Of the seven deadly sins, the one that has plagued the United States the most throughout its history is greed.. Greed -- i.e., "the excessive desire to possess wealth or goods with the intention of keeping it for oneself." – can be seen in 1614, when Thomas Hunt sailed to Spain from his expedition in America with a ship packed with Patuxet Indians, bound to be sold into slavery. It can also be seen in 1773 as a major factor of the Boston Tea Party, where King George III was yearning for more control over colonial governments and hungry for the revenue from it. Greed can also be seen in 1830 during the Indian removal act, where President Andrew Jackson (backed by many other white Americans) signed a law that forced the five civilized tribes (Creek, Choctaw, Cherokee, Seminole, and Chickasaw) off of their land and dragged to different territories in Oklahoma. In each of those instances, greed served as the ultimate cause of behavior. Despite the many factors that played a significant role in the American Civil War, greed once again served as the catalyst and ultimate cause of the American Civil War. While anti-slavery movements, the idea of states' rights and the vision of "one union" each represented powerful arguments (or justifications for plunging the United States into civil war), the ultimate cause stemmed from fundamental differences between the "North and South" over control of economic power – i.e., modes of production, property, and money.
The South argued that protecting the integrity of “States’ Rights” served as the primary justification for the Civil War. However, the idea of states rights is rooted in greed – in the effort to maintain or grow economic power. “States Rights” is defined as rights...
... middle of paper ...
...otal factor that drove North and South to the Civil War. Even to this day, greed continues to plague Americans and it can be witnessed in many instances. For example the AIG bailout, which displays the problems that arise from greed for money (and in the bankers’ cases, power as well) in America. Or some Americans’ objection to Mexican immigration due to the argument that they are ‘taking our jobs’, which is very similar to those who were anti-slavery in the North. In the end, Money – or the accumulation of material wealth – must never trump our sense of humanity. Greed – whether in the form of economic power of a nation, profit for a corporation, or lifestyles of the rich and famous – should never take precedence over our core spiritual values. The Declaration of Independence reflected this in part: “All men are created equal…” All human beings are created equal.
On the question as to whether states’ rights was the cause of the Civil War, Dew references a speech made by Jefferson Davis, president of the Confederate States of America, during his inaugural address as one that “remains a classic articulation of the Southern position that resistance to Northern tyranny and a defense of states’ rights were the sole reason for secession. Constitutional differences alone lay at the heart of the sectional controversy, he insisted. ‘Our present condition…illustrates the American idea that governments rest upon the consent of the governed, and that it is the right of the people to alter or abolish governments whenever they become destructive of the ends for which they were established’”(13).
In the 1860’s the United States weren’t united because of the issue of slavery. The civil war was never just about getting the union back together, but about making it count and getting rid of slavery. The south wanted their slaves and would say they are “-the happiest, and in some, the freest people in the world”. (Doc 5) However, the north knew that was not true because of Harriet Beecher Stowe's “Uncle Tom’s Cabin”. In 1854 when the Kansas-Nebraska act was passed it caused some issues. Anti-slavery supporters were not happy because they did not want expansion of slavery, but the pro-slavery supporters weren’t happy because they wanted slavery everywhere for sure. (Doc. 7)The Kansas-Nebraska act caused trouble before it was even passed, Senator Charles Sumner argued against and attacked pro-slavery men causing Preston Brooks to beat Sumner with a cane. The south praised Brooks while the north felt for Sumner. (Doc 8) In 1858 during his acceptance speech Lincoln said his famous line, “A house divided
Self-interest can be seen in many of the writings throughout American history. The mercantile system, as exhibited by the British on the colonies, was an extremely hedonistic approach to gaining wealth for themselves. Mercantilism, as set forth by the Navigation Acts, imposed strict and extremely descriptive laws that would limit and exploit trade in the colonies, allowing Britain to control the wealth and profit of materials and goods in America. These acts were used to keep America from trading with any other countries. As stated in the Navigation Act of 1660, "no goods or commodities whatsoever shall be imported into or exported out of any lands" to his Majesty belonging"in any other ship or ships...as do truly and without fraud belong only to the people of England or Ireland" (Restoration 98). Britain knew that by controlling the colonies in this manner they could take the raw materials out and sell the finished products back, and by doing so they would profit greatly. This mercantile system exemplifies the arrogant minds of the British while America was developing. This system would soon become a failure due to the people's demands to have representation along with taxation, and their desire to separate from England as a free and independent state. Likewise, it was due to self-interest of the greedy planters and the self righteous farmers in the south that slavery was highly used. At that time they needed all the labor they could get, and the cheapest way to obtain it was through the purchase of slaves. Some of the slavery was downplayed by calling it indentured servitude, where servants were essentially slaves for a limited number of years.
When even the highly-supported secession documents clearly outline how important slavery was to the southern states, it is hard to deny its fault in the war. The argument that the Confederacy was fighting for states’ rights is the most-often suggested alternative, however all one needs to do is dig deeper and calculate what these
In studying the Southern defense of slavery, it appears that southerners were defending a way of life. Many believed that the institution of slavery was the lesser of two evils in terms of providing benefits for workers, others believed that it was at the very foundation of a free society to own slaves and still others saw it merely as an expedient means to an economic end. Although one may acknowledge that the South had understandable political, social and religious reasons for supporting the institution of slavery, the fundamental moral obligation to treat all humans as equals supercedes them all.
