Free Essay

Civil Wa

In:

Submitted By rrizo
Words 4176
Pages 17
American Civil War The American Civil War is a very misunderstood war. It is known for the war that ended slavery. What most people don’t know is the war was not originally fought for the abolition of slavery. The South, or the Confederate, wanted to exercise their rights as states and split from the north. Well Abraham Lincoln thought that would be the downfall of the United States. The Civil War was fought to between the Union and the
Confederacy on the issue of splitting up the United States. The country was divided between two philosophies, either they thought the country could only survive and prosper as a whole, or they believed the south had the right to split from the union.
The country was divided between two different philosophies. The North believed if the South seceded from the North the country would crumble. While the South believed they had the right as states to separate themselves from the Union. (Malvasi)
Abraham Lincoln was the head of the Unions thinking. He had a great sense of political knowledge. He realized if the south did secede the Union wouldn’t stand a chance against attack because half of the country essentially would have been gone. Lincoln originally had no plans of abolishing slavery all his focus was on keeping the country together in one strong unit. (Malvasi) The South on the other hand felt they had been mistreated by the Union and were being taken advantage of. Soon the idea of secession came around and South Carolina was the first to make the threat. They were quickly followed by states like Georgia and Mississippi. They were in fact threatening to leave because they believed the Union wanted to abolish slavery. They thought the plan was to do so by admitting more free states than slave states so congress would be one sided. (The Civil
War) This however was not the Unions intention. The only intentions the North had was to ensure the country stays together, the problem was the way they went about it looked like a threat to slavery. This scared the South into action, their threat to leave.
The cause of the Civil War was the South wanting to secede. “The existence of
African servitude was in no wise the cause of the conflict, but only an incident.“(Civil
War: Cause of the Civil War) This is a common misconception, slavery being the cause of the Civil War. The only reason this a belief is because the South thought the North was trying to abolish slavery. When all the North was doing was trying to gain control so the
South could not secede. The main importance of the North was keeping the country together. The goal is clear to see when you look at the compromise of 1850 and the
Missouri Compromise. The point of these deals is to keep the south happy with the power they have in congress. The compromise of 1850 was to stop the growth of Slavery so power didn’t spread too far so the South could take over the North. The Missouri
Compromise stated states had to enter the union in pairs, one slave state and one free

state. Which is good strategy because it would make the South calm because the power in the Senate would remain equal. Which is exactly what they wanted because they assumed the goal of the North is to gain all power, which involved getting rid of the most important industry of the South, which is slavery. This prompted the south to exercise what it thought to be its states rights and try and secede. Only the Union would not allow this to happen which is where the war started.
For anything to be successful you need leaders. Both sides in the Civil War had just that. The Union had Abraham Lincoln as President and Ulysses S. Grant as their
General. While the South had Jefferson Davis as there appointed President and Robert E.
Lee as their General. Abraham Lincoln was the Unions best weapon the for wartime. His main goal was to preserve the Union at all cost. He realized very early War would take place and it was his job to raise an army. So when the day came and rebellion started in
South Carolina. Lincoln sent 75,000 troops to stop the rebellion. (The Civil War) Early on in the war he made it well known the war was not about slavery. Which will be important later on because of what Lincoln did. It was stated earlier that it was Lincoln’s job to raise an army; it was also his job to find a good commander for the army. He tried numerous commanders before finding one that lived up to his standards and his name was Ulysses
S. Grant. These standards mentioned were developed during his teaching of military strategy to himself. (The Civil War) He read numerous books and absorbed the information about military strengths and weaknesses to learn what he needed to prevent a loss to the South. With Lincolns newly acquired military knowledge and his instincts about how the war was going he knew it was time to make a change. He wanted to change the focus of the war to slavery. He did so by declaring the Emancipation
Proclamation. It said all slaves in rebellion states were now free. This was a genius move politically because it separated the Confederate states from European powers. Europe wouldn’t acknowledge the Confederate states until they freed all their slaves; also it deprived the south of its greatest resource, the slaves.
Jefferson Davis was Lincoln’s southern counterpart. He was the President of the
Confederate states. He actually wanted to be a battlefield General not a President, and that showed and hurt him later on. Davis did do a good job with some things however. He built a functioning wartime society. The main parts of which were the government, the army and the economy. Davis also had many more obstacles to deal with than Lincoln.
One of the biggest ones being that the South had 40 percent of the population the North had. Which is why he tried to pass a bill towards the end of the war saying slaves could enlist in the army. (The Civil War) He could see defeat in sight and was desperate for a victory He also had less to work with as far as supplies went, he was known for having his men steal what they needed from the southern population. Most would say Davis did a good job considering what he had to work with going up against the North. But he clearly had downfalls too. It was stated early Davis wanted to be a Battlefield General; this hurt him immensely at war. He got way to involved with the battles and would end up interfering. He provided no actual plan he just wanted to attack. Also he let his temper and other emotions get in the way of putting his best guys at battle. Many times he forced a more skilled or talented general to sit out battles because he was not happy with them.

