Introduction
Civic virtue is understood as the cultivation of behavior or habits of own living claimed as significant for the success of the public. Self-interest, on the other hand, refers to the habit of having the concern of acquiring what one needs and not about what happens to other people. In the ratification of the Constitution of the United States, there were debates on the issue of the new constitution. 1 The Federalists supported the ratification of the constitution while the anti-federalists strongly opposed the views of the Federalist. The two parties drafted out papers to bring out their claims and views on the ratification of the constitution. The Federalists believed that without the passing of the new Constitution, the United States would not survive. On the other front, the anti-federalists opposed the ratification of the Constitution because they believed that it would give the national government too much power. The anti-federalists, therefore attacked their opponents stating that self-interests guided the Federalists in support of the constitution. This essay will describe the views of federalists and the anti-federalist on the ratification of the constitution basing on self-interest and the civic virtue.
Before the ratification of the Constitution, the Article of Confederation existed as the United States' constitution. The constitution had numerous weaknesses and shortcomings. The senior US delegates decided that it had to be changed . The transition from the previous Constitution to the United States Constitution, however, was not an easy one. All the problems of the Articles of Confederation had to be fixed . Lengthy debates were carried out to ensure that the new constitution was a success. In the debates, the two original parties, the Federalists and the Antifederalists, both brought in their viewpoints about the issue and gave out the advantages and the disadvantages that the new constitution brought forth.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
The major weaknesses of the Articles of Confederation included lack of national court system and the lack of the power to tax or regulate foreign and interstate commerce by the Congress. 2 The Articles of Confederation also stated that each state had only one vote in the Congress whether it was smaller or bigger in size. The Articles lacked an executive branch to enforce any acts passed by the Congress. In the Articles of Confederation, it was stated that the amendments to the article of Confederation required a unanimous vote and that for laws to be passed, a 9/13 majority was required. All these weaknesses deemed the Articles of Confederation as not good enough for the United States. The constitution needed to be changed immediately.
Again, before the ratification of the constitution, the Articles of Confederation through its weaknesses had caused a lot of trouble for the people of the United States. The weaknesses also brought with them regional conflicts, an issue that got the attention of the delegates. Through the ratification of the constitution, the delegates aimed to solve such interstate conflicts and disputes. The ratification, however, was not an easy one. In the Articles of Confederation, the founding fathers had stated that, in the occurrence of a ratification of the Constitution, nine states were to be in support before the process took effect. This alone was not easy. It took a lot of emphasis by the Federalists to convince the whole nation to be in support of the ratification of the constitution.
The Antifederalists also published out their papers stating their reasons for opposing the Constitution which made the process longer. An endless barrage of documents and articles were produced by each party clearly stating and describing the advantages and the disadvantages for the new constitution. The antifederalist deemed their antagonists as self-centered, supporting the Constitution by their virtue of self-interest. The federalists themselves thought of themselves as of the interests of the public. They expressed their civic virtue by stating that the Constitution would not protect the citizens. To the antifederalist, they felt deeply that the new constitution would only give more power to the national government while undermining the state government.
Initially, the Federalists were led by Alexander Hamilton, though at first, the identity of the leader was held a secret. The political party, the Federalists, was the first party to be formed in the United States. The party saw the weaknesses in the Articles of Confederation and attempted to convince the United States government to ratify the constitution. It was Hamilton alongside other leaders who published the series of documents popularly known as the Federalist papers under the name ‘Publius’. The ‘Publius' highlighted the weaknesses of the Articles of Confederation and the need for a better constitution.
According to the Federalists, the previous Constitution gave the individual states more power. The Federalists argued out that, for the US citizens to gain more protection and security, the national government needed to be given more authority and jurisdiction. The Federalists also felt that the Congress had limited power due to the Articles of Confederation. They wanted the Congress to be given the authority and jurisdiction over the domestic affairs.
After the revolutionary wars, the United States was bankrupt. The federal government had no powers of taxation. The Federalists, therefore, saw the need for the federal government to be given more power to exercise taxation to gain revenue to support itself. This is an issue that the Antifederalist viewed as of self-interest. They accused the Federalists of pushing for a situation which would put more burdens on the people while giving more power to the federal government. The antifederalist felt that the Federalists were looking out for themselves and those in power while they were not concerned with the interests of the public.
Due to the lack of sufficient finances after the revolutionary wars, the Congress could not effectively resolve the trade and interstate and regional disputes that were actively growing. The Federalists then opted to come up with a stronger constitution that would efficiently and adequately deal with such issues. They viewed the lack of sufficient authority to the Congress and the national government as a weakness that would not facilitate the development of the nation. They also felt that at some points, other states might decide to draw away from the congregation which would ultimately lead to the collapse of the nation. Indeed rebellions occurred, one of which involved the state of Massachusetts, in which the federal government was unable to provide an army to suppress the uprisings.
