In a paragraph, compare and contrast the arguments made by the Federalists and the Anti-Federalists at the Constitutional Convention about the benefits and problems of a strong central government.

i will mark brainliest

In short the Federalists supported the constitution to tackle the economic and political problems faced by America due to weak central government under the Articles of Confederation; the Anti-Federalists opposed the constitution as they fear the strong central government would suppress people and the states; however at the end a compromise was made by the inclusion of the Bill of Rights in the Constitution.

Explanation:

The Articles of Confederation was unable to succesfuly manage the affairs of America. Due to defence, economic and interstate problems there was a need for a new Constitution that would address these problems. When founding fathers signed the Constitution in 1787, it needed to be ratified by 9 states to go into effect. This ratification resulted in arguments on the benefit and problems of a strong central government. Federalists led by Alexander Hamilton and James Madison supported the constitution. They wanted a strong central government to solve the problems of economy, defence and foreign affairs, and persuaded the states to ratify the new document. In that case the states would have to give up some of the powers including defence, foreign affairs and trade. One of the arguments was that the constitution only limited the power of government and not the people; they opposed the Bill of Rights (A set of 10 amendments to protect the rights of people). On the other hand, the Anti-Federalists opposed the consitution based on the conviction that the new law would curb the liberty of people by giving too much power to the central government. Others in this group argued that a strong central government would threaten the sovereignty of states, and might become as oppressive as the British monarchy. They, therefore, wanted to make Bill of Rights part of the constitution.