The Civil War : American History

1175 Words5 Pages
Introduction It is often said that one cannot understand the American history without understanding the Civil War. From April 15, 1861 to 1865 April, the United States was between the north and south of the war, also known as the American Civil war. Northern leaders are bourgeois war; combat forces are vast numbers of workers, peasants and black. In the south, insist the war is only plantation slave owners, their war aims to defend slavery, secession, a confederate, reflects the country from the establishment of the moment, have the right to choose their own life of freedom, and the purpose is to beat the north south, to restore national unity and the abolition of the slave system, so that the capitalists get more cheap labor, which makes the capitalist to obtain the smooth development. The importance of the civil war created USA history, American morphology. Common generalization people made on the Civil War & real reason behind it The direct cause looks for the Republican candidate for the abolition of slavery Lincoln was elected, and then the Southern States declared their independence, and the northern states to maintain the federal unified grounds, playing such a unification and division of the war. One look fine, you 'll notice, Lincoln in the 1860 election, only to get the country into four of the vote, except in Vermont, in the northern most states, Lincoln just took five or six of the vote, while in the South he didn 't appear on the ballot paper. That is to say, the Republican Party as a regional party, won the election victory, and this victory, also confirmed that the former president Martin van Buren many years ago prophecy: the ruling party if you can 't get a nationwide support, the country will face split. To be, ... ... middle of paper ... ...iggered Southern secession from the union. During the secession crisis, many politicians argued for a new sectional accommodation to preserve the Union, focusing in particular on the proposed "Crittenden Compromise." But historians in the 1930s such as James G. Randall argued that the rise of mass democracy, the breakdown of the Second Party System, and increasingly virulent and hostile sectional rhetoric made it highly unlikely, if not impossible, to bring about the compromises of the past (such as the Missouri Compromise and the Compromise of 1850). Indeed, the Crittenden Compromise was rejected by Republicans. One possible "compromise" was peaceful secession agreed to by the United States, which was seriously discussed in late 1860—and supported by many abolitionists—but was rejected by James Buchanan 's conservative Democrats as well as the Republican leadership.
Open Document