The Federalist argued out that the limited power offered to the national government by the Articles of Confederation was responsible for all the problems that the United States faced. The limited power meant limited sources of finance which meant that the national government could not do much when it came to duties such as protecting the nation. The push for a better constitution which would provide more power and hence more finance would see to it that issues such as security are guaranteed. The Federalists took advantage of the political and economic situation of the nation to voice out the benefits that the new Constitution would bring.
According to the Federalists, the proposed constitution would provide adequate protection and security to the people of the United States. The United States would grow and develop as a strong nation with the proposed constitution. There would be better and successful ways to resolve disputes and conflicts between states and regions. The affairs of the nation at large would be looked at in a better way. There would be free trade between states without conflicts and fear of insecurity. Ultimately, the United States would develop economically and thrive as one of the world's best economy.
Delegates from various states then met in the state of Philadelphia in the year 1787 to start the process of revising the Articles of Confederation. 3 The process was a lengthy one. After the ratification, the first United States president, George Washington, was elected. It is important to note that, under the Articles of Confederation, the position of a national president was ceremonial. Also, under the Articles of Confederation; John Hanson, worked as the president of the United States though the work did not suit a typical president. The work proved to be tedious that Hanson wanted to resign. Unfortunately, the Article of Confederation never indicated how succession would be carried out. This meant that the departure of Hanson from office would leave the nation without a president. This and more other reasons also prompted the necessity for the ratification of the constitution.
In the meetings and debates, the Antifederalists strongly opposed the proposed Constitution stating out that it lead to a possible tyranny. The primary reason behind the opposition of the antifederalist was the fact that it would give too much power to the federal government. Instead, they wanted the states to be given more authority to conduct their affairs individually without the interference of the federal government. The antifederalist did not like the idea of having a government that the resembled the British monarchy, whereby the monarchy had full powers and jurisdiction over the whole nation. 4 They believed that by making the national government more powerful, it would become more like the British government. Such government, according to the Antifederalists, would deprive the citizens of their rights just like the British monarchy had done. The antifederalist pushed for the inclusion of a bill of rights in the Constitution as the only way they would agree to support the constitution. The bill of rights would grant certain rights to the citizens which would give way to the creation of a democratic government. Initially, the Federalists had stated that the Constitution did not require a bill of rights.
Finally, the constitution began its ratification process with the bill of rights include. The bill of rights guaranteed that the American people had certain rights and that they would freely criticize the government without any fear. The antifederalist saw to it that the bill of rights was signed and well documented. The Constitution was later signed and adopted in September of 1787. The final ratification came through in 1788 by the state of New Hampshire. 5
Conclusion
The Articles of Confederation had a lot of shortcomings that need to be verified and ratified. The Federalists saw the challenges that the national government faced due to its limited power and recommended the ratification of the constitution. However, initially, the Federalists suggested that the new Constitution would also not require a bill of rights. The antifederalist viewed the ideologies of the Federalists as of self-interest and actively opposed the idea of granting the national government more power. Finally, the Antifederalists agreed to let the ratification go through with the inclusion of a bill of rights in the proposed Constitution. The antifederalist expressed their civic virtue in the attempts to fight for the rights of the common people by pushing for the bill of rights.
Bibliography
Ireland, Owen. Religion, Ethnicity, and Politics: Ratifying the Constitution in Pennsylvania . Penn State Press, 2010.
Cornell, Saul. The other founders: Anti-federalism and the dissenting tradition in America, 1788-1828 . UNC Press Books, 2012.
Maier, Pauline. "Narrative, Interpretation, and the Ratification of the Constitution." The William and Mary Quarterly 69, no. 2 (2012): 382-390.
Berman, Larry A., and Bruce Allen Murphy. Approaching Democracy . Pearson Higher Ed, 2012.
1 Maier, Pauline. "Narrative, Interpretation, and the Ratification of the Constitution." The William and Mary Quarterly 69, no. 2 (2012): 382-390.
2 Berman, Larry A., and Bruce Allen Murphy. Approaching Democracy . Pearson Higher Ed, 2012.
3 Berman, Larry A., and Bruce Allen Murphy. Approaching Democracy . Pearson Higher Ed, 2012.
4 Cornell, Saul. The other founders: Antifederalism and the dissenting tradition in America, 1788-1828 . UNC Press Books, 2012.
5 Ireland, Owen. Religion, Ethnicity, and Politics: Ratifying the Constitution in Pennsylvania . Penn State Press, 2010.
