Bleeding Kansas The Compromise of 1850 brought relative calm to the nation. Though most blacks and abolitionists strongly opposed the Compromise, the majority of Americans embraced it, believing that it offered a final, workable solution to the slavery question. Most importantly, it saved the Union from the terrible split that many had feared. People were all too ready to leave the slavery controversy behind them and move on. But the feeling of relief that spread throughout the country would prove to be the calm before the storm. On December 14, 1853, Augustus C. Dodge of Iowa introduced a bill in the Senate. The bill proposed organizing the Nebraska territory, which also included an area that would become the state of Kansas. His bill was referred to the Committee of the Territories, which was chaired by Stephen A. Douglas of Illinois. Douglas had entered politics early and had advanced quickly; at 21 he was Illinois state's attorney, and by age 35 he was a U.S. Senator. He strongly endorsed the idea of popular sovereignty, which allowed the settlers in a territory to decide for themselves whether or not to have slavery. Douglas was also a fervent advocate of Manifest Destiny, the idea that the United States had the God-given right and obligation to take over as much land as possible and to spread its "civilizing" influence. And he was not alone. A Philadelphia newspaper expounded Manifest Destiny when it proclaimed the United States to be a nation rightfully bound on the "East by sunrise, West by sunset, North by the Arctic Expedition, and South as far as we darn please." To fulfill its Manifest Destiny, especially following the discovery of gold in California, America was making plans to build a transcontinental railroad from east to west. The big question was where to locate the eastern terminal -- to the north, in Chicago, or to the south, in St. Louis. Douglas was firmly committed to ensuring that the terminal would be in Chicago, but he knew that it could not be unless the Nebraska territory was organized. Organization of Nebraska would require the removal of the territory's Native Americans, for Douglas regarded the Indians as savages, and saw their reservations as "barriers of barbarism." In his view, Manifest Destiny required the removal of those who stood in the way of American, Christian progress, and the Native American presen... ... middle of paper ... ...itself. The abolitionist senator Charles Sumner delivered a fiery speech called "The Crime Against Kansas," in which he accused proslavery senators, particularly Atchison and Andrew Butler of South Carolina, of [cavorting with the] "harlot, Slavery." In retaliation, Butler's nephew, Congressman Preston Brooks, attacked Sumner at his Senate desk and beat him senseless with a cane. In September of 1856, a new territorial governor, John W. Geary, arrived in Kansas and began to restore order. The last major outbreak of violence was the Marais des Cynges massacre, in which Border Ruffians killed five Free State men. In all, approximately 55 people died in "Bleeding Kansas." Several attempts were made to draft a constitution which Kansas could use to apply for statehood. Some versions were proslavery, others free state. Finally, a fourth convention met at Wyandotte in July 1859, and adopted a free state constitution. Kansas applied for admittance to the Union. However, the proslavery forces in the Senate strongly opposed its free state status, and stalled its admission. Only in 1861, after the Confederate states seceded, did the constitution gain approval and Kansas become a state.
Click here to unlock this and over one million essaysShow More
America’s Manifest Destiny first surfaced around the 1840’s, when John O’Sullivan first titled the ideals that America had recently gained on claiming the West as their ‘Manifest Destiny.’ Americans wanted to settle in the West for multiple reasons, from the idea that God wanted them to settle all the way to the West co...
The term “Manifest Destiny” was never actually used until 1845, but the idea was always implied from the Doctrine of Discovery. Without understanding the Doctrine, it is impossible to understand the reasons and fundamentals behind why Manifest Destiny began.This Doctrine was a set of ten steps and rules that European nations followed in order to avoid conflict over land holdings, created in the early 1400s. The first few steps give the discovering country full rights to buy the land from the native peoples. This is important, since it gave the discovering country the power of preemption. Conquered Indian peoples lose sovereign powers and the rights to free trade and diplomatic relations, and the land they occupy is said to be vacant. Religion played a massive role in the regulations of the Doctrine, since “non-Christian people were not deemed to have the same rights to land, sovereignty, and self determination as Christians”(Miller 4). These rules were all meant to favor the ethnocentric, with full understanding of the repercussions on those who lived in the places being conquered.
In the 1830’s America was highly influenced by the Manifest Destiny Ideal. Manifest Destiny was the motivating force behind the rapid expansion of America into the West. This ideal was highly sponsored by posters, newspapers, and various other methods of communication. Propaganda was and is still an incredibly common way to spread an idea to the masses. Though Manifest Destiny was not an official government policy, it led to the passing of the Homestead Act. The Homestead Act gave applicants freehold titles of undeveloped land outside of the original thirteen colonies. It encouraged Westward colonization and territorial acquisition. The Homestead Act was signed into law by President Abraham Lincoln in 1862. To America, Manifest Destiny was the idea that America was destined to expand across the North American continent, from the Atlantic, to the Pacific Ocean. Throughout this time Native Americans were seen as obstacles because they occupied land that the United States needed to conquer to continue with their Manifest Destiny Ideal. Many wars were fought between the A...
Manifest Destiny was the idea that it was the United States’ destiny to take over all of North America from the Atlantic to the Pacific. Most of the public was in favor of territorial expansion, though some politicians felt it contradicted the constitution.
