The Republic Of San Marino

The challenges that the Union and the Confederacy faced during the Civil War were very different. Critical weaknesses that seemed unfit for war, plagued the opposing American forces, and would serve to be a continuous obstacle that would need to be conquered by patriotism of the people, for their opposing views. To allow for both sides to be competitive, the efforts put forth had to mold to the varied needs of the armies by both the civilian population and their militaries. To the people in the south the similarity to the colonists in the Revolutionary War, was assimilated to their separatist cause in the Civil War and would be their drive to compete with the dominating Northern states. This mindset started the Confederacy in the Civil

America’s transformation into the country we live in today has been formed through numerous events during its short history but the event that will split the United States into North versus South is truly one of the most defining events in American history. Through numerous events leading up to the start of the Civil War, I will attempt to show how the United States was destined for conflict and that the Civil War was inevitable. The first way I will show how the war could not be avoided will deal with the issue of slavery. Slavery should be the first mentioned because many conflicts within the United States leading up to the Civil War and the division of the United States dealt with slavery. The Missouri Compromise should also be talked

The Civil War that took place in the United States from 1861 to 1865 could have easily swung either way at several points during the conflict. There is however several reasons that the North would emerge victorious from this bloody war that pit brother against brother. Some of the main contributing factors are superior industrial capabilities, more efficient logistical support, greater naval power, and a largely lopsided population in favor of the Union. Also one of the advantages the Union had was that of an experienced government, an advantage that very well might have been one of the greatest contributing factors to their success. There are many reasons factors that lead to the North's victory, and each of these elements in and

San Marino is a small, land locked country located inside the country of Italy. Officially founded in 301 AD and with a Constitution adopted in 1600 AD, it is often heralded as one of the world’s oldest countries. This paper will be exploring San Marino’s Political Philosophy (classic), Constitution (largely unchanged), Governmental Model (federal, with checks and balances and an independent judiciary), Economic Well-Being (a developed country and fairly well-off), Role of the Media (nearly non-existent), and Political Socialization (uniform for all citizens).

Before this sanguinary war began, there was a divided America. The inhabitants of these nations couldn’t define America’s founding principles, which were life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. The pre-Civil War era was one of the most chaotic periods in human history. The South and the North were the disagreeing nations in America. The free and industrialized North was the center of the abolitionists while the agrarian South was the center of

From the beginning of the war, the Confederacy placed great hope in being recognized and supported by Great Britain and France. European intervention in the conflict remained a strong possibility, but when it did occur, it was not in a way anticipated by either the Confederacy or the Union.

With the eruption of the Civil War came one of the biggest tribulations and trials that this country has ever faced, but as we understand the motives of one of the greatest Presidents in American History we can see that the Civil War was inevitable. From his original intentions of merely preserving the Union and holding the country together, to permanently abolishing slavery we can observe why prevailing in the struggle of the Civil War is one of Lincoln’s defining legacies. Thus, as the civil war draws to a close, an old tumultuous era has ended, and a new more prosperous era has

The romanticized version of the Civil War creates a picture of the North versus the South with the North imposing on the South. However, after reading “The Making of a Confederate” by William L. Barney, one can see that subdivisions existed before the war was declared. The documents analyzed by Barney primarily focus on the experiences of Walter Lenoir, a southern confederate and a member of the planter elite. His experiences tell a vivid story of a passionate and strongly opinioned participant of the Civil War as well as demonstrate a noticeably different view involving his reasoning when choosing a side. Between analyzing this fantastic piece of literature and other resourceful documents from “Voices of Freedom” by Eric Foner, one

The South fought this war as the Second American Revolution. The cause of the South was equated to that of their forefathers who had fought and won their freedom from Great Britain less than 100 years earlier. If it was a war to set men free, it was the Southern farm boy that wanted his freedoms guaranteed under the original constitution. The Northern states' politicians were aggressively attempting to implement a monarchial form of government, which was precisely what the early colonists had fought against in the American Revolution. The Northern states were taking advantage of their superior numbers in the federal government and were using their advantage to implement unfair tariffs against the South. Enormous amounts of money were taken from the South and funneled into the Northern states. Most of the revenue taken from the Southern states was used to run government programs. This brought about the argument of "State's Rights" and a weaker central government by the South.

