US History Free Essays

US history Free Essays The American nation has been formed out of allegiance to the patriotic feelings that often go unquestioned for the rank-and-file American and the inherent support for pluralism. Therefore, the US history was destined to include outbursts of intolerance and calls for conformity. These two driving forces of the US social development were evident at all times, and were present in the period between 1840 and the start of the Civil War that ultimately reshaped the political balance in the nation. We will write a custom essay sample on US history or any similar topic only for you Order Now However, intolerance was mounting, evidenced by the outbreak of the war, and efforts to conform were becoming increasingly rare in the North where people began to understand what evil they were facing. The major controversy in the period that has never been resolved and has finally led to the war that took the lives of approximately 600,000 or 700,000 Americans was the debate over slavery between the North and the South. In the more technologically and industrially developed northern states that did not rely so heavily on slave labor for the survival of their economy, abolitionists were calling for cancellation of slavery that tarnished their nation. However, the northern politicians, eager to prevent what later turned into an armed conflict, could not afford to break with their southern counterparts for that reason. In 1850, after the annexation of Mexican territories allowed the US to add Texas to its territory, the explosion of the debate over the expansion of slavery necessitated a new compromise that would replace the accord reached in the Missouri Compromise in 1818. The moderate political forces both in the North and the South pushed the nation towards the Compromise Measures of 1850. This agreement defined California as free soil and allowed other former Mexican territories to choose their fate. This compromise allowed a temporary respite in the vehement controversies plaguing the northern and the southern states. Among other things, this compromise admitted as a free state and set up territorial governments in the remainder of the Mexican cession with authority to decide for themselves whether to permit slavery or not. Moderates in both North and South hoped that the slavery question was settled, at least for a while. The measures included in the compromise of 1850 were challenged by the appearance of a literary work, however strange this may seem. Of all novels that influenced the course of history, Harriet Beecher Stowe’s antislavery novel Uncle Tom’s Cabin published in 1851 was one of the most instrumental in the fight for human freedom. A terrifying description of the life of a black slave sought to reach the hearts of those who were still in the pro-slavery camp and strengthen the conviction of those opposing it. The book was denounced by the South where Stowe was labeled a â€Å"coarse, ugly, long-tongued woman† attempting to â€Å"awaken rancorous hatred and malignant jealousies† threatening the nation (Garraty, Carnes 2002: 370). On the contrary, in the North it gathered a lot of admirers and motivated quite a few to fight for abolition of slavery. Uncle Tom’s Cabin exacerbated the controversy between the North and the South. The next explosion of intolerance was caused by the Kansas-Nebraska Act introduced in 1854 by Senator Stephen A. Douglas of Illinois. These two territories, Kansas and Nebraska, that were previously required to remain free soil, were now allowed to decide upon their own choice whether to permit slavery or not, under the doctrine of popular sovereignty. The act that was a footsy in the direction of slave-owners aimed at preserving the national unity raised a storm of protest on the part of the anti-slavery forces. The future US president Abraham Lincoln expressed his indignation over this act by saying that â€Å"the repeal of the Missouri Compromise aroused him as he had never been before† (MSN Encarta). The opponents of the extension of slavery refused to conform: to oppose the spread of this evil they formed the Republican Party that was meant to unite anti-slavery forces. Perhaps the most vivid example of a person who refused to conform to the norms of the then society was the raid of John Brown in Harpers Ferry, Virginia in which the armed people got hold of the federal armory and arsenal. The raiders were the people who used the military operation to vent their protest against slavery. There arose a real threat that his followers will enter the southern states and try to liberate slaves using armed force. Brown was executed, to later become a hero for the anti-slave North. One of the most efficient forms of protest against slave owning was the Underground Railroad, also known under the name of the Liberty Line, a network of people who helped Afro-Americans enslaved in the southern states to flee to the free northern states or Canada before slavery was abolished after the American Civil War. It is assessed that about 100,000 slaves were able to get out of slavery with the help of the railroad in the period from 1810 to 1850 (Wikipedia). The main reason for the existence of the Underground Railroad was the wide spread of the Abolitionist ideas that called for the elimination of slavery as a social and economic phenomenon. Brave idealists who chose to participate in the undertaking were ready to defy the laws of their states in order to accomplish what they thought