Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

ok folks, my son says, What is a Federalist?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
tigereye Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-13-04 03:42 PM
Original message
ok folks, my son says, What is a Federalist?
Edited on Wed Oct-13-04 03:56 PM by tigereye
he has many political questions since he has been reading a book about the Presidents and hearing us(me and husband) rant around here. :)
He is 8.

any takers or historians?

thanks
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
UrbScotty Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-13-04 03:46 PM
Response to Original message
1. Federalists supported a stronger national government
Edited on Wed Oct-13-04 03:50 PM by ih8thegop
At the 1787 Constitutional Convention, they aggressively pushed for a stronger national government to replace the Articles of Confederation.

Under the Articles, the government had little power: It couldn't directly tax people, control trade, enforce laws. They had to rely on states to donate money to the federal government.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
deadparrot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-13-04 03:52 PM
Response to Reply #1
4. Were dominant unti about 1800, then they slowly began to lose power after
Edited on Wed Oct-13-04 03:52 PM by deadparrot
Jefferson's election, partly due to their passing of the Alien and Sedition acts...they finally disappeared around the 1820s.

Alexander Hamilton was their leader.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
proud patriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-13-04 03:49 PM
Response to Original message
2. here's a site that compares
both Federalists and Anit-Federalists
http://www.netessays.net/viewpaper/14152.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lazarus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-13-04 03:51 PM
Response to Original message
3. IIRC
Federalists were the faction that was in favour of the Constitution. They were pushing the concept of a strong central government.

The other side, Anti-Federalists or Democratic-Republicans, were more in favour of a very weak central government, with the states having much more power.

That's how it started, but, of course, things changed radically. They eventually merged with elements of the Democrat-Republicans to become National Republicans, then Whigs, who evolved into the modern Republican party.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
candy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-13-04 03:54 PM
Response to Original message
5. The states recognize the authority of the federal government---
while they(the states) retain certian powers.

Alexander Hamilton was a Federalist when the party existed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
UrbScotty Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-13-04 03:57 PM
Response to Reply #5
7. So was John Jay, the first Chief Justice
Edited on Wed Oct-13-04 03:58 PM by ih8thegop
Jay and Hamilton, under the synonym "Publius," wrote The Federalist Papers, which were instrumental in the ratification movement.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bucky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-13-04 04:05 PM
Response to Reply #7
11. Of course Madison was a top Federalist who became a Republican
The Republicans eventually became the modern Democrats. The pedigree of today's Republicans is erroneously linked to the original Federalist party, but their origins aren't quite as directly linked to Hamilton as the Democrats are to the Jefferson-Madison faction.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lil-petunia Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-13-04 03:55 PM
Response to Original message
6. They created the modern country
Federalists forced the repayment of the old Revolutionary War debt, the assumption of state debts, passage of excise laws, creation of a central bank, maintenance of a tariff system, and favourable treatment of American shipping. They pushed federal power over state's rights. But they refused to buckle under just to win elections, so panderers and frauds won many local elections. Their power eroded until 1817 when the party was no more.

In foreign affairs they approved the Jay Treaty of 1794, sponsored strong defense and internal-security legislation in the crisis of 1798–99.

Interestingly, their key opponents were the national republican party which eventually became today's democratic party.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tigereye Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-13-04 04:00 PM
Response to Reply #6
8. that is so funny that the NRP became the Dems
fascinating.

Thanks everyone.

It is fun to explore the past and how things are very different - political parties for instance. Jay Treaty... I can't remember what it was. Will have to look it up.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bucky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-13-04 04:02 PM
Response to Original message
9. Federalists were (almost) the first bolsheviks
In 1917 Russia the communists then trying to overthrow the start up Kerensky Republican government that had replaced the Czar started to break up into two factions. The smaller group took on the name "bolsheviks", meaning "the majority." The (rather stupid) moderate faction, although a larger group, obligingly (and rather stupidly) took on the name "mensheviks," meaning "the minority." The guys with the better name won.

In 1787 another group of revolutionists had a similar to-do over names. The smaller, but more activist, faction of the Revolutionary leaders decided that they didn't like the constitution of the 13-state confederation. At the Philadelphia convention the debate clearly divided along the lines of those who wanted to moderately reform the confederation government (the foederalists as the term was then spelled) and those who wanted a total overhaul to create a national government, called the "nationalists."

The more dynamic nationalist faction made a few concessions (like the make up of our current undemocratic Senate) and started calling themselves federalists, using the more modern spelling. It irked a number of leading liberal patriots like Luther Martin of Maryland, Patrick Henry, and the powerful Lees of Virginia that the opponents of the Articles of Confederation called themselves federalists and labeled the champions of the Articles "antifederalists" as if to define them by the fact that they opposed confederation, which they obviously did not.

But of course the winners (Washington, Madison, Hamilton, Robert Morris) write the history books.

If your kid's only 8 years old, you'd better stick with the definition Ih8theGOP wrote. It's a bit cleaner than the long version.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gothmog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-13-04 04:04 PM
Response to Original message
10. Federalist Society is group of RW nut case lawyers
There is a group of right wing nut case lawyers called the Federalist Society. These nut cases are very right wing and have been very influential in helping Bush to make his judicial selections. M. Estrada is a member of the Federalist Society and took pride in making sure that each of the justices had right wingers as law clerks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bucky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-13-04 04:07 PM
Response to Reply #10
12. They're the PITs. Pricks-in-Training.
I'm sure they all dream of "pulling a Clarence", lifetime appointment by the time they're 40. Then it's hellooooo, Anniiitaaaa!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
smirkymonkey Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-13-04 04:57 PM
Response to Reply #10
15. But it almost seems like a Federalist would be the opposite
of a traditional Republican, who favors smaller governement, more power to the states. Or do I not quite understand the nuances?

To me it sounds like they are basically pushing for a dictatorship, which would kind of make them totalitarian fascists.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
candy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-13-04 04:14 PM
Response to Original message
13. Forgot to mention earlier,you must have a very bright young man!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tigereye Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-13-04 04:53 PM
Response to Reply #13
14. yeah we think so
thanks... he asks good questions and I think that is a good start. It is really fun when he comes home and tells me info I don't know. And I used to play Mr. President ( an academic game based on Pres. info when I was in high school)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed May 08th 2024, 03:33 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC