What Was The Difference Between North And South After The Civil War

Sectional differences between the North and the South have caused the two regions to disagree on multiple issues since the establishment of the United States. The North’s economy was primarily based on industry, while the South’s economy was primarily based on agriculture, which greatly changed the two section’s desire and need for slaves. When the United States began annexing new territory, disputes over the expansion of slavery became prominent. In the Missouri Compromise of 1820, Missouri was added to the Union as a slave state while Maine was added as a free state in order to maintain the balance between slave and free states, and slavery was prevented from extending above the 36th parallel line. In order to follow the guidelines of the Missouri Compromise, Southerners looked westward in order to expand slavery. Southerners supported the extension of slavery into western territories because it allowed them to use free labor to harvest cotton and other crops, and the addition of new slave states would strengthen the South in the House of Representatives, because more states would vote for policies that favored slaveholders. Northerners were against the expansion of slavery into Western territories because they believed slave labor undermined free white labor and took away job opportunities, and would disrupt the balance between free and slave states. Controversy over the expansion of slavery into western territories between the years of 1845-1861 contributed to the

The Antebellum period in the United States history was considered as time between 1820 and 1862. During this period, significant changes took place in terms of political, social and economic effects in America. The United States economy was changed from an underdeveloped country of frontiersmen and farmers into an industrialized economy. The South American depended on agriculture while the Northern part had many industries. The two parts differed in terms of slavery policies in the country as the south advocated for preservation of slaves while the North championed abolition of slavery policies. In addition, during this period the south and North had established distinct cultures because of their geographical difference (Mitchell, 8). The south had fertile soils and suitable climate that supported agriculture while the north had cold climate and rocky soils that could hardly support any farming.

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.

Even though the North and the South origins were both from Europe, their customs and living habits were different. The North and the South began to notice these differences as they broke away from Britain in the Revolutionary War. The North and South emerged into two different regions, due to their various differences. These differences included the geography, the economy, the social and classification status, and transportation.

ship the cotton but this meant that the South had to pay the North to

Throughout history, people have gone to extreme lengths to secure their economic well being. The people in the Southern states were no different in this regard, and for this reason we affirm the resolution that the South was justified to secede from the Union. Before going any farther, we must define key terms in the resolution. The South refers to the 11 states who became the Confederate States of America. The Union was the United States in 1860. Lastly, justified means done for a legitimate reason, in this case in the context of the political and economic circumstances of the time. We support our affirmation with the following contention: that the South’s economic interests were in such danger that they took the only path available to them

First off, the way they declared secession and proceeded to do so was illegal. To begin with everyday we recite the pledge of allegiance where it states, “one nation, indivisible”. Those southerners recited the same pledge we did and they recited themselves that this union is indivisible. Next, under the constitution of the United States of America secession was and always will be considered illegal because of Article 10 Section 1. In this part of the constitution it was illustrated that, “No state shall enter into any treaty, alliance, or confederation….”. The southern states obviously did not follow that and violated the constitution they agreed to abide by themselves. When they concurred to join the Union they agreed to join an indivisible nation. Nowhere could they make a complaint worthy enough to try to separate for the states that they agreed to join, but of course they tried to with the controversial subject of slavery.

Before the Civil War, the North and the South were very different. Their values were completely different. The North was more industrialized, urbanized, and was more reliant on wage labor. On the other hand, the South continued to be a rural, agricultural society, and depended on slavery to harvest the cash crops that they made a living off of. Such big differences brought about the Civil War. Was there something that could have been done to avoid the Civil War in the first place?

Despite the unexpected hardships the Union faced, the Civil War ended with an overwhelming Union victory. However, due to the context of total war, the South was left in shambles. Following the Civil War was an Era known as Reconstruction-the process of Southern states to be reentered into the United States. What started as a peaceful reconciliation almost ignited a whole new Civil War. Although both the North and the South sparked tremendous amounts of damage, which destroyed Reconstruction the most? The South destroyed Reconstruction due to their strong opposition to the idea of Reconstruction and free civil rights for slaves.

One of the main Economic Differeneces where that there where more trains in the north then in the south. I think that is because the southern people didn’t wont the blacks to get on trains and leave to the north or train. Another one is that more cotton factories were in the south then the north and i think this is because there were more slaves in the south then the north obvoiusly because the north didn’t have slaves. Another thing is that in Doc B they say the populations are very different from the south had 23,000,000 and the south had 8,700,000.

Between 1789 and 1860 was the Antebellum South period this was socially and economically a tenacious time for the north and south, but how?

The reason why I don’t think the South was justified is that the South should not have slaves. Therefore the South should rethink seceding themselves from the Union if it was there choice to secede. The South did not have a reason to secede from the Union. Although they might have felt that they had a particular reason to secede.(MegaEssays: Was the south Justified in seceding the Union)

The South should have never seceded because it would unravel the country. The South wanted to secede because they disagreed over state rights and slavery. The South shouldn’t have succeeded because the states can’t physically separate to make a new country, secession is unlawful, and it will lead to anarchy. The North was trying to preserve the Union

This shows that South Carolina had the right to secede because it was a sovereign state. It also shows how the South should have had the right to decide whether they would want to secede from the country or not. Another example is that when the Southern states joined the Union, it was voluntarily (Appleby et.al 556). “Nowhere in the Constitution is there any mention of the union of the states being permanent.” (http:/civilwar.bluegrass.net). This shows that they should have the right to leave the Union if they choose to. They had this right because the South had no bind with the Union stating that they had to stay except for the United States constitution in which the North had already violated. Even though the United States constitution was what they looked at as a contract, the Union already desecrated its’ terms before this dispute. It also shows how the right was their own and the government could not control their choices in staying or not. These reasons and examples show how the South had to right to secede because of various reasons regarding the political state the government was in.

“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