First, the South couldn’t have won the civil war because state’s rights prevented unification of the South. The very issue that created the Confederacy helped to destroy it. In waging war, the South faced problems of politics and government that greatly complicated its problem of economic mobilization. No one would deny the troublesome effect of the conflict generated by differing ideas of how best to protect liberty and to organize southern society for the war effort. Southern people insisted upon retaining their democratic liberties in wartime, which proved fatal for the South. They had to struggle with a “confederacy formed by particularistic politicians [that] could hardly be expected to adopt promptly those centralists polices which victory demanded” (Donald, p. 26). Individual state governors fought bitterly with Jefferson Davis to prevent him from consolidating power to fight the war. They withheld troops and supplies while the Confederate Congress spent its time arguing over the rights of the states instead of prosecuting a war of national survival. Many internal conflicts within the South were acquiring and weakening the South’s unity. Internal conflicts caused confederate officials to choose between moving troops from the coasts and strengthening their armies, or leaving the...
Capitalism has always been a double-edged sword for the United States. It began as the driving force in pushing along economic growth, but it came at the price of the African society. It was implied, and enforced, that Africans were of a lesser class through the means in which they were "used" by the slave owners to promote their wealth and stature. The larger their plantation, the wealthier and more successful people were seen. But in order to do this, the plantation owners needed workers, but if they had to pay workers reasonable wages, they could not yield a profit.
Up until the late 1800s, slavery was widely considered acceptable in America. This ethical issue was important because African Americans were forcibly held against their will in order to fulfill the hard labor duties that were demanded by their owner. Slaves had no say in whether their lives belong to themselves. There was no sense of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. African Americans were not even considered a full person. Although the slaves had families they had no control on whether or not they would stay together. Slaves were sold to different parts of the country in which sometimes they would never see their family members again. Although slavery was accepted, the northern part of America allowed African Americans to be free. This ultimately led to a bloody division between the North and the South. The south led a revolt to go to war against the north, specifically in order to keep their rights to allow slavery. Based on the principles of jus ad bellum, the south was not qualified to go to war in the first place. In order to go to war the state has to be minimally just and the south was not minimally just in doing so. Throughout this paper I will explain the six principles of the jus ad bellum and whether or not the south met any of those principles. I will also explain the south perspective within each of these principles, on why they believed it was right for them to go to war.
For a long time, historians have been unable to come to an agreement to why the Civil War started and whether or not it was repressible or irrepressible. Northern and Southern writers had different opinions as to why the war occurred. To most Northern writers, the war occurred because of the unlawful plan of slave owners who were committed to a not liable institution. The North defended the Constitution and was against the immoral aggression of the south. The North clearly defended the Union. However, the Southern writers on the other hand tried to show their views on why the Civil War started by portraying the North as the aggressive ones who wanted to destroy the South and all of its institutions. The south insisted that slavery was not the main cause of the war but instead was the aggressive and unconstitutional acts of the North. The south claimed the North used its powers for political and economic gain and denied that the war had stemmed from differences over slavery. The north’s domineering attitude toward the south was the main cause for their hostilities. They defended this ...
Throughout the years, many people have been taught that the reason the Civil War happened, was to abolish slavery all through the United States. Although that is true, there were more reasons why the Civil War occurred.Referencing will be done on different articles and writers to support the findings of the authors. The article “Slavery, the Constitutional, and the Origins of the Civil War” by Paul Finkelman, discusses about the North (union) and the South (confederacy) and the disagreement of the territories following the constitutional laws regarding slavery, the article explores both sides of the territories and their beliefs of how the situation of slavery should have been dealt with. The article “The Economic Origins of the Civil War” by Marc Egnal, discusses the North’s (union) and the South’s (confederacy) economic situation that could have pushed the two territories to engage in war with one another. Finally, the last article “Politics, Ideology, and the Origins of the American Civil War” by Eric Foner, focuses on the Norths (union) and Souths (confederacy) views on politics and ideas of how each territory is ran and how they have affected the North and the South. These historians supplied specific and different explanations that explained what exactly caused the United States to enter into a Civil War. With the information provided by the authors, the evidence will lead us to the answer of what caused the Civil War.
All of this dates back to how America was first “discovered” by Christopher Columbus. In reality, he simply stumbled upon it while he was trying to sail to Asia and then took advantage of the natives in order for the new colonies to survive. Once he learned all that he needed in order to make a living there from those already inhabiting the area, Columbus murdered and raped their people and then stole their land out of pure greed. Further, Capitalism, and its ancestor Mercantilism, is based on the idea of taking risks, or loans, in order to generate profit. This system requires there to be an imbalance in wealth. That is to say that some need to be on the poorer end of the spectrum while others get to be much more wealthy. This correlates to how those wealthier are those who become more successful in life, which is more than likely due to their safety net of funds provided to them by the risks taken by their parents or other elders. "I'm the first to admit that I am very competitive and that I'll do nearly anything within legal bounds to win. Sometimes, part of making a deal is denigrating your competition" (Trump). This is all the more exemