U.S. Political Party System Term Paper

¶ … Anti-Federalists and the Constitution in the Development of Political Parties The Development of Political Parties

The Constitution and Political Parties

The Changing Ideology of Political Parties

Even before the adoption of the Constitution, political parties were beginning to form. Those who favored the Constitution were called Federalists, and were led by Alexander Hamilton and James Madison. Another group, led by Thomas Jefferson, opposed the adoption of the Constitution and was known as Antifederalists. The Antifederalists broke up after the Constitution was ratified, but they set the stage for the development of other political parties, resulting in the two party system that we have today.

The Development of Political Parties

The debate over the Constitution split people into two groups. Those who favored ratification believed that a strong federal government that would dominate the individual states. Hamilton particularly argued that the future of the country depended on the development of a viable mercantile and manufacturing economy. Such an economy would require a strong central government. Jefferson and the Antifederalists feared a strong central government because they believed that it would trample the rights of individuals. They favored states rights, decentralization, and an agrarian economy. Of course, the Federalists triumphed, but not before the Antifederalists forced the adoption of the Bill of Rights (Elkins and McKitrick 32, 59-61).

After the Constitutional debate, the Antifederalists broke up while the Federalists gained most of the political power. Jefferson was the lone nonfederalist in the Washington administration, but his influence was limited, and he left his post as Secretary of State. Regional interests began to drive politics, with the New England states supporting the Federalists. Southerners and...

...

Essentially, their philosophy was the same as the Antifederalists. The wealthy tended to support the Federalists, and the common people supported the Democratic Republicans. By the 1796 election, political parties were established in the United States and have existed ever since then. For the most part, there have been two major parties, although there have been brief periods in which one party has dominated nationally (Sharp 138-162).
III. The Constitution and Political Parties

The Constitution apparently does not envision political parties since it does not mention them anywhere. However, while it is clear that some of the founders were surprised by the emergence of political parties, most of the founders were politically savvy, and at least some of them must have realized that the creation of political parties was inevitable. After all, they had the evidence of Great Britain, which saw the development of the Tory and Whig parties while America was still a colony. Furthermore, they had the experience of seeing two quasi-parties develop during the Constitutional debate. One can only conclude that they felt that including references to parties in the Constitution was unnecessary, since their development was inevitable. This begs the question of whether the Constitution itself made the development of political parties inevitable or if their creation is more the result of the diversity of interests that exist in a large nation. The answer seems to be that both were contributing factors. The Constitution created a system that made parties necessary. Passage of legislation requires majorities. This in turn leads to the formation of alliances within the legislatures. This in turn creates an impetus to elect groups of legislators who will work together and share the same views. Maybe this is why…

Sources Used in Documents:

Bibliography

Brief History of the Democratic Party." 2003. Democratic National Committee. 30 April 2003 http://www.democrats.org/about/history.html.

Elkins, Stanley and Eric McKitrick. The Age of Federalism: The Early American Republic, 1788-1800. New York: Oxford University Press, 1993.

Main, Jackson Turner. The Antifederalists: Critics of the Constitution, 1781-1788. Chapel

Hill: The University of North Carolina Press, 1961.
The Republican Party." 2003. Republican National Committee. 30 April 2003. http://www.rnc.orggopinfo/history.


Cite this Document:

"U S Political Party System" (2003, May 01) Retrieved April 27, 2024, from
https://www.paperdue.com/essay/us-political-party-system-148191

"U S Political Party System" 01 May 2003. Web.27 April. 2024. <
https://www.paperdue.com/essay/us-political-party-system-148191>

"U S Political Party System", 01 May 2003, Accessed.27 April. 2024,
https://www.paperdue.com/essay/us-political-party-system-148191

Related Documents

The merits of the two-party system all stem from its perceived (and probably justifiably so) stability. That stability is offered by many as reason enough to avoid rocking the boat. But, as presented here, the arguments against the two-party system and, indeed, maybe against stability itself, are more persuasive. The U.S. can handle electoral dynamics associated with more than two parties, and it seems that the governing body can only

However, the system is much more representative. Thus, in the British Parliament there are representatives from the Scottish parliament as well as from the Northern Ireland Assembly. Even so, the proposals for the reform of the electoral law and program have tried to ease the access of the population to the voting system, to increase the public awareness in relation to the political representation. This would determine a better

Obtaining a warrant to take blood sample of a person suspected of drunk driving but has refused to take breath test takes longer time and undermines the essence of time in this process. The Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. together with other judges; however, expressed discomfort with what they termed government sanctioned bodily intrusions using sharp needles (Liptak, 2013). Missouri prosecutors' petition was occasioned by a case where one

To ensure Allende never came to power, before resorting to "jackals," the United States, through the CIA, spend three million dollars campaigning against him, mostly through radio and print social marketing. Allende had a warm relationship with Cuba and had openly criticized the invasion of the Bay of Pigs. This all was in line with the earlier outlined U.S. policy which invoked control of Latin American countries as key to

" The withdrawal was supposed to aid the Communists in controlling the areas vacated by the Japanese, who had succeeded in controlling vast portions of Manchuria. Stalin's efforts were aimed at forcing "the GMD [Guomindang or Chinese Nationalist Party] to make economic concessions, to prevent a united China from allying with the United States, and to placate Washington on the international arena by giving in to American demands for withdrawal," but in

" (Miles, 2006) According to Norway's Department of Defense document entitled: "International Military Operations, Crisis Management - Multinational Operations" when a country is a participant in an "multinational crisis management" initiative entailed is "the ability, at short notice and in concert with allies and others, to contribute a military capability in some form for the purpose of bringing under control a given situation in which poses a threat either to international