Federalists v. Anti-Federalists
The differences in viewpoints of the Federalists and the Anti-Federalists, while contributing to a diverse economy, weakened the political stability of the United States.
One way that the views of the two sides differed was on the issue of the economy. The Federalist view that was led primarily by Alexander Hamilton believed that the United States should invest more in manufacturing and trade if the nation was to be successful. These views were highlighted when he wrote Report on Manufactures and later advocated for protective tariffs, bounties, premiums and improved transportation for manufacturers. This was due to the fact that many of the Federalists were in the New England colonies whose livelihood relied on trade and manufactured goods But by doing this he ignored a huge part of the American economy that had thrived for decades. This section of the economy was the growth and exportation of such cash crops as indigo, rice, and tobacco in the Southern colonies. The interests of farmers were championed by the Anti-Federalist/Jeffersonian view on what America's economy should be. Jefferson believed that the future of America could be found in the yeoman farmer. The yeoman farmer was one the worked the land, possibly with the help of a few slaves. Where Hamilton saw a diversified economy led by the social elite, Jefferson wanted a decentralized agrarian republic.
The differences between the Federalists and the Anti-Federalists were not restricted to the future economy of America but it also contained differences in how the American economy should run at that time. The Federalists, again led by Hamilton, called for a national bank that could issue a uniform currency for the colonies. The Federalist rationale for this were the implied rights that they said could be found in Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution, which authorized congress to "make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the