to be the right thing. Although many abolitionists chose to defy the laws to free slaves, the lawmakers deemed it appropriate to pacify the South by toughening the laws against runaways. The passage of the Fugitive Slave Law of 1850 allowed slave hunters to enter northern in search of runaway slaves and capture slaves who had run away from their southern masters. After the passage of the law, runaway slaves could no longer settle down in northern states. Thus, outbursts of intolerance for another’s position by far exceeded conformity attempts in the America of the 1840s-1850s. American people had too serious an issue to confront to be able to conform: they had to decide on the future of their nation, selecting between a nation of slave-owners, a democracy akin to that of Ancient Greece where rule of people referred to everybody but the slaves and that of freedom and equal opportunities for all. The refusal to accede to the views of the other side finally led to the secession of the southern states from the Union. Bibliography Garraty, John A. Mark C. Carnes. The American Nation: A History of The United States. Prentice Hall, 2002. MSN Encarta. Civil War, American. http://encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_761567354_3/Civil_War.html (July 10, 2005) Wikipedia. Underground Railroad. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Underground_Railroad (July 10, 2005) How to cite US history, Essay examples Us history Free Essays We take nothing by conquest, Thank god. Zinn uses this statement to present how atrocious the conquest really was since there was a conquest. America wanted to hide it’s evil ways behind the facade of saying that America acquire land always through peaceful purchases. We will write a custom essay sample on Us history or any similar topic only for you Order Now The war was very unpopular to many. Polk said that the war was to gain California and also said that Mexicans invaded first. On this chapter Zinn focuses on the Mexican American war and how it really was a conquest caused by Polk. In 1821, Mexico won it’s independence in a revolutionary war against Spain. Mexico was a large country which included Texas, New Mexico, Utah, Nevada, Arizona and part of Colorado. In 183 Texas broke of from Mexico and declared itself † The lone star republic† and in 1845 the U. S Congress brought it into the union as a state. Later in spring of 1846, all that was needed was a military incident to begin the war Polk wanted. It happened after General Taylor’s quartermaster, Colonel Cross isappeared. His body was found eleven days later. It was assumed that the Mexicans had killed him. A lot of the Anti-Slavery congressmen voted against all war measures. Seeing the mexican campaign as a means of extending the southern. Slave territory Joshua Giddings explains his vote against supplying men and arms for the war. To Howard Zinn looks like Polk was the only one that wanted California to be part of his nation. The war barely begun in the summer of 1846, when a writer who lived in Washington refused to pay his Massachusetts poll tax. Denouncing the mexican war. He was put into Jail and spent the night there. Zinn argues that the president Polk pushed for the war because he wanted to expand. He wanted to go as southwest as possible. He thought the United States needed to be larger. Polk wanted California for America before anyone else could get it. It was not right for him to move his troops into an area that was already claimed by Mexicans. The war was not popular and the soldiers wanted to go home. Like Zinn said † I don’t think it was right to Just take land from Mexico Just because the president wants it. I think thats ot fair. Polk’s leadership as president ofa nation that was quickly expanding not care for the mexican people already living there. Zinn gives a quote from the diary of Colonel Ethan Allen Hitchcock, who opposed measures taken by General Taylor to annex Texas. Hitchcock explains, â€Å"He seems to have lost all respect for Mexican rights and is willing to be an instrument of Mr. Polk for pushing our boundary as far west as possible,† (A people’s history of the United States page 150). The feelings for this burst of expansion were varied; some believed it unnecessary to ifferent degrees and opposed or refuse to go into war with Mexico Just to take their land , while others strongly favored the extra land. In fact, a new attitude was developed during this time, the one of â€Å"manifest destiny’Americans technically went into conquest because Cross was found dead eleven days after he disappeared and Mexicans were responsible for it. They didn’t know who killed it so they actually went into conquest because Polk was already planning on taking California from Mexico. Americans assumed the war begin by the mexicans after killing Cross. No one wanted to go to war with anyone. The American people were not excited or impatient for this. In conclusion a part of me was shocked while another part of me knew that these actions were not uncommon. While it is hard for me to determine what the United States’ goal is right now (perhaps stability) it’s easy to see what kind of mindset these powerful leaders back then had. It was all about the idea that Americans were entitled to the land they set their eyes on. knowing that the united states of America used to be so grossly land-obsessed. Then again, who knows what our country is obsessed with today; it could be land once again. How to cite Us history, Papers