In the middle of the nineteenth century bloody battles broke out all over the United States, pitting brother against brother and father against son. The causes of this war were the issues of slavery and state’s rights; but most importantly, the catalyst for the Civil War was the tension in the air cause by the dissention of the South from the North. Dissention is a radically different concept than the idea of disagreement. Had the Northern and Southern states merely disagreed about slavery and states’ rights issues, the Civil War would only be a wisp of what could have been. Disagreement leads to arguments while dissent leads to quarrels, and the distinction Boorstin makes between the two is entirely accurate. Dissent can be caused by a multitude of factors. One may dissent from the majority because their pride has been hurt, because communication broke down, or because they simply refuse to listen to any other view but their own. Dissention is dangerous because it is primarily a factor of pride, something that lies very close to the heart of any individual. There are times, however, when dissention may be caused by something else. When rhetorical communication breaks down, dissention can and will occur. Misunderstandings are delicate situations, and must be resolved accordingly. For instance, the Dallas City Commissioner John Wiley Price recently dissented from a citizen, telling the citizen and others in the court room to “go to hell!” The citizen Price had the altercation with addressed Price as “Chief Mullah” in an attempt to be a smart aleck. However, the citizen pronounced “mullah” (the name for an Islamic cardinal) as “moolah,” a highly offensive racial slur. Price does not tolerate racial slurs, and thus the screaming... ... middle of paper ... ...ilities of Congress is that minorities and factions exist: dissent takes place, not disagreements. Verbal brawls take place rather than actual argumentation, and that is what kills democracy. That is why things never get done. In his address, Obama claims that a “robust democracy” demands contentious debate in which people fight for their beliefs. In some respects, he is correct. However, if he includes dissent in this robust democracy, he is gravely mistaken. Dissent ostracizes and condemns individuals because of what they believe in, which is clearly not something a robust democracy demands. “We are part of the American family,” the president said. In order to be a part of this family, we cannot exclude its members from their freedom to speak and express their ideas. Dissent hinders those capabilities, and thus truly can be considered the cancer of democracy.
In the book, Apostles of Disunion, author Charles B. Dew opens the first chapter with a question the Immigration and Naturalization service has on an exam they administer to prospective new American citizens: “The Civil War was fought over what important issue”(4). Dew respond by noting that “according to the INS, you are correct if you offer either of the following answers: ‘slavery or states’ rights’” (4). Although this book provides more evidence and documentation that slavery was the cause of the Civil War, there are a few places where states’ rights are specifically noted. In presenting the findings of his extensive research, Dew provides compelling documentation that would allow the reader to conclude that slavery was indeed the cause for both secession and the Civil War.
Dissent is spiteful, often arrogant; alienating the minority that uses it in an argument. Had the teenage girl come to her parents explaining how she was late because she had driven a drunk friend home safe and went back to get the car, her punishment may not have been so severe.
In the past century, people continued to express an increasingly discontent view of Congress especially true when one looks back before the Clinton Impeachment debacle As the size of the nation and the number of congressman have grown, the congress has come under attack by both public influences and congressman themselves. Yet looking at one congressman's relationship with his or her constituents, it would be hard to believe that this is the branch of government that has come under suspect. In “If Ralph Nader says congress is 'The broken branch,' how come we love our congressman so much?” author Richard F. Fenno, Jr., provides insight into this view and why, through congress coming under fire, constituents still feel positively about there congressmen. Although congress is often criticized, its fine tuned functioning is essential in checking the power of congress without hindering the making of legislation.
In the years paving the way to the Civil War, both north and south were disagreeable with one another, creating the three “triggering” reasons for the war: the fanaticism on the slavery issue, the Kansas-Nebraska Act, and the separation of the Democratic Party. North being against the bondage of individuals and the South being for it, there was no real way to evade the clash. For the south slavery was a form of obtaining a living, without subjugation the economy might drop majorly if not disappear. In the North there were significant ethical issues with the issue of subjugation. Amazing measures to keep and dispose of subjugation were taken and there was never a genuine adjusted center for bargain. Despite the fact that there were a lot of seemingly insignificant issues, the fundamental thing that divided these two states was bondage and the flexibilities for it or against. With these significant extremes, for example, John Brown and Uncle Tom's Cabin, the south felt disdain towards the danger the Northerners were holding against their alleged flexibilities. The more hatred the South advanced, the more combative they were to anything the Northerners did. Northerners were irritated and it parted Democrats over the issue of bondage and made another Republican gathering, which included: Whigs, Free Soilers, Know Nothings and previous Democrats and brought about a split of segments and abbreviated the street to common war. Southerners loathed the insubordination of the north and started to address how they could stay with the Union.
From the opening sentence of the essay, “We are free to be you, me, stupid, and dead”, Roger Rosenblatt hones in on a very potent and controversial topic. He notes the fundamental truth that although humans will regularly shield themselves with the omnipresent First Amendment, seldom do we enjoy having the privilege we so readily abuse be used against us. Freedom of speech has been a controversial issue throughout the world. Our ability to say whatever we want is very important to us as individuals and communities. Although freedom of speech and expression may sometimes be offensive to other people, it is still everyone’s right to express his/her opinion under the American constitution which states that “congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or the press”.
The turmoil between the North and South about slavery brought many issues to light. People from their respective regions would argue whether it was a moral institution and that no matter what, a decision on the topic had to be made that would bring the country to an agreement once and for all. This paper discusses the irrepressible conflict William H. Seward mentions, several politician’s different views on why they could or could not co-exist, and also discusses the possible war as a result.
