The anti federalists are credited with persuading the federalists to add a bill of rights to the United States constitution. Thi
s fact could lead to the conclusion that the federalists were against protecting personal rights; however, that is not true. The reason the federalists did not see the need for a bill of rights is because
Federalists considered that bill of rights was unnecessary because they made a clear distinction between US and State constitutions. They argued that the people were allowed to from state constitutions and it gave them broad authority on broad range of topics, the state government could regulate the personal and private matters of the people. While the US constitution retained only those rights that were in interests of the nation, hence Bill of rights was unnecessary an dangerous proposition. It was unnecessary because the federal government could not endangered the freedom of religion or press as it wasn't granted the authority to do so.
Answer: D) they believed it was unnecessary since the Constitution limited the federal government, and each state's constitution included a protection of rights.
Explanation: The Federalists believed it was unnecessary since the Constitution limited the federal government, and each state's constitution included a protection of rights. The Federalists believed that separating the powers of government into three branches, adding checks and balances to ensure each branch would remain equal, and also enumerating the powers of government would greatly limit the new government's ability to infringe on an individual's rights.
3) <span>The first </span>five-year plan <span>was a list of economic goals, created by General Secretary Joseph </span>Stalin<span> and based on his policy of Socialism in One Country. It was implemented between 1928 and 1932. </span>
