Conclusion

Conclusion:

While the federalist papers are historically significant and offer excellent insight into the political debates over the ratification of the constitution and the justification for the constitution, they were not effective in swaying public and political opinions over the ratification of the constitution. First off, the checks and balances that the federalist papers discussed, while passed into the constitution, were more described by Madison to give justification and reasoning to why the constituion was written that way. Which is why they were not effective in swaying public opinion. Furthermore, the federalist papers warned against adding a bill of rights, however, in the wake of ratification of the constitution, many states only agreed to ratify if they promised to add a bill of rights. Moreover, a bill of rights was ratified two years after the ratification of the constitution, once again demonstrating how the federalist papers did not sway public opinion very well. Finally, the federalist papers were written to also create enthusiasm among federalists for the ratification of teh constitution. This means that the federalist papers were not necessarily written to swing public opinion, they were meant to gear up more enthusiasm from other federalists. Overall, the federalist papers were not particularly effecting in swaying public opinion for the ratification of the constitution.