50%(4)2 out of 4 people found this document helpful
This preview shows page 1 - 3 out of 3 pages.
Running head: FEDERALISTS VS ANTI-FEDERALISTS DEBATE1Federalists vs. Anti-Federalists DebateName of StudentName of Institution
FEDERALISTS VS ANTI-FEDERALISTS DEBATE2Federalists vs. Anti-Federalists DebateFederalism is favorable because the absence of a strong, central, unifying authority would, at best, cripple the effectiveness of the union and, at worst, set up the nation’s descent into anarchy. Carol Berkin (2009) observed that the anti-federalists saw the value of the federal government. She notes that, even though the anti-federalists had concerns about the Constitution giving the federal government too much power, they still recognized that the confederation wasn’t working and that it needed to be stronger. Similarly, Gordon Wood (2012) observed that Melancton Smith, an antifederalist New York delegate, votes for the Constitution because he realizes that without the constitution, flawedas it is, the states would fall apart. Smith’s rationale was that the United States was better off with the government—even in its poorly constituted form—than it was without it. In the end, the