Historians have argued inconclusively for years over the prime reason for Confederate defeat in the Civil War. The book Why the North Won the Civil War outlines five of the most agreed upon causes of Southern defeat, each written by a highly esteemed American historian. The author of each essay does acknowledge and discuss the views of the other authors. However, each author also goes on to explain their botheration and disagreement with their opposition. The purpose of this essay is to summarize each of the five arguments presented by Richard N. Current, T. Harry Williams, Norman A. Graebner, David Herbert Donald, and David M. Potter. Each author gives his insight on one of the following five reasons:

The bloodiest war in American history, led by Abraham Lincoln for the north, and Jefferson Davis for the south, both presidents, but two different sides. Both garner for peace, yet one is willing to start a war, while the other is willing to accept it. This essay will compare and contrast the political, economical, and social outlooks on Lincoln’s and Davis’ Inaugural addresses throughout the civil war between the North and South. Slavery, laws, and state rights drove the South to start a war, and Lincoln received the war with open arms. Both sides wanted peace, but their means of achieving it and their leaders’ choices and beliefs differed greatly while still holding similarities.

Although James McPherson presents Lincoln as having numerous qualities that defined him as a brilliant leader, he wastes no time in revealing what he believes to be Lincoln’s greatest strength. In his Introduction, McPherson states regarding Lincoln’s political leadership: “In a civil war whose origins lay in a political conflict over the future of slavery and a political decision by certain states to secede, policy could never be separated from national strategy…. And neither policy nor national strategy could be separated from military strategy” (McPherson, p.6). Lincoln could not approach the war from a purely martial standpoint—instead, he needed to focus on the issues that caused it. For the catalyst of the war was also the tool for its solution; a war started by differing ideologies could only be resolved through the military application of ideology. This non-objective approach to the waging of the war almost resembles the inspired approach McPherson brings to his examination of Lincoln himself.

For four years, Americans fought against one another on the battlefield. This war would come to make up the bloodiest war in American history. Over the four years, over 620,000 soldiers died in the conflict. This war became one the most traumatic event in American History. Since the beginning of colonization to the 1860’s, the people in this country were slowly being divided. From 1850 to 1861, it was apparent that the union was separating into the North and the South and battle was soon to follow. With this division, peace could not continue amongst the country, for the country was filled with problems that affected the common Americans. With the events that led up to the war, the South felt like they had every reason to secede from the

“A house divided against itself cannot stand.”1 These words, spoken by Abraham Lincoln, foreshadowed the war that became the bloodiest in all of the United State's history. The Civil War was a brutal conflict between the North and South; brother against brother. With slavery as the root cause, Southern states had seceded from the Union and were fighting for their independence. They became the Confederate States of America (CSA) and were a force to be reckoned with. The Union, however, put up a fierce struggle to preserve the country. If the Civil War was to be a war of attrition, the North had the upper hand because of its large population, industrialization, raw materials, railroad mileage, and navy. But if the war was short lived, the

The North’s actions of abolishing slavery and enacting tariffs caused the South to fight in hopes of preserving their way of life and economy. Plantations in the South were only successful because of slavery. Without the slaves helping them create the abundance of cotton, the South would have no economy. The country’s economy would be greatly altered if slavery was eliminated both from a consumer and producer perspective. When the North did announce that they wanted to completely eradicate slavery, the South was taken aback due to the fact that the whole country would not function without slavery and the cotton produced. The North wanted the South to industrialize but the South replied “… we must ever continue to be, wholly dependent upon agriculture and commerce (South Caroline Protest Against the Tariff of 1828).” The climate in the South did not allow for the same industrialization to occur as it did in the North. Plantations and their productions of cash crops were booming in the South and the northern frontier was too small of a market, therefore leading them to sell to foreign countries. This caused the North to enact tariffs and in order to prevent the South from being too successful and lose them as a market. The North ended up petrifying the Southerners into fighting a war in order to preserve their way of life and thriving economy.