The formation of these alliances had been preceded by an arms race in which both the two major powers were trying to overpower each other in terms of military equipment. The Soviet Union had tried its first atomic weapon in 1949, and this greatly shocked the Americans as it had happened very early than expected. Truman had responded to this by authorizing the development of thermonuclear weapons or hydrogen bombs. They controlled the Asia effect by exploding the H-bomb which was smaller in size than the Hiroshima atomic bomb but 2500 times powerful compared to it. The Russians were however not willing to give up, and in 1953, they also managed to produce an H-bomb. Despite Khrushchev’s efforts to outdo America`s military equipment the Americans always believed in the existence of a missile gap between them and the Asians. This motivated them to increase their missile forces. The soviet union brought the world to a shock when they launched the first world`s artificial satellite (sputnik 1) further threatening the Americans who had never thought of this.
In 1854, Congress passed the Kansas-Nebraska Act to create new territories. Stephen Douglass wrote the act in an effort to attract the transcontinental railroad to his home city of Chicago. Douglass needed Kansas, and Nebraska, to become official territories to make it happen. Douglass believed the act would help Chicago economically, and aid his hopes of becoming president by ending The Missouri Compromise. Popular sovereignty replaced geographic restrictions as the decided factor on the issue of slavery. The opportunity to move slavery further north galvanized the south, and outraged the n...
...a man of God I think we need to try our best to take care of the world and try to live the best life we can that will please God. He gave us this earth so we should take care of it the best we can. We have a role of caretakers, we are to appreciate the functionality and beauty of the environment. In His incredible grace and power, God has placed on this planet everything needed to feed, clothe, and house the billions of people who have lived on it since the garden of Eden.
In year 1845, journalist John L. O’Sullivan used the phrase “manifest destiny” in an article to support the U.S. right to occupy new territories, saying: “[that claim is by the right of] our manifest destiny to overspread and to possess the whole of the continent which Providence has given us for the development of the great experiment of liberty and federated self-government entrusted to us” (Boyer 388). O’Sullivan proposed the idea that the expansion of the United States wouldn’t happen if it was not supposed to. The topic created a big controversy whether the Manifest Destiny confers the United States the destiny to expand or it is an excuse to take other people’s land (Allard par. 1).
Although the Americans faced unbeatable odds, it was the belief in the “manifest destiny,” that became their driving force to win an impossible war. The “manifest destiny” was a vision of some American citizens that the territory including California, New Mexico, Utah, Texas, Arizona, and Nevada belonged to the United States. Using this belief gave courage and determination to each soldier to win this war for America and their families. In doing so, their sacrifices would not only improve the wealth and land rights of the United States, but also create more future opportunities for
“We are the nation of human progress, and who will, what can, set limits to our onward march?” (Denial) noted writer John O’Sullivan in 1839, but in fact, there was one limit: territory. Some people believed that in order to spread democracy, it was America’s manifest destiny, or obvious fate, to inhabit the entire North American continent. It had a major impact on American society by it being the cause of social change in the US, it economically revamped America, and lastly, it altered America politically. Manifest destiny caused the change of America socially due to the economic transition from a local market economy to a national market economy. Manifest destiny has also impacted America’s society economically by the large increase in territory gained to profit off of. But, it also altered America politically by causing further division of the North and South which led to a great drama of regional conflict. These social, political, and economical changes in the United States were certainly results of the initiation and usage of manifest destiny.
Manifest Destiny was a continuous development beginning in the early 1840s. Manifest Destiny was the act of expanding the United States westward. Many people and presidents have promoted this movement. The very first president from the trans-Appalachian West, Andrew Jackson, won the presidency in 1828. Mr. Jackson founded the Democratic Party, which was formed in the 1820s. He served as a major-general in the War of 1812. He commanded the U.S Forces in a long five-month movement against the Creek Indians. Andrew’s focus as president was to expand the United States. He forced Indians to move west of the Mississippi River, which later was known as the Trail of Tears. Today it remains one of the most compelling and controversial events
Monique Wittig, a radical feminist, illuminates, “For what makes a woman is a specific social relation to a man, a relation that we call servitude”. The concept of justifying the female inferior image based on biology and the ‘w...
Beauvoir points out the problem in society. That women are almost expendable, because we are just another piece of eye candy, another sexual conquest, undefined and unworthy of man – explaining, but not excusing, why sexism is still prevailing despite tiresome efforts by people who wish to decrease its
Internet usage in children and adolescents has been increasing in a steadily fashion in the past number of years and with the increase in internet usage, a new form of bullying has developed – Cyber bullying. Cyber bullying can be defined as “the electronic posting of mean-spirited messages about a person,” (Merriam-Webster, 2012). This form of bullying can come through various mediums including but not limited to text messages, emails, videos, and social networking sites. There is an overwhelming amount of information that defines cyber bullying, identifies the demographics of bullies and victims of cyber bullying, and identifies the outcomes of cyber bullying on victims. More focus needs to be placed on who the perpetrators of this form of violence are and how this form of violence is linked to traditional bullying. This will allow researchers and practitioners to move forward with research and implementation preventative methods and intervention once the problem has already occurred.