Congress has helped develop the Presidency as we know it today. This is because Congress argues over proposals and legislation proposed by the President. They are a major determent in whether bills turn into laws. But it’s not easy. One reason for this is because there are many powerful groups out there who argue about what should be discussed such as air pollution with the EPA or jobs.
This is why the United States of America could not just have been divided in half over the issue of slavery. This type of revolutionary acts and events typically are not isolated in one area for such a profound difference. There are many reasons as to why America could not have continued with such opposing views on the ownership of slaves. An issue as big as slavery or of an individual’s independence being questioned in the land of the free could not go without an outcry and an uproar. Two very strong and powerful groups were not going to be able to just drop the issue of independence. The reason that the North and South could not have just agreed to disagree is not complex. In the case of the Civil War slavery was the main opposition through this time and the division was through the North and the South. On the subject of the Civil War being a battle to be avoid it would have to be no. The Civil War was a long time coming and there was not going to be another way to come to a decision. There will always be different sides of a war and while sometimes it will seem to be hundreds of opinion that come in; really there are really only two sides of a war. As to who is correct in a war it really depends on what side of the field that is being heard. The necessity of war it will always be difficult to determine; however, in some instances war really is not an option just the
The presidential elections of 1860 was one of the nation’s most memorable one. The north and the south sections of country had a completely different vision of how they envision their home land. What made this worst was that their view was completely opposite of each other. The north, mostly republican supporters, want America to be free; free of slaves and free from bondages. While on the other hand, the south supporters, mostly democratic states, wanted slavery in the country, because this is what they earned their daily living and profit from.
...om’s Cabin in 1852, the Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854, the Dred Scott Decision of 1857, John Brown’s raid on Harper’s Ferry in 1859, and the outcome of the Presidential Election of 1860—created conditions where Southerners felt the need to secede from the United States (they felt that their “way of life” was being threatened), as well as created conditions where the Northerners decided to go to war against the Southern Confederacy in order to maintain the Union. It is not surprising, however, that the Civil War occurred; since the Industrial Revolution, the Industrial North had always been different than the Agricultural South. If each region paid more attention to resolving the issues that separated them, instead of trying to prove themselves right, they could have stopped the bloodiest battle in American history (even though this is using hindsight knowledge).
After thoroughly assessing past readings and additional research on the Civil War between the North and South, it was quite apparent that the war was inevitable. Opposed views on this would have probably argued that slavery was the only reason for the Civil War. Therefore suggesting it could have been avoided if a resolution was reached on the issue of slavery. Although there is accuracy in stating slavery led to the war, it wasn’t the only factor. Along with slavery, political issues with territorial expansion, there were also economic and social differences between North and South. These differences, being more than just one or two, gradually led to a war that was bound to happened one way or another.
Clayton describes the idea of civility in The United States of America today. Strategically Clayton uses politics to display his issue, by doing this he appeals to his audience’s emotions since politics is a strong-willed area of discussion in America today. Clayton begins his essay by expressing the lack of civility in The United States today, however, continues by declaring that in some cases the lack of civility is a positive and that incivility and democracy go hand and hand. Clayton expands Louis C.K.’s reasoning that world is changing by describing the incivility in today’s world. Clayton provides evidence from how South Carolina representative Joe Wilson shouted in the middle of President Barack Obama’s speech calling him a liar. Another example, of this are the “shouting matches that now pass for political [debates]” (Clayton). Louis C.K. would most likely accredit these acts of incivility to the digital age. Clayton does, he states that social media has “radically changed the way Americans communicate with each other, altering the norms of discourse” (Clayton). Clayton claims that yes, there is an increase in civility partially due to Internet
The American Civil War was the bloodiest military conflict in American history leaving over 500 thousand dead and over 300 thousand wounded (Roark 543-543). One might ask, what caused such internal tension within the most powerful nation in the world? During the nineteenth century, America was an infant nation, but toppling the entire world with its social, political, and economic innovations. In addition, immigrants were migrating from their native land to live the American dream (Roark 405-407). Meanwhile, hundreds of thousand African slaves were being traded in the domestic slave trade throughout the American south. Separated from their family, living in inhumane conditions, and working countless hours for days straight, the issue of slavery was the core of the Civil War (Roark 493-494). The North’s growing dissent for slavery and the South’s dependence on slavery is the reason why the Civil War was an inevitable conflict. Throughout this essay we will discuss the issue of slavery, states’ rights, American expansion into western territories, economic differences and its effect on the inevitable Civil War.
People are doing outrageous things to get their point across. Protests are happening all over the place, just when people don’t like what is going on or even if they don’t like the speaker at the certain time and place. The civil discourse has been thrown out the window. There is hardly any such thing anymore. Now a days it is their opinion or none. No one wants to hear what anyone else has to say or even take it into consideration. It is especially getting out of hand in colleges across the United States. Speakers are coming to Universities and speaking about an assortment of topics. When a group of students disagree with the speaker or are against what is being addressed or talked about there are riots and protests. Sometimes there are extreme measures made to prove the point that they don’t want the speaker there or even physically trying to kick the speaker out. There is no students willing to sit down and listen to what is being said, instead student’s emotions take
In our countries government, Congress plays a major role in decision making. They’re primary role is to pass laws. These laws start off as bills. Bills can only be introduced by members of Congress. Although these bills only come from Congressman, there are many people who influence these bills. Such as the president, regular citizens, offices in the executive branch, and many others. The bills right off the bat do not have a very good chance of passage. Only one out of every ten bills even gets any attention at all. This is because they must go through many tests and hearings before they even have a chance of landing on the president’s desk. These steps in a bill becoming a law are very important, and make sure that all bills passed into law are the best of the best.