Final answer:
Federalists supported a strong central government to ensure stability and defend individual freedom as outlined in the Federalist Papers, while Anti-Federalists feared such concentration of power could lead to tyranny and insisted on a Bill of Rights. Issues of presidential power, state sovereignty, political corruption, and taxation defined their contrasting views.
Step-by-step explanation:
Federalist vs. Anti-Federalist Positions
Federalists advocated for a strong central government believing it was necessary for stability, effective governance, and foreign relations. They supported ratification of the Constitution as it stood, arguing that the separation of powers and checks and balances would prevent tyranny. The Federalist Papers, particularly Papers 10, 39, and 51, penned by Hamilton, Madison, and Jay, detailed their case for a large republic as a protector of individual liberty.
Anti-Federalists, however, were wary of concentrated power and feared that a large central government could become tyrannical and infringe upon personal freedoms and states’ rights. They wanted strong state sovereignty and a weaker national government. The Anti-Federalists insisted that a Bill of Rights was necessary to protect individual liberties. They believed that the legislative and executive branches had too much power, and without checks, could lead to corruption and the abuse of power.
On presidential power, Federalists believed in a balanced approach with sufficient authority vested in the presidency to lead effectively, while Anti-Federalists feared that too much power would mirror monarchical systems. Regarding state sovereignty, Federalists trusted a centralized government with limited state power, whereas Anti-Federalists advocated for state autonomy. As for political corruption, Federalists believed that a large republic could control factions and prevent corruption, and Anti-Federalists feared that a distant central government would be more prone to corruption. Lastly, in terms of taxation, the Federalists saw it as necessary to maintain financial stability and support government operations, while Anti-Federalists worried about the burden on citizens and the lack of direct state control over fiscal policies.