permit the guardians to decide on to keep or to not to keep their baby. People commit errors of engaging in intercourse, uncommonly adolescents and little grown-ups. They might as well have an opportunity to alter their errors. Abortion is exceptional, it gives an opening to uproot the load of an unwilling accepted. Republicans uphold the rule that each human conceived and unborn has a key, single power to existence; accordingly, they are in opposition to abortion. Republicans think the unborn child has the right to life which cannot......

Words: 1212 - Pages: 5

The Democratic Party

...Selena Briones 8 November 2012 Government The Democratic Party The Democratic Party is one of two major contemporary political parties in the United States along with the Republican Party. Since the 1930s, the party has promoted a social liberal and progressive platform, and its Congressional caucus is composed of progressives, liberals, centrists, and left-libertarians. The Democratic party believes, Rights of the Individual, Freedoms of the Individual, Responsibilities of the Individual, and Beliefs Concerning Societal Conditions and Governmental Responsibilities. The party has the lengthiest record of continuous operation in the United States and is among the oldest political parties in the world. The Democratic Party evolved from Anti-Federalist factions that opposed the fiscal policies of Alexander Hamilton in the early 1790s. Thomas Jefferson and James Madison organized these factions into the Democratic-Republican Party. The party favored states' rights and strict adherence to the Constitution; it opposed a national bank and wealthy, moneyed interests. The Democratic-Republican Party ascended to power in the election of 1800. Andrew Jackson is typically considered the first Democratic President of the United States. Current President of the United States Barack Obama is the 15th Democrat to hold that office. As of the 112th Congress following the 2010 elections, the Democratic Party currently holds a minority of seats in the House of Representatives and a...

Words: 498 - Pages: 2

Federalist Articles

...protecting and upholding the fundamental values and interests of the American people.It starts by declaring “We the people of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America”(The constitution,1787). In article one, it talks of the representation of all the states and rotational election of senators(which I think is important in a democratic government) as well as the making of the necessary laws empowering the government in its execution of the constitution. In article two, it points out clearly that the president has to be a natural born citizen of this country(one of the ongoing political issues with the republicans that the current president is not). Section four of the same article emphasizes on what Thomas Jefferson said in our earlier readings that a government that is destructive of society,or does not conduct or uphold itself to the integrity of the office, should be removed. Articles three and four continue talking about the importance of appointed judges conducting themselves in good behavior(honest,non corrupt,unbiased and provide justice for all) as well as giving congress to dispose,make rules and regulations towards the common interest of the citizens and protect us against invasions. John......

Words: 2742 - Pages: 11

Dred Scott vs Sanford

...Dred Scott vs. Sanford: The Dred Scott vs. Sanford case is one of the most important cases that have ever been tried in the United States of America and was heard in the Old Courthouse of St. Louis. This case that is usually known as the Dred Scott Decision was a ruling by the Supreme Court of America that African people imported into the country and detained as slaves were not protected by the U.S Constitution and could never be American citizens. Dred Scott was a slave who sued for his freedom from his master in a Missouri court in the year 1846. As part of his arguments, Dred Scott claimed that he resided in Illinois which was a free state and part of the Louisiana Territory. Therefore, he claimed that he was a free man because of his residence in a free territory in which slavery was prohibited by the 1820 Missouri Compromise (“Dred Scott v. Sanford” par, 1). However, Dred Scott’s suit for freedom in the local federal court in Missouri was unsuccessful. Eleven years later after his initial suit in the Missouri court, Scott brought a new suit in the United States’ Supreme Court. This was after the federal court ordered the jury to depend on Missouri law for the conclusion of the case regarding Scott’s freedom. Additionally, Scott decided to appeal to the United States’ Supreme Court following the decision of the Missouri Supreme Court to consider him as a slave. In his defense, Scott’s master maintained that the American Constitution did not allow people of......

Words: 2148 - Pages: 9

The Federalist Party and the Democratic Republicans Party

...Josh Dean U.S. History to 1877 online Unit 1 essay I chose the northern colonies as the colony that I would most like to live in. I chose the north because it seems more stable for a family to live in. The northern colonies had a much healthier life style with a life span that averaged into the seventies. The north was a much tighter society that lived in smaller communities that worked and socialized together. I also like the fact that the settlements were also more organized then the other two colonies. I like the fact that when the northern colonies layed out a town they did it in an organized fashion with the town hall in the center or town were they would worship and have meeting. Around the town hall they would lay out the houses for the people to live so they were close to the center of town. I think this also would help with town defense against attacking Indians and other hostile groups. I also like the fact that the families were given land that had wood and a place to grow crops. This would help immigrants just arriving that they would have the security of knowing they had land to live on. Also the fact that towns with 50 or more families would start a school, which shows the importance of education in the northern colonies. The fact that the north was moral in most of their choices for the community would be a major factor for me deciding to choose the northern colonies to live in. Like the fact that the northern colonies is the anti-slavery......

Words: 657 - Pages: 3

Democratic vs Non-Democratic Government

...Discuss the principal feature of democratic government and non-democratic government. Give an example of each. The principal feature of democratic governments is that the power resides with the people. In a democratic system, governments are established and updated through free and fair electoral processes. Through these processes, the populace elects representatives from competing political parties. The chosen (elected) representatives govern on behalf of the people who elect them. Further, elected representatives, and in turn governments operate under the same rules of law. One example of a democratic nation is Canada. In Canada, the country’s people are represented in the House of Commons by 308 members of parliament (MP). The MPs represent constituencies that are determined based on population density. This system is ideal because large cities, with large populations have many delegates that can represent the many different opinions of the populace. The united states have a similar system whereby the people are represented by elected congress members who act on their behalf in the US government assembly. Although these are important elements in characterizing a democracy, they are obsolete without the active participation of the populace. The citizens of a democracy have an intrinsic responsibility to sustain the democracy. Firstly, people must actively participate in political affairs by staying well-informed about political issues,......

Words: 513 - Pages: 3

American History - Republican Era

...foreign competition Anglo-American Accords: series of agreements reached in British-American Convention of 1818; fixed western boundary between US and Canada as 49th parallel; restored fishing rights Chesapeake Incident: 1807 attack by British ship Leopard on American ship Chesapeake in American waters Dartmouth College vs. Woodward: 1819 Supreme Court decision that prohibited the stated from interfering with the privileges granted to a private corporation Embargo Act of 1807: Act passed by Congress prohibiting American ships from leaving for any foreign port Era of Good Feelings: 1817-1823; period in which the disappearance of the Federalists enable the Republicans to govern in a spirit of nonpartisan harmony Fletcher vs. Peck: Supreme Court decision of 1810 that overturned a state law by ruling it violated a legal contract Treaty of Ghent: December 1814 treaty between US and Britain; ended War of 1812 Impressment: British policy of forcible enlisting American sailors into the British navy Marbury vs. Madison: 1803 Supreme Court decision creating the precedent of judicial review by ruling part of the Judiciary Act of 1789 unconstitutional McCulloch vs. Maryland: 1819 Supreme Court decision upholding constitutionality of Second Bank of the United States and the exercise of federal powers within a state Missouri Compromise: sectional compromise in Congress in 1820 that admitted Missouri as a slave state and Maine as a free state; made slavery illegal in Louisiana......

Words: 485 - Pages: 2

Anti Federalists Versus Federalists

...Pros-Federalists ♥ Supporters of the Constitution that were led by Alexander Hamilton and John Adams. They firmly believed the national government should be strong. They didn't want the Bill of Rights because they felt citizens' rights were already well protected by the Constitution. ♥ Felt that there should be three independent branches each representing a different aspect of the people, and because they are equal one cannot overpower the other. ♥ The more organized party. ♥ The party that wanted the constitution to be ratified and it was! ♥ Federalist vision of the country supported the belief that a National Government based on the Articles of the Confederation was inadequate to support an ever growing and expanding nation. ♥ Federalists were made up of the wealthy and elite plantation owners and businessmen. ♥ The Federalists believed the articles of confederation which were the first attempt to unite the country into a continental nation had failed ♥ Cons-Anti Federalists ♥ Thought Congress held too much power. ♥ Did not like it that there was no bill of rights. ♥ Opponents of a strong central government who campaigned against the ratification of the Constitution in favor of a confederation of independent states ♥ Believe Executive Branch held too much power. ♥ Did not want the constitution Ratified ♥ Did not get their way. ♥ Anti-Federalists believed the Constitution and formation of a National Government would lead to a......

