The Civil War (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
May 04, 2024, 09:07:01 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Discussion
  History (Moderator: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee)
  The Civil War (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: The Civil War  (Read 15788 times)
LBJ Revivalist
ModerateDemocrat1990
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 799


Political Matrix
E: -5.87, S: -2.87

« on: April 10, 2010, 03:47:13 PM »

I really can't believe the people who defend the Confederacy and try to claim the Civil War wasn't about slavery--these are usually conservatives, who still call it the ''war of Northern Agression.'' I go on conservative message boards and it's amazing to see after 140 years these Southerners still calling the war by that name, arguing slavery had little to do with the war and even referring to those from the Northern states as "Yankees" It's like many of these cons are still stuck in 1870. Yeah, let's defend a state's right and freedom to own slaves...Little bit of irony there.
Logged
LBJ Revivalist
ModerateDemocrat1990
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 799


Political Matrix
E: -5.87, S: -2.87

« Reply #1 on: April 10, 2010, 05:19:03 PM »

The Civil War started because both sides were tired of compromise. The Whigs and Democrats, were not really supporting the needs of the people, and were mostly there for their own selfish reasons. Politicians had quickly become seen as malignant and corrupt, which made people begin to lose faith in the Party System's ability to solve problems. Politicians were also seen as out of touch with their constituents as no side, Slave or Free were really winning the argument by the 1850's, the argument had only been postponed by a series of compromises such as the Missouri Compromise, the Compromise of 1850, and the Kansas Nebraska Act.

All of these had attempted to cool tensions between an enraged South, and an angry North. Not only did any of these compromises fail to do that, but the parties had lost the faith of the people who had elected them into power to accomplish a specific goal. For example, Stephen Douglas, who was seen as a "moderate" on slavery, supporting Popular Sovereignty in States, was rejected by the South as the Democratic Nominee in 1860 because the Southern Wing of the Democratic Party did not view Douglas as "pro slavery" enough. The people on both sides were simply tired of political compromise.

The politicians' failure to please their constituents lead to a rise of people creating new parties, such as the Republicans, to "fix Washington," or some people, like John Brown, merely took matters into his own hands and started killing people. Brown's attack on Harper's Ferry and subsequent execution heightened North-South tensions to an even higher level. People turned to violence because of the political system's inability to solve the Slavery issue.



It almost sounds like today. Not the whole details (as in Slavery, harpers ferry, etc) but the rise of new parties or political groups, the intense disdain for compromise on both sides of the aisle, the tension getting higher and higher between the two parties or ideals.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.023 seconds with 11 queries.