North Vs South Political Analysis

The economies of the North and South were vastly different leading up to the Civil War. Money was equivalent to power in both regions. For the North, the economy was based on industry as they were more modern and self-aware. They realized that industrialization was progress and it could help rid the country of slave labor as it was wrong. The North’s population had a class system but citizens could move within the system, provided they made the money that would allow them to move up in class. The class system was not as rigid as it was in the South. By comparison, the South wanted to hold on to its economic policy. In doing so, the practice of slavery kept the social order firmly in place. The economic factors, social issues and a growing

Between Constitutional ratification and southern secession, the United States increasingly developed sectional tensions between North and South. Regional differences and territorial expansion created the conflict of interests between the states. Proslavery southern and antislavery northern states envisioned their economical and political future in different ways. The question of slavery during the westward expansion was decisive for politics of both sides because more slave states would create voting advantages for the slaveholding states in the Congress. Northwestern territories were occupied by the new settlers from New England who established urbanized culture and infrastructure in Upstate New York and the Upper Northwest. New settlers in the Lower South organized farms and plantations to develop agricultural sector. Slavery was the main labor force in the South. With technological and transportation development, it became easier to migrate in the search of new territories. In the first half of the nineteenth century, the North supported industrialization and manufacturing, while the South was mostly focused on the agricultural development. The whole economy of the southern states depended largely on the cotton production. For many years, the issues of slavery, human rights and racial inequality were the main topics for discussion by people, and the expansion of borders in the beginning of the nineteenth century intensified discussions around these questions. The

While many have described the civil war as simply the war between the States, Bruce Levine in his book “Half Slave and Half Free: The Roots of Civil War” has put together an 80 year survey from around 1773 the pre-revolutionary era to the Civil War with well documented evidence of the social, cultural and political idealisms of our once divided nation. This book review will emphasize points on each of the book’s chapters which are put chronologically and particularly comparing the southern slave labor system to the free labor system in the north. Levine’s thesis statement on page four of his book reads as follows, “What impelled so many-rich, middling, and poor; white and black; native-born and immigrant- to risk and sacrifice so much? To answer such questions, this book reexamines the antebellum political history in the light of the broader economic, social, cultural, and ideological developments that shaped the lives of the American people”. (p. 4) Clearly the author of the book has researched numerous historical papers and has placed them in the direction his thesis will be provided with hard evidence from the founding fathers’ letters, written memos and of course the laws put into the United States constitution.

As we already noted – in the 1800s expediency of slavery was disputed. While industrial North almost abandoned bondage, by the early 19th century, slavery was almost exclusively confined to the South, home to more than 90 percent of American blacks (Barney W., p. 61). Agrarian South needed free labor force in order to stimulate economic growth. In particular, whites exploited blacks in textile production. This conditioned the differences in economic and social development of the North and South, and opposing viewpoints on the social structure. “Northerners now saw slavery as a barbaric relic from the past, a barrier to secular and Christian progress that contradicted the ideals of the Declaration of Independence and degraded the free-labor aspirations of Northern society” (Barney W., p. 63).

In sequence with these events, Abraham Lincoln returned to politics in 1854 because of the success of Douglas’ Kansas-Nebraska act, and he quickly became the voice of the newly formed Republican Party. Shortly after he accepted the nomination from his party he said, “A housed divided against itself cannot stand. I believe this government cannot endure, permanently half slave and half free.” This quote is very important because Americans became aware that they would soon have to choose either to favor or oppose slavery, there was no middle ground. In Abraham Lincoln’s eyes, freedom meant the opposition to slavery. Unfortunately for the Republican party, Lincoln lost the election of 1858 and Douglas was reelected, but Lincoln would soon be back.

Throughout the 19th century, the distinctions between the North and South in the United States were controversial. Prior to the Civil War, the North consisted of business owners and middle-class men. The South consisted of mostly farmers. The North was industrial, using railroads and factories. The South was agricultural, with mostly farms and plantations. The North paid their labor workers. The South used slaves. Not only did their opposing views on slavery and the separation of the two cultures, tensions arose that eventually led to one of the most gruesome wars in history.