He just never learned his boundaries as a President not a general.
Both the South and North had one General they both relied on; the South’s was
Robert E. Lee. “As commander of the Army of Northern Virginia, he masterminded many of the South's greatest military victories”(Robert E. Lee) He was the South’s bread and butter when it came to battle. Most people don’t even know he almost became a general for the Union. It wasn’t until Virginia seceded that he was on the South’s side. Proof of this is he had freed his slaves before the Emancipation Proclamation was ever even a thought. The South was an enormous underdog in every aspect except when they were fighting on their own turf. The general in which the North put their faith in was Ulysses
S. Grant. He was appointed the position merely because of the lack of trained officers in the union army, and because of his experience having came from West Point Military
Academy. (The Civil War) He was the front runner for the job because he had destroyed two confederate armies while leading his own troops. Simply put the union rode him out all the way to victory in the war. This was by far his high point of his career because almost everything else he had attempted in history was considered a failure.
When it comes to the outcome of the war you look to factors to see why and how the North won. Looking at how the North is astonishing when you consider the disadvantages they had. The biggest factor was the conditions under which the war was fought. The south was fighting on their turf with the understanding is all they have to do is survive the war. The north had to win the war outright to be victorious. All the south had to do was try and hold them off. Then when you throw in home field advantage for the south the advantages start to pile up. The south also had more trained military experience and the better military minds, but somehow the north was still able to win this war. What the North had was the man History would call the political genius in this war,
Abraham Lincoln. He understood that based on just the premise of stopping the succeeding he would probably fail. Being the genius he is he brought slavery into the equation with the emancipation proclamation. He used the escaped slaves in slaveholding states to his advantage. The emancipation proclamation made it legal to now use them to help fight in battle. Lincoln himself said in times of war the enemy often destroys or takes an enemies property, or even uses it against them. (Lincoln) Not only did this add numbers to the North’s army, but it dwindled down the home field advantage for the
South. All the slaves who now fought for the North were familiar with the south because that is where they were worked as slaves. The souths old property was now being used against them. (Lincoln) This also ties into the 54 t regiment. The 54 th regiment was one of the first official all black units in the Northern army. (Carney) This was a sign of the times and of the changing attitude of the nation. The civil war may not have started out with a focus on slavery, but it is certainly known for the event that ended slavery in the
United States of America.
The first thing a person thinks of when the Civil War is mentioned is the

abolition of slavery. The abolition of slavery was a great defining moment for this country, but it was not the focus of the war. The focus was doing whatever possible to keep the Union together. This war was what some would call a big upset, on paper the
South should have won the war. But with a little bit of luck in Ulysses S. Grant fighting for the Union instead of the south, and Abraham Lincoln’s political knowledge, the North came out with a victory.
Works Cited
6
Patterson
"William H. Carney." Contemporary Black Biography. Vol. 104. Detroit: Gale,
2013. U.S. History in Context. Web. 20 Oct. 2014.
"The Civil War (1861–1865)." Gale Encyclopedia of U.S. History: War. Vol. 1.
Detroit: Gale, 2008. U.S. History in Context. Web. 20 Oct. 2014.
Civil War: Causes of the War." Encyclopedia of the Confederacy. Ed. Richard
Nelson Current. New York: Simon & Schuster, 1993. U.S. History in
Context. Web. 20 Oct. 2014.
"Robert E. Lee." American Civil War Reference Library. Kevin Hillstrom and
Laurie Collier Hillstrom. Ed. Lawrence W. Baker. Vol. 2: Biographies.
Detroit: UXL, 2000. 251­263. U.S. History in Context. Web. 20 Oct.
2014.
Lincoln, Abraham. "A Letter from Abraham Lincoln to Illinois Republican James
Conkling." The African­American Experience. Woodbridge, CT: Primary
Source Media, 1999. American Journey. U.S. History in Context. Web.
20 Oct. 2014.
Malvasi, Mark G., and Carey M. Roberts. "U. S. Civil War: Did Slavery Cause the
Civil War?" History in Dispute. Ed. Mark G. Malvasi. Vol. 13: Slavery in the Western Hemisphere, circa 1500­1888. Detroit: St. James Press,
2003. 276­284. U.S. History in Context. Web. 20 Oct. 2014.
7

