Anti-Federalists were opposed to the adoption of the Constitution for two major reasons. The first was that they feared that the Constitution placed power too firmly in the hands of a centralized Federal government. The second was that the Constitution contained no prescribed Bill of Rights. As only the first of these two concerns is an answer choice, it must be the correct answer.

Charles Beard is a famous writer and historian who argued that the Constitutional Framers, far from being motivated by universal human rights and liberty, were instead motivated by preserving the economic interests of the upper class from which they came.

The correct answer is Thomas Jefferson. He famously responded to the uprising in Massachusetts by saying that "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is its natural manure." You do not need to remember this quote, but you do need to remember its sentiment. Jefferson believed that rebellions were not detrimental to the maintenance of the American government; on the contrary, he felt that they were necessary toward preserving the concept of liberty and individual freedom. In this he was in the minority among the Founding Fathers—George Washington in particular felt that Shays’ Rebellion conclusively demonstrated the need for a stronger Federal government.

The Declaration of Independence, in which the colonies formally listed their grievances against the British government and King George, was written by Thomas Jefferson, in 1776.

The Virginia Plan, as opposed to the New Jersey Plan, was intended to establish a legislative branch where the representation was divided proportionally among the states, based on their respective populations. It was primarily sponsored by James Madison.

The Federalist Papers is a collection of essays written by John Jay, Alexander Hamilton, and James Madison advocating for the ratification and adoption of the United States Constitution. These essays were published primarily in New York state newspapers in 1787 and 1788 during the debate over Constitutional ratification.

In Madison No. 51 he uses the specific phrase “necessary predominates” when referring to the Legislative branch of government. The reason for this, according to Madison, is that the legislative branch is more representative of the people therefore it should have a greater say in government affairs.

John Jay, Alexander Hamilton, and James Madison wrote the collection of papers that we now refer to as the Federalist Papers. Essentially, these papers laid out the inner-workings of the proposed federal government, along with some pretty compelling political theory to back it up. Most students remember that Hamilton and Madison wrote the Federalist Papers—some even remember they both did—but relatively few people remember that John Jay actually wrote a few as well. Unfortunately, John Jay has been relegated to a relatively obscure part of the annals of history—he was also the first Supreme Court Chief Justice, but was so massively eclipsed by John Marshall’s fame that everyone forgets that too.

At any rate, the easiest way to remember that all three men wrote the Federalist Papers is to remember this: Hamilton wrote the most, Madison wrote the best, and Jay wrote . . . five

Madison penned a brilliant response to the anti-federalist objection regarding a large republic and factions. The anti-federalists stir up fear regarding a particular faction taking over the government and subjecting everyone else to that faction’s interests. Madison responds by turning the argument on its head. Madison says we can do one of two things: (1) control the effects of factionalism—that is, ensure everyone has the same opinion (belongs to the same faction)—or, (2) expand the sphere and include every faction you could possibly think of.

The expansion theory makes sense if you abstract it. Take a room of 10 people—would it be easy or hard for one particularly vociferous person to “convert” or sway a majority of those people to her will? Relatively speaking, it would be easy, right? What if there were 100 people? 10000? 1000000? It becomes exponentially harder to sway people to your will when there are more voices there.

Federalist 51 includes one of the most famous quotations in all of political science: “if men were angels no government would be necessary.” Madison goes on to explain that men, in fact, are not angels, and thus government IS necessary. But since men are inherently sinful/greedy/generally bad, how do we ensure that the government we created doesn’t turn upon the people?

Separation of powers, that’s how. By splitting the government into three branches—each of which jealously guards its own power—we ensure that the government will be too busy fighting against itself to turn a totalitarian eye to the people.