Words: 324 - Pages: 2

2.03 the Anti-Federalists

...FEDERALISTS The federalists wanted and believed in a central government that’s slip into branches and ran by the people. They really wanted a government that was strong and for the people. The anti-federalists wanted to stay under the control of the British in a monarchy government. The federalists wanted the constitution ratified just as it was immediately. FEDERALISTS vs. ANTI-FEDERALISTS The federalists and the anti-federalists had two totally different views on hot the U.S should be governed. They both had their own ideas of what they thought would help make our county better. The federalists believed and wanted a strong federal government, an army and a central bank. With our country in mind they felt that our country should be ran by the people. Stated by the federalist no.39 “It is essential to such a government that it be derived from the great body of the society, not from an inconsiderable proportion of a favored class of it; otherwise handful of tyrannical nobles exercising their oppression by a delegation of their powers might aspire the rank of republicans and claim for their government the honorable tittle of republic.” The federalists believed in separating the government into branches so that the government could be kept under control. Also, stated by the federalists no. 51 “It is evident that each department should have a will of its own; and constituted that the members of the others.. But the great security against a gradual concentration of the......

Words: 667 - Pages: 3

Difference Between Democrats and Republicans

...Is There Really a Difference between the Republican and Democratic Parties? Throughout modern American history, there have been many debates between the Rupublicans and the Democrats. Whether it comes down to what they've done for the american government or how each party differs from one another, there's no question that these two parties are the driving force behind what we know today as the American Government. The truth is, these parties greatly differ from one another and is shown through party ideologies, organization, and certain events in history. The history of the oldest running political party in the world is a complex and diverse one. The democrats, founded by Thomas Jefferson himself, have gone through numerous trials and tribulations to be the politcal party it is today. Stemming from conflicts with the Federalists over Jay's Treaty, it was apparent that " a deep rooted philosophical difference existed between the two factions"( Rutland 10). Because of this struggle for power and differences between the two factions, the Democratic-Republican party was born. Throughout it's history, the democratic party has held onto a few specific ideals that make them different from the republicans. First and foremost, the democratic party started from two main ideals that stem from the Declaration of Indepence, liberty and equality for all. Jefferson believed that the working class people of America werent being treated fairly compared to the wealthy class and......

Words: 252 - Pages: 2

Marbury vs. Madison

...Marbury vs. Madison was a case heard by the Supreme Court that greatly verified the need for accountability of governmental power through checks and balances….. specifically that of judicial review. Starting with the key players in this case, Marbury was a man who was to be appointed as the Justice of the Peace for Washington County in the District of Columbia by President Adams. Madison was the new Secretary of State appointed during Jefferson’s term who withheld Marbury’s (as well as others) petition for commission when Jefferson assumed office, as requested by the president. Marshall was the Chief of Justice, previously Adams Secretary of state. He made and wrote the decision to overturn the act of congress that wrote the principle of judicial review and thusly made the decision against giving Marbury his commission. As for the story. Both the first and second president were federalists. During Adams term, he created new positions for judgeships within the executive branch then in an attempt to keep the federalist influence he appointed loyal federalists to these positions days before the third president took office. Jefferson was a democratic republican. The catch was that though these positions were appointed to specific people and approved by senate, the letters were not delivered to the appointed judges and thusly unofficial. Jefferson was frustrated by this “packing” of the judiciary (pg 63) and ordered that the letters not delivered after his inauguration be voided,......