civil war.docx 7
1
/

● Patterson
● Alex Patterson
● Professor Jackson
● History 17A
● 21 September 2014
● American Civil War
● The American Civil War is a very misunderstood war. It is known for the war
● that ended slavery. What most people don’t know is the war was not originally fought for
● the abolition of slavery. The South, or the Confederate, wanted to exercise their rights as
● states and split from the north. Well Abraham Lincoln thought that would be the downfall
● of the United States. The Civil War was fought to between the Union and the






































Confederacy on the issue of splitting up the United States. The country was divided between two philosophies, either they thought the country could only survive and prosper as a whole, or they believed the south had the right to split from the union.
The country was divided between two different philosophies. The North believed if the South seceded from the North the country would crumble. While the
South
believed they had the right as states to separate themselves from the Union. (Malvasi)
Abraham Lincoln was the head of the Unions thinking. He had a great sense of political knowledge. He realized if the south did secede the Union wouldn’t stand a chance against attack because half of the country essentially would have been gone. Lincoln originally had no plans of abolishing slavery all his focus was on keeping the country together in one strong unit. (Malvasi) The South on the other hand felt they had been mistreated by the Union and were being taken advantage of. Soon the idea of secession came around and South Carolina was the first to make the threat. They were quickly followed by states
1
Patterson like Georgia and Mississippi. They were in fact threatening to leave because they believed the Union wanted to abolish slavery. They thought the plan was to do so by admitting more free states than slave states so congress would be one sided. (The Civil
War) This however was not the Unions intention. The only intentions the North had was to ensure the country stays together, the problem was the way they went about it looked like a threat to slavery. This scared the South into action, their threat to leave.
The cause of the Civil War was the South wanting to secede. “The existence of
African servitude was in no wise the cause of the conflict, but only an incident.“(Civil
War: Cause of the Civil War) This is a common misconception, slavery being the cause of the Civil War. The only reason this a belief is because the South thought the North was trying to abolish slavery. When all the North was doing was trying to gain control so the
South could not secede. The main importance of the North was keeping the country together. The goal is clear to see when you look at the compromise of 1850 and the
Missouri Compromise. The point of these deals is to keep the south happy with the power they have in congress. The compromise of 1850 was to stop the growth of Slavery so power didn’t spread too far so the South could take over the North. The Missouri
Compromise stated states had to enter the union in pairs, one slave state and one free state. Which is good strategy because it would make the South calm because the power in the Senate would remain equal. Which is exactly what they wanted because they assumed the goal of the North is to gain all power, which involved getting rid of the most important industry of the South, which is slavery. This prompted the south to exercise









































what it thought to be its states rights and try and secede. Only the Union would not allow this to happen which is where the war started.
2
Patterson
For anything to be successful you need leaders. Both sides in the Civil War had just that. The Union had Abraham Lincoln as President and Ulysses S. Grant as their
General. While the South had Jefferson Davis as there appointed President and Robert
E.
Lee as their General. Abraham Lincoln was the Unions best weapon the for wartime. His main goal was to preserve the Union at all cost. He realized very early War would take place and it was his job to raise an army. So when the day came and rebellion started in
South Carolina. Lincoln sent 75,000 troops to stop the rebellion. (The Civil War) Early on in the war he made it well known the war was not about slavery. Which will be important later on because of what Lincoln did. It was stated earlier that it was Lincoln’s job to raise an army; it was also his job to find a good commander for the army. He tried numerous commanders before finding one that lived up to his standards and his name was Ulysses
S. Grant. These standards mentioned were developed during his teaching of military strategy to himself. (The Civil War) He read numerous books and absorbed the information about military strengths and weaknesses to learn what he needed to prevent a loss to the South. With Lincolns newly acquired military knowledge and his instincts about how the war was going he knew it was time to make a change. He wanted to change the focus of the war to slavery. He did so by declaring the Emancipation
Proclamation. It said all slaves in rebellion states were now free. This was a genius move politically because it separated the Confederate states from European powers. Europe wouldn’t acknowledge the Confederate states until they freed all their slaves; also it deprived the south of its greatest resource, the slaves.
Jefferson Davis was Lincoln’s southern counterpart. He was the President of the
Confederate states. He actually wanted to be a battlefield General not a President, and
3
Patterson that showed and hurt him later on. Davis did do a good job with some things however.
He
built a functioning wartime society. The main parts of which were the government, the army and the economy. Davis also had many more obstacles to deal with than Lincoln.
One of the biggest ones being that the South had 40 percent of the population the North had. Which is why he tried to pass a bill towards the end of the war saying slaves could enlist in the army. (The Civil War) He could see defeat in sight and was desperate for a victory He also had less to work with as far as supplies went, he was known for having his men steal what they needed from the southern population. Most would say Davis did a good job considering what he had to work with going up against the North. But he clearly had downfalls too. It was stated early Davis wanted to be a Battlefield General;










































