Those who supported the Constitution and a stronger national republic were known as Federalists On the other hand those who opposed the Constitution in favor of small localized government were known as Anti-Federalists. Both were concerned with the preservation of liberty, however, they disagreed whether a strong national government would preserve or eventually destroy the liberty. So you could say that those who supported the Constitution were perceived as a threath to freedom and liberty.
Answer:
Howard Zinn's history is often at odds with how Republicans and Federalists portray history. While Republicans tend to portray Abraham Lincoln as the person who ended slavery, Zinn sees Lincoln as a figure who transitions Black people into a different kind of slavery. While Federalists claimed a big central government would be the best way to look out for the interests of all people, Zinn claims the Federalists's main priority was to advance the interests of the wealthy.
Zinn's view was that traditional American histories were sympathetic to the nation's social and economic elites. The aim of the revolution, Zinn argues, was to divert colonial class anger of the 1760s, shifting it away from colonial assemblies and onto the British government.
Zinn believes that the Constitution does not provide adequate protection for certain segments of the American population. He says in regards to this concept: The slightly prosperous people who make up this base of support are buffers against the blacks, the Indians, the very poor whites.
Explanation:
