Anti-federalists

The Anti-federalists believed that the government should be small and close to the people so that liberty could be preserved to the greatest extent possible. The Constitution, they believed, would tip the scales too far in the direction of establishing order, not protecting the liberties of the people. Moreover, they argued that the civic virtue the Federalists seemed to count on for the success of the Constitution was more likely to flourish in smaller communities where the people were more naturally attached to and prone to obey their government. It was also easier in smaller republics, the Anti-federalists argued, to achieve the consensus necessary to pursue and realize the common good of a political body.

In spite of the long list of significant objections the Anti-federalists made, their opposition to ratification never seemed to solidify around any key structural defect of the Constitution. While Anti-federalists variously proposed changing the preamble to read “we the states” instead of “we the people,” shortening the terms of national elected officials, creating a multi-person executive and limiting the jurisdiction of the national court, the rallying point for opponents of the Constitution had little to do with the form of government it would ultimately establish. Perhaps sensing that the people would react most positively to the Constitution’s failure to provide a listing of guaranteed rights and liberties, the Anti-federalists pinned their hopes of defeating the Constitution on their demands that it include a “bill of rights.”