this hurt him immensely at war. He got way to involved with the battles and would end up interfering. He provided no actual plan he just wanted to attack. Also he let his temper and other emotions get in the way of putting his best guys at battle. Many times he forced a more skilled or talented general to sit out battles because he was not happy with them.
He just never learned his boundaries as a President not a general.
Both the South and North had one General they both relied on; the South’s was
Robert E. Lee. “As commander of the Army of Northern Virginia, he masterminded many of the South's greatest military victories”(Robert E. Lee) He was the South’s bread and butter when it came to battle. Most people don’t even know he almost became a general for the Union. It wasn’t until Virginia seceded that he was on the South’s side. Proof of this is he had freed his slaves before the Emancipation Proclamation was ever even a thought. The South was an enormous underdog in every aspect except when they were fighting on their own turf. The general in which the North put their faith in was Ulysses
4
Patterson
S. Grant. He was appointed the position merely because of the lack of trained officers in the union army, and because of his experience having came from West Point Military
Academy. (The Civil War) He was the front runner for the job because he had destroyed two confederate armies while leading his own troops. Simply put the union rode him out all the way to victory in the war. This was by far his high point of his career because almost everything else he had attempted in history was considered a failure.
When it comes to the outcome of the war you look to factors to see why and how the North won. Looking at how the North is astonishing when you consider the disadvantages they had. The biggest factor was the conditions under which the war was fought. The south was fighting on their turf with the understanding is all they have to do is survive the war. The north had to win the war outright to be victorious. All the south had to do was try and hold them off. Then when you throw in home field advantage for the south the advantages start to pile up. The south also had more trained military experience and the better military minds, but somehow the north was still able to win this war. What the North had was the man History would call the political genius in this war,
Abraham Lincoln. He understood that based on just the premise of stopping the succeeding he would probably fail. Being the genius he is he brought slavery into the equation with the emancipation proclamation. He used the escaped slaves in slaveholding states to his advantage. The emancipation proclamation made it legal to now use them to help fight in battle. Lincoln himself said in times of war the enemy often destroys or takes an enemies property, or even uses it against them. (Lincoln) Not only did this add numbers to the North’s army, but it dwindled down the home field advantage for the
South. All the slaves who now fought for the North were familiar with the south because
5
Patterson











































that is where they were worked as slaves. The souths old property was now being used against them. (Lincoln) This also ties into the 54 th regiment. The 54 th regiment was one of the first official all black units in the Northern army. (Carney) This was a sign of the times and of the changing attitude of the nation. The civil war may not have started out with a focus on slavery, but it is certainly known for the event that ended slavery in the
United States of America.
The first thing a person thinks of when the Civil War is mentioned is the abolition of slavery. The abolition of slavery was a great defining moment for this country, but it was not the focus of the war. The focus was doing whatever possible to keep the Union together. This war was what some would call a big upset, on paper the
South should have won the war. But with a little bit of luck in Ulysses S. Grant fighting for the Union instead of the south, and Abraham Lincoln’s political knowledge, the North came out with a victory.
Works Cited
6
Patterson
"William H. Carney." Contemporary Black Biography. Vol. 104. Detroit: Gale,
2013. U.S. History in Context. Web. 20 Oct. 2014.
"The Civil War (1861–1865)." Gale Encyclopedia of U.S. History: War. Vol. 1.
Detroit: Gale, 2008. U.S. History in Context. Web. 20 Oct. 2014.
Civil War: Causes of the War." Encyclopedia of the Confederacy. Ed. Richard
Nelson Current. New York: Simon & Schuster, 1993. U.S. History in
Context. Web. 20 Oct. 2014.
"Robert E. Lee." American Civil War Reference Library. Kevin Hillstrom and
Laurie Collier Hillstrom. Ed. Lawrence W. Baker. Vol. 2: Biographies.
Detroit: UXL, 2000. 251­263. U.S. History in Context. Web. 20 Oct.
2014.
Lincoln, Abraham. "A Letter from Abraham Lincoln to Illinois Republican James
Conkling." The African­American Experience. Woodbridge, CT: Primary
Source Media, 1999. American Journey. U.S. History in Context. Web.
20 Oct. 2014.
Malvasi, Mark G., and Carey M. Roberts. "U. S. Civil War: Did Slavery Cause the
Civil War?" History in Dispute. Ed. Mark G. Malvasi. Vol. 13: Slavery in the Western Hemisphere, circa 1500­1888. Detroit: St. James Press,
2003. 276­284. U.S. History in Context. Web. 20 Oct. 2014.
7