Words: 795 - Pages: 4

The Conflict Between Federalists and Anti-Federalists

...The Conflict between Federalists and Anti-Federalists The Conflict between Federalists and Anti-Federalists While the anti-Federalists believed the Constitution and formation of a National Government would lead to a monarchy or aristocracy, the Federalists vision of the country supported the belief that a National Government based on the Articles of the Confederation was inadequate to support an ever growing and expanding nation. After the constitution was signed the next step was ratification by a least nine states. Ratification by the states was by no means a fore gone conclusion in 1887. Any state not ratifying the constitution would be considered a separate country. The Federalists and Anti-Federalists had very different opinions on what kind of government should be formed. The Anti-Federalists were made up mostly of farmers and tradesman, common people working to support their families. The Federalists were made up of the wealthy and elite plantation owners and businessmen. In an effort to make their argument the Anti-Federalists used rhetoric from the Revolutionary War to stress the merits of state and local government. The Anti-federalists also characterized a national or central government as a step away from democratic goals, fought for during the Revolutionary War and a step towards monarchy or aristocracy rule (Net Industries, 2009). Anti-Federalists believed individual state rights should be protect and if the constitution was ratified states would......

Words: 1128 - Pages: 5

2.03 Federalists vs. Anti-Federalists

...The federalist structure of government is the one that is best for this nation. Federalists wanted to make a change; a change for the people. They want an established government that is ruled or governed by the people, unlike the Anti-Federalists who wanted to keep the same monarchy government and didn’t seek a change for the people. A monarchy has proven to be corrupt because only the higher-class had the right to power and the lower-class had no say. For this reason, the Federalists wanted to separate the powers of the government into their own branches in order to avoid a corrupt government. Because of this, Federalism would be the best option for this country. Federalists strongly desired a government for the people. They also wanted the constitution to be ratified as quickly as possible with the use of editing. Federalists also believed that some power should be taken out of the states and put into the government, and that the government should be respectfully separated into three branches. Federalist paper no. 39 states: “It is essential to such a government that it be derived from the great body of the society, not from an inconsiderable proportion or a favored class of it; otherwise a handful of tyrannical nobles, exercising their oppression by a delegation of their powers, might aspire to the rank of the republicans and claim for their governments the honorable title of republic.” By separating the government into different branches, the Federalists has the idea......

Words: 615 - Pages: 3

Anti Federalist vs. Federalist

...Both Federalists and Anti-Federalist was both established from Washington’s cabinet. Jefferson who was an anti-federalist, was the secretary of state and hamilton, who was a federalist, was the secretary of the treasury. both parties thought presidents should be voted in by the public, (white males to specific). they based their ideas from the Enlightenment. Overall, they both wanted to keep the liberties of the people protected and wanted representative government. it is important to understand the two opposing view because the two groups untimely forged our nation, and they also created the basic of today two party political system. Opposing Views Federalists Anti-Federalist they were the supporters of a larger national government. they were a group of people that opposed the ratification of the proposed constitution in 1787. Federalists felt like the Bill of Rights addition was not necessary, because they believe that the constitution as it stood only limited the government not the people. propose and supported the Bill of Rights addition because they claimed the constitution gave the central government too much power, and without the bill of rights the people would be at risk of oppression. felt that the states were free agents that should manage their own revenue and spend their money as they say fit. felt that many individual and different fiscal and monetary policies led to economic struggles and national weakness. favored dividing the power among different......

Words: 380 - Pages: 2

2.03 Federalist vs Antifederalist

...If you were to ask me whether I sided with the anti-federalist or the federalist, you might be surprised at what I would say. Maybe not for the reasons you think. In my opinion, I side with the federalist. I’m all for order and I don’t like change so much but to make a country better you need to change some things. Things will constantly be changing and that is fine. A strong central government is very important. The federalist wanted to see a change to improve the country as a whole whereas the anti-federalist wanted to keep the monarchy ways. The anti-federalist and federalist had different views as to how a country should be ran. Both did have ideas to help the country and make it better. Federalist wanted a central federal government, a central bank, and an army. They cared about the governed and not just the ones who govern. In federalist paper no. 39 it says “It is essential to such a government that it be derived from the great body of the society, not from and inconsiderable proportion or a favored class of it; otherwise a handful of tyrannical nobles, exercising their oppression by a delegation of their powers, might aspire to the rank of republicans and claims for their government and honorable title of republic.” Not only did the federalist care about giving too much power to the important people, they also wanted to have control of the government. It states this in federalist paper no. 59: “It is evident that each department should have a will of its own and......

Words: 545 - Pages: 3

iPhone KAPOT gooien + WASABI snuiven? - HOE VER GA JIJ? | Is Computer A Blessing Or A Menace? | THE DARK KNIGHT ENG SUBS