Question

Please read carefully the sections titled "A New Constitution" and "the Ratification Debate and the Origins of the Bill of Rights" in Chapter 7.The US Constitution was in many ways the fruit of many compromises: southern versus northern interests, large versus small states, central versus local power. While far from perfect, the final document created, as Foner puts it, "a new framework for American development," laying the basis of American modern democracy. If you were one of the state delegates chosen to vote on the ratification of the Constitution in 1788 would you have voted in favor or against? Why? (make sure to read the arguments presented by the Federalists and Anti-Federalists and please make also sure that you provide a clear argument in support of your vote).

Answer 1

Answer:

My vote would have been in favour of the ratification of the Constitution in 1788, the explanation is as follows:

Who are Federalists:

The state delegates who were in support of the constitution and a Federal Government were called Federalists.

Arguments being a federalists are as follows:

1. A strong nationalized government is more powerful and has stronger roots, than the state governments.

2. Forming of a nationalized bank at the center, which can have solid relationships with different foreign countries representing the United States.

3. The country should be governed by the most rich and educated white men, rather than a working class people who can come in greed.

4. The constitution is enough and sufficient in itself and the Bills of rights is not required by the United States.

The major argument that federalists gave was that, the Article of Confederation was not able to protect the nation in case of emergency. Wherein, most of the powers were with the states.

Conclusion: My vote is in favour of the ratification of the constitution. Due to the above mentioned arguments. Because, ‘Together we unite divided we fall’ and Together will never be defeated.