Similar Documents

Premium Essay

Was The Civil War Good Or Bad

...The Civil War. A subject that some people think was caused by lack of Southern states’ rights. But let’s not talk of that. It would probably be preferred to talk about Lincoln. Despite what some people might say, Lincoln was an accomplished president. Lincoln was a successful leader, as demonstrated by his sense of humor, his influence, his intelligence, and his ability to handle depression. Upon reading this, it is hoped that a new light will be seen on Lincoln. In the world of the eighteen sixties it was rare for someone to have a sense of humor, especially the president. Back then, it must have been hard to smile. But even still, Lincoln managed to smile in most of his pictures, if not all. “You can comb through thousands of photographs...

Words: 1169 - Pages: 5

Premium Essay

What Was The Civil Rights Movement In The 1960's

... The 1960’s had a few names, such as the women’s rights movement, and the civil rights movement. However the civil rights movement was a revolutionary fight for racial equality mostly among those who were black and white. With blood being shed, people fought for and against the idea of integration of races. Leading both sides were to important people. The first was Martin Luther King Jr. who preached loved and that violence must be met with peace; the other was Malcom X who thought along with taught that violence can only be met with violence. The two were natural born enemies that had different ways of solving the same problem. One can see the difference in...

Words: 744 - Pages: 3

Premium Essay

Why Slavery Was Not the Cause of the Civil War

...During the mid- nineteenth century, the United States was being faced with a period of exponential growth; a distinct foundational social, economical and cultural difference resided between the country’s northern and southern regions. The North emerged as the industrial heart of the country’s economy, its region made up of manufacturing, developing and processing materials. The north was overall a stronger better-established economy. The South’s economy was made up of mostly agriculture based on large-scale farming. It eventually turned into an economy depended on cotton and required mass labor forces known as slaves, which was the backbone of its economy. As time went on the South began to feel more and more greatly threatened by the North. The South began to become dismayed with the lack of acknowledgement concerning federal control over state rights. Many southern states felt that the new constitution did not fully acknowledge if at all the rights of states to act independently. This was an exponential concern with right of slavery. As America began to expand with the addition of new states from the Louisiana Purchase and the victory of the Mexican War, the fight arose between slave and non-slave state proponents. The Missouri Compromise, Compromise of 1850, and Kansas- Nebraska Act of 1854 were all based around the use or freedom of slaves in new territories causing rising tensions between the North and South. The growth of the Abolition movement twisted the nerves...

Words: 3475 - Pages: 14

Premium Essay

What Was The Great Locomotive Chase In The Civil War

...shouting, and the sounds of gunshots rang in the ears of people at the Big Shanty Train Station as The General, a Confederate supply locomotive, was being hijacked and stolen by Union raiders. The Great Locomotive Chase, or Andrews’ Raid, was a vital element of the Civil War because of the Unions daring seizure of the Confederate steam-engine The General led by James Andrews, along with twenty-two volunteers. The Great Locomotive Chase was a steam-engine pursuit in the Civil War and was a vital part of the rivalry between the Northern Union and the Southern Confederation. Defeating the Union in The Great Locomotive Chase was a tremendous victory for the Confederate states in the Civil War. This was such a great victory for the Confederate nation because the Union had been very stealthy in terms of getting on the General and hijacking it, and the southerners noticed it well before the raiders expected them to, throwing off the entire operation. The northern raiders had planned to be far down the tracks before the southern soldiers had even noticed that their supply train was gone, but they had failed. The thieves were also planning to rip up the rails so they could not be pursued, but the pursuers had already caught up to them. The Confederacy kept a steady pursuit of the Union raiders, resulting in victory....

