Although some historians feel that the Civil War was a result of political blunders and that the issue of slavery did not cause the conflict, this interpretation fails to consider the two main causes of the war itself: the expansion of slavery, and its entrance into the political scene. By considering the personal opinions of people living in both the North and the South at the time of the war, as well as the political decisions made, one can understand the reasons behind the war, and then determine its inevitability. The revisionists believe that the issue of slavery was not a major cause of the war. Some argue that the war was caused by careless decisions made by politicians, who caused people to react with emotions that were out of proportion with the issues involved. Others feel that the slavery problem could have been solved without war.
The problem with these theories is that the revisionists do not recognize slavery as the main difference between North and South. They also fail to realize that it was not simply political blunders that caused the war, but the discussion of slavery publicly among politicians. In his theory of the war, Michael Holt primarily considers the timing of the conflict. He feels that the breakdown in the two party system created a panic among citizens and that this panic erupted into war. The only problem with this theory is that it is not the citizens of a country who decide whether or not to go to war, it is the politicians.
The Term Paper on Was the War a Political Disaster for the Soviet Union
Was the war a political disaster for the soviet union The war was a political disaster for the Soviet Union. Its central objective, the unification of the Korean peninsula under the Kim Il-Sung regime, was not achieved. Boundaries of both parts of Korea remained practically unchanged. Furthermore, relations with communist ally China were seriously and permanently spoiled, leading to the Sino- ...
The reason that slavery could exist without war in the United States until 1861 was because up until that time there was always enough land to expand. It was when the amount of land available for expansion became scarce that the North and South began to feel friction as to who would contro more states, free or slave. The South wanted more slave states, where the North wanted more free states, to give them more land and power in the Senate. That tension, when publicly addressed, erupted into war. Both the North and the South felt that the other was trying to enslave them. This feeling among both Northerners and Southerners made the expansion issue so powerful because the more land and as a result power the South gained, the more afraid the north became; as a result the more the North felt they must prevent the south from expanding.
Arthur Schlesinger feels that the war was fought over the moral issue of slavery. In his essay, “A Moral Problem,” he says, ” A society closed in the defense of evil institutions thus creates moral differences far too profound to be solved by compromise. Such a society forces upon everyone, both those living at the time and those writing about it later, the necessity of moral judgment.” He goes on to say that because slavery was “a betrayal to the basic values of our Christian and democratic tradition,” it had to be challenged, however, He fails to realize that the North did not care about the institution of slavery as long as it stayed in the South. South Carolina seceded, because Abraham Lincoln, a Republican, was voted into office. The Republican party threatened the South’s expansionism and therefore Southerners felt that they had no other choice but to secede or, “To abandon the institution of slavery to Black Republicanism, and to trust the union for her safety.” The Republican party, however, had no intention of ending slavery in the South or freeing the slaves; they just did not want slavery to expand, “Because the scene of intestine struggle will thus be transferred from the south to the North.” He does argue that slavery, for whatever reason was at the heart of the conflict between North and South, and that “The extension of slavery… was an act of aggression” The United States was divided into three groups by the time the Civil War began: those who believed in the complete abolition of slavery, those who were against the expansion of slavery, and those who were pro slavery.
The Essay on Civil War Aspects Slavery South North
... the south was trying to dominate the U. S with slavery. I believe that the war was fought over the moral issue of slavery. The North ... The central cause of conflict between North and South was slavery, but it was only in it's expansion that it was given through ... of men. The Pro slavery South was, in many ways reacting to the North's attack on the slavery and its expansion. Slavery is an institution ...
Many historians like to believe that the moral aspect of slavery is what made it an explosive issue. As Schlesinger notes, “It was the moral issue of slavery, that gave the struggles over slavery their significance.” They should realize, however, that the abolitionist philosophies were considered radical at that time. The abolitionists were a minority, compared to more conservative Northerners. The abolitionists, however, did play a major role in shaping the views of many Northerners. They wrote papers denouncing slavery, held rallies, and published works such as Uncle Tom’s Cabin and The Liberator which not only forced people to discuss slavery openly, but also created a general distaste for slavery and the South. The majority of the North felt that, “to aid or abet the extension of slavery is wrong” However, they had no problems with slavery as long as it remained in the South.