While other authors focus their attention in regards to Reconstruction in the Southern states after the American Civil War on political matters and the meaning of Reconstruction itself, John Rodrigue ventures into the world of Sugar and the relationships between planters and freedmen to illustrate the creation of a labor system within the world of sugar cane plantations in Louisiana. By concentrating on this specific business and region, the author is able to illustrate the factors that shaped labor during and after the Civil War, while showing how Reconstruction altered life in terms of labor for both whites and African Americans. Rodrigue argues that by focusing on this specific region reveals how blacks were able to gain negotiating power with planters in an effort to support free labor. By utilizing primary and secondary sources, the author frames the narrative and provide the reader with a personal perspective into the free labor system.

Since the constitution in 1787 the north and the south beliefs had separated them. The free northern states need for labor workers dropped drastically due to urbanization and the increase of industries. Easier transportation was soon developed when they created railroads. As for the southern slave states their fertile land was ideal for large-scale farms and crops. Document A is two different

Throughout American history, the south and the north have consistently held different beliefs on how to handle some subjects. Whether it ranged from slavery, to taxing, or to business, southerners and northerners often seemed to be on opposite sides of the spectrum. It was not any different back in the 1800’s. Though intensely different, they were still part of the same country. One of the biggest issues that made the north and the south so distinct from one another was their view and perspective on slavery. The north, who was considered mostly republican, saw slavery as something that needed to be abolished for it was a great sin committed by mankind; while the south, who were mostly considered democrats, viewed it as a necessity for they considered African-Americans a race that needed to be controlled because they were less intelligent than the white man but very violent and because they were “built” for the hard labor. Over the 1800’s they had been a tension built between the two sides of the country. The tension rose to a boiling point when the 1860 election rolled around. After the elections occurred, a chain of events followed which would leave a lasting impact on the current United States. In the heart of these events was the civil war. To this day, it is very debatable that the war started because of the unsure future of slavery under new leadership.

In the time just before the Civil War, the United States was one of the most successful nations in the world. The United States had become the world’s leading cotton producing country and had developed industry, which would in the future, surpass that of Great Britain. Also, the United States possessed an advanced railroad and transportation system. However, despite its successes, the United States was becoming increasingly divided. The North and the South had many distinct differences in terms of their social, cultural, and economic characteristics that brought about sectionalism and, eventually, the Civil War.

The Civil war was the most momentous and crucial period of time in the history of America. Not only did this war bring an end to slavery but also paved way for numerous social and political changes. The country had already been torn by the negative trend in race relations and the numerous cases of slave uprisings were taking their toll on the country 's political and social structure. The country was predominately divided up into 3 sections, the North, the South, and the West. Each of these groups had different fundamental interests. The North wanted economies depending on farming, factories and milltowns, while the West relied on expansion and development of land for farming and new towns. The South mainly relied on agriculture like

And its abolitionist and free thinking.Meanwhile, the south’s colony is characterized by the controversy of slavery and the cash crops they produced

In the later half of nineteenth century America, the new nation’s original ability to resolve conflict through means of peaceful compromise had vanished. Various spans of conflict such as Westward Expansion, the Market Revolution, Sectionalism, Mexican American War, the succession of the southern states and ultimately the failure of the Compromise of 1850 that made compromise between the North and the South unattainable. It was the uncompromising differences amongst the free and slave states over the power of the national government that created a divide that would result in divisional violence. From the industrialized North, the agricultural South, Jackson’s Presidency to Lincoln’s and the rise in America 's involvement in politics that followed, slavery was merely one pawn on the board during America’s transforming years that would later reveal itself to have been the vehicle for the Civil War.

In the early years of the 19th century, slavery was more than ever turning into a sectional concern, such that the nation had essentially become divided along regional lines. Based on economic or moral reasoning, people of the Northern states were increasingly in support of opposition to slavery, all the while Southerners became united to defend the institution of slavery. Brought on by profound changes including regional differences in the pattern of slavery in the upper and lower South, as well as the movement of abolitionism in the North, slavery in America had transformed from an issue of politics into a moral campaign during the period of 1815-1860, ultimately polarizing the North and the South to the point in which threats of a Southern disunion would mark the beginning of the Civil War in 1861 (Goldfield et. al, The American Journey, p. 281).

free-labor based economy of the North and the slave-labor based economy of the South which