Words: 483 - Pages: 2

Premium Essay

How Important Was The Siege Of Petersburg In The Civil War

...The siege of Petersburg was one of the most crucial and most important turning points of the Civil War. The Union failed to capture Richmond from the Confederacy, so went to Petersburg as their last chance to make the Confederates surrender. The forces, the fighting tactic, and the casualties of the siege mark the surrender of Robert E. Lee to the Union forces and eventually ended the war at Appomattox Court House. The Union and the Confederacy both put their best forces including the army and leaders into the siege of Petersburg. The Union general, Ulysses S. Grant, had a showdown with the Confederate general, Robert E. Lee, throughout the course of the siege from June 9, 1864 to March 25, 1865. The troops on the Union’s side outnumbered the Confederacy with approximately 100,000 soldiers in comparison with only 52,000 soldiers in the Confederacy. The tactic of fighting from the North was the most well-known factor of the siege....

Words: 560 - Pages: 3

Premium Essay

The Unknown Citizen Anaylsis

...After reading The Unknown Citizen by W.H. Auden I was a little confused about the context of the poem. After rereading it a few times I began to think it was about establishing the American Dream after the War because of the description the speaker gave of the citizen. The speaker says “ But satisfied his employers, Fudge Motors Inc.”, I knew that this was an allusion to Ford Motors which had been a huge factory job, which had been what most men did. Later when the speaker says, “And had everything necessary to the Modern Man, a phonograph, radio, a car and a frigidaire.”, it really helped back up my theory because he was working hard to acquire the nicest things which was huge after the war due to having to scrape and save everything. Overall, I enjoyed the poem. The slight satire caught my interest and enticed me the entire poem. Part Two: After our discussion After our class discussion I found out my theory was completely off. The poem was actually satirical about the “Big Brother” and the mold society tries to push everyone into. We discussed how the speaker capitalizes “the Bureau of Statistics” and how that was the first hint of the satire. The speaker used this to show how the government keeps track of everything. As the poem went on, more fake government organizations came up to show how simple and ordinary the citizen was. The last line “Was he happy? Was he free? The questions is absurd; had anything been wrong, we should certainly have heard.”, emphasized that...

Words: 348 - Pages: 2

Free Essay

To What Extent Was the Civil War a War over Slavery

...“To what extent was the Civil War a war over slavery?”    In this enlightened age, there are few I believe, but what will acknowledge, that slavery  as an institution, is a moral and political evil in any Country.  Robert E. Lee      620 thousand of ​ soldiers lost their lives,​  war cost 5 billion dollars, large  destructions, especially in the South. 4 million freed slaves by Thirteenth Amendment to  the United States Constitution. Brother shot to brother.  Slavery in America has its origins from the beginning of United States existence.  In nineteenth century U.S could be called as an young country with wide, noble ideas of  independence, equality and economic development; with their own basic law, the first  constitution in the World. Regarding to mentioned words; why was it possible to  America to start Civil War?  The case of America was multi­dimensional. United States Constitution did not explain  laws and behaviour towards black­skinned slaves clearly. The South States of America  were place where slavery flourished. Hosts of latifundiums needed ''hands to work'' –  slaves were the cheapest solution because hosts after buying a slave with reasonabe  price had to care only of the fact that their slave is still alive; they provided slaves with  hunger food rations and water – it was a cheap labour which made large land holdings  profitable. In general opinion this unhumanitarian situation was the reason of Civil War.  But...  Was it that clear?  Was the ...

Words: 1544 - Pages: 7

Premium Essay

To What Extent Was The South Responsible For Reconstruction After The Civil War

...Reconstruction ? Both the north and the south were responsible for killing reconstruction after the civil war. The north did not agree that slavery should be allowed but really just had given up on trying to convince the south. The south on the other hand simply refused to give into what the north was saying. To clarify reconstruction was the rebuilding of the united states after the civil war , this was a very tough time period that lasted up to 14 years. Though reconstruction occurred after the civil war many considered it just as painful as a war for many reasons. The northerners wanted to punish the southerns because of their ways of life and how they treated the african americans. My argument is that both the north and the south are responsible for killing reconstruction. The north may have wanted to end slavery and many other things that the south were doing but had given up on taking action. The northers weren’t so focused on fixing the situation and founded themselves being distracted from the leading situation. They also didn’t have great attitudes but seemed more racist which contributed to the end of reconstruction. “ Although political violence continue in the south”. The south would refuse any change that was...