This opinion dates back to the 1820, when the Missouri compromise forbade slavery to exist beyond the latitude 3630, in an attempt to keep slavery out of politics and out of the North. But unfortunately due to the expansionism that followed with the annexation of Texas, and debates over what should be done with the lands gained in the Mexican War this proved to be impossible. The Pro slavery South was, in many ways reacting to the North’s attack on the slavery and its expansion. Slavery is an institution that must continue to grow for its survival. The cotton that necessitated slaves is also a crop that dries soil rapidly, necessitating new soil to be used quite often. Moreover, expansion for the South meant growth, politically, socially and economically, and it meant more political power.
The Dissertation on Southern Economy Slavery South Slaves
How Important Was Slavery to the Economy of the Southern States? Advanced Higher History Dissertation Whether slavery was profitable is one of the key questions that over time, historians have tried to answer. The relevance of this question to our field of study is that slavery was an issue that played an essential role in causing the American Civil war in the 19 th Century. The issue is whether ...
It is human nature to want to make what one has larger and stronger, just as the South wanted to expand and gain power. The Southern politicians did this through political moves such as the Annexation of Texas, “Bleeding Kansas”, the Ostend Manifesto, and through the Dred Scott decision. All of which infuriated the North, and convinced them that the south were trying to dominate the U. S with slavery, making the North ” [T]he subservient subjects of a slave driven oligarchy” The Republican party was formed in opposition to southern expansion. Their platform was Free Soil, Free Men and Free Labor. The Republicans were anti-South but they were in no way an abolitionist party.
They believed that slavery was a flawed system that made the south inefficient, and that because the North’s free labor system was superior it must be guarded from “southern aggression.” When the Republican candidate, Abraham Lincoln was elected in 1860, the South felt that its expansionism was being threatened, and because expansion was vital to the survival of slavery they also felt their way of life was being threatened. Because slavery was such a substantial part of Southern society, the South felt that they could not survive without it. Therefore they were not willing to compromise with the north, “We have at last reached that point in our history when it is necessary for the South to withdraw from the Union. This has not been our seeking… [but] we are bound to accept it for self-preservation.” Although slave owners only made up 25% of the southern population it was a central component of their society.
To own slaves was a sign of wealth and social prestige; poorer farmers who could not afford slaves had a goal to work for, Evan those who were extremely poor and had no hope of ever owning a slave supported slavery, for no matter how poor a white man was in the South, they were still not at the bottom of the social system, as long as there were slaves. If one looks at the figures for the election of 1860 one will notice that Lincoln only secured 4% of the popular vote in the South, only running a ticket in the upper 5 states, where in the north he received 54% of the popular vote. This reveals the unity of the South in their dislike for the Republicans and Lincoln. If the South had been more divided they might have been more willing to negotiate a compromise, but this simply was not the case. “There will be no compromise-it is out of the question.” The central cause of conflict between North and South was slavery, but it was only in it’s expansion and attention that it was given through politics that it became a powerful divisive force that could not be solved by compromise. The entrance of slavery into politics made it into a public issue, and once the issue became public the conflict had to be solved.
The Term Paper on Southern Slave Slavery Slaves Labor
Analyze the philosophical and economic reasons for the growth of slavery in the United States. Slavery has been of signal importance in American history. During the Antebellum Period, it undergirded the nation's economy, increasingly dominated its politics, and finally led to the Civil War between the north and south. After war, the legacy of slavery continued to shape much of American history, ...
Tragically, compromise was impossible, as each section felt that its personal liberty was at stake, and as a result this conflict could not be solved without war.