Words: 603 - Pages: 3

Premium Essay

The American Civil War Was an Irrepressible Conflict. Do You Agree?

...‘The American Civil War was an irrepressible conflict.’ Do you agree? The American Civil war is one of the most studied topics in American history. Yet still, a definitive answer cannot be found as to why the war broke out. Many of the interpretations can be grouped into two major schools of thought: the irrepressible conflict or the Blundering Generation. It was certainly true that the North and South were becoming increasingly different during this period. Slavery being the most fundamental of these, however there was also variances in the economies and culture. This would support the idea that the war was inevitable as the differences were too great. However, it can be argued that radically different societies can co-exist without going to war. Instead, a series of mistakes and misjudgements were made by blundering politicians. There are numerous examples of this; the Kansas-Nebraska Act, Dred Scott and the Fugitive Slave Act to name just a few. In my view, the American Civil War was an irrepressible conflict since compromise on the slavery issue was impossible. Blundering politicians acted as catalysts to ignite the flames of war, however they did not create the differences which acted as the foundation for the irrepressible conflict. The issue of slavery is often cited as the most significant cause of the war. By 1860 the issue of slavery had become too great and compromise was impossible. As Frederick Douglass stated, ‘the more the issue is settled, the more it needs settling...

Words: 2087 - Pages: 9

Free Essay

How Important Was the Contribution of Martin Luther King to the Civil Rights Movement of the Years 1955-68?

...How important was the contribution of Martin Luther King to the civil rights movement of the years 1955-68? Martin Luther King was born on the 15th of January 1929. His father was a minister and all throughout king’s younger year’s king aspired to be just like his dad. King became pastor of the Dexter Avenue Baptist Church in Montgomery, Alabama, when he was twenty-five years old, in 1954. It wasn’t till a year later in 1955 that his involvement in the civil rights movement truly came into action. He had heard of a bus boycott, taking place in Montgomery; a young lad called Rosa Parks refused to give up her seat to a white man, she was arrested and fined. There was then staged a boycott, it lasted for 385 days; the situation became so tense king’s house was even bombed, and he was arrested. Because of his extreme involvement this was the start of people viewing king as this national figure for civil rights. Some people do argue however king’s involvement to the cause was not that important, and it was more the action of the people and the long overdue action from the government that made the biggest contribution. The Boycott was most successful for both king and the civil rights movement; In December 1956 the court outlawed segregation on buses. This showed how much the public made an impact on protects, and showed how much king was a key figure in its achievement. After that in 1957 King and several other important activists including Ralph Abernathy, Fred Shuttlesworth,...

Words: 344 - Pages: 2

Free Essay

How Far Was the Effectiveness of the Civil Rights Movement in the 1960s Limited by Internal Divisions? (30 Marks)

...How far was the effectiveness of the Civil Rights Movement in the 1960s limited by internal divisions? (30 marks) During the Civil Rights Movement great improvements were made gradually for the small minority groups in USA, for example Black African Americans, Hispanic groups and also women. However, from the very beginning there were internal divisions within the civil rights movement as well as external divisions. These partitions were caused by four major factors; methods such as peaceful protest and violence, ideology, effects of tension from jealousy and rivalry and lastly personalities of the different civil rights organisations and their leaders as they were competing for media attention and public recognition. These divisions did limit the effectiveness of the civil rights movement as they slowed down the process and cause many complications. These divisions were extremely clear thought out the 1960s as there was the development of Black Power and their methods of violence which is a contrast to Martin Luther King’s approach which was peaceful protest. In the early 1960s many successes came about for the civil rights movement especially for SNCC and of Martin Luther King. The Greensboro sit-ins led by SNCC in 1960 is an example of a triumph as they demonstrated that civil rights campaigns could spread quickly and also showed that other organisations could work together as the sit-ins attacked all aspects of segregation and it lead to the extending of the existing NAACP...

Words: 913 - Pages: 4

Free Essay

To What Extent Was the Red Victory in the Civil War Due to the Skill and Leadership of Trotsky?

...To What Extent Was the Red Victory in the Civil War Due to the Skill and Leadership of Trotsky? The red victory in the civil war in 1919 may have been due to the skill and leadership of Trotsky who was the founder and first leader of the Red Army. As well as this there were other factors which contributed such as geographical factors, the unity and organisation of the reds and the support that they had. The reds were victorious in the civil war due to the skill and leadership of Trotsky who had been made commissar for war in 1918. He restored harsh military discipline and professionalism to the ‘worker’s and peasants red army’ by reintroducing the death penalty for those who did wrong which meant that men were made to fight as more of an effective fighting force. He also reorganised the army and so it had a strict hierarchy and he brought back thousands of former Tsarist officers to train and command the units. To do this he held their families hostage which meant that their loyalty was ensured. In addition to this he attached a political commissar to each army of the unit and ended soldiers committee’s and officer’s elections which meant that the loyalty of the officers was ensured so he would retain power, For those men who were unable to fight, due to age or physical inability, formed labour battalions. This meant that the Front received more help and nobody had an excuse to not fight in the army and so it would prevent people from thinking they could use injuries to get...

Words: 1166 - Pages: 5

Free Essay

Explain Why Manchuria Was the Main Battleground of the Chinese Civil War in the Years 1946–1948.

...Explain why Manchuria was the main battleground of the Chinese civil war in the years 1946–1948. The long-term factor that made Manchuria the main battleground in the beginning of the Civil War was its economic importance. Not only was Manchuria the industrial centre of China at the time, it was a strategic trade zone because of its infrastructure. Manchuria had some of the key railway lines connecting the region with a number of areas in China. Its economic importance was highlighted by the Japanese invasion in 1931, when they had chosen the region seeking for natural resources such as coal. Thus the region had proven to be economically beneficial for both sides, which one of the main reasons it was chosen to be the main battleground at the early stages of the war between the GMD and CPC. The fundamental reason for Manchuria being the key battleground between 1946 and 1948 however was the power vacuum created by Japanese surrender in August 1945. After a sudden retreat of Japanese troops, both the Nationalists and the Communists were determined to seize the abandoned territory, which is why both sent their troops to Manchuria as soon as Japanese had surrendered. The reason why it had been so essential for either side to take control of Manchuria was that seizing Manchuria would considerably strengthened the chances of either GMD or CPC to take over China. Therefore it was crucial to get control over Manchuria in order to have greater control over the whole of China. ...

Words: 966 - Pages: 4

Free Essay

My Life

...Jordan Hollingsworth Professor Appling English 1102 28 February 2016 Paper on Simon J. Ortiz “(My Father’s Song) A poem is a set up of words out together into a piece of writing that partakes of the nature of both speech and song that is nearly always rhythmical, usually metaphorical, and often exhibits such formal elements as meter, rhyme, and stanza structure. In the poem written by Simon J. Ortiz is a very touch poem about ones father and how he misses him dearly. He recalls a memory they had once shared together. The next poem that will be laid out and made more clearer to the viewer will be a poem about a mans father and his hard work. The narrator of the story is one that is recalling his past and how he felt bad for his dad as a young boy. As he has gotten older and more understanding to challenges in life he starts to relative the hardship and to feel bad for his dad. Some expressions or descriptions that are used inside poems are figurative language, symbolisms, metaphor, simile, and personification. Figurative language is words or expressions with a meaning that is different from the literal interpretation. Symbolisms are the use of symbols to represent ideas or qualities. In the essay we will discuss the ideas of how the author uses different ways that they have put there thought together in the poem. Metaphor is a term of used to imply comparison between two literally incompatible items; it does not use explicit connective words. Simile is an explicit comparison...

Words: 1344 - Pages: 6

Premium Essay

How Far Was the Leadership of Martin Luther King Responsible for the Gains Made by the Civil Rights Movement Between the Years 1955 and 1968?

...How far was the leadership of Martin Luther King responsible for the gains made by the civil rights movement between the years 1955 and 1968? The leadership of Martin Luther King was heavily influential between 1955 and 1968 and his success was almost entirely down to his methods of peaceful protest, especially in the South. His philosophy of non-violent direct action helped him to project the movement across the whole of America with help from media companies, the movement gained a substantial amount of support out of sympathy when the American citizens saw the brutal treatment of innocent protestors, increasing the already large numbers of campaigners. Though his campaigns King showed sheer determination and dedication to achieving the ultimate goal of equality. His campaigns impacted all areas of American society whether that be social, political or economical, his protests had the power to affect all. King was ambitious in his ventures, in 1963, he set out to desegregate the most heavily segregated city in the country, Birmingham. Here he targeted black unemployment by provoking violence and not retaliating. After the demonstrations the process of desegregation began slowly, promises were made to end segregation in employment, department stores were desegregated and those jailed for their participation in the campaign were freed. As well as these progressions, Kennedy announced plans to pass a bill that was said to finally end segregation. The Birmingham campaign helped...

Words: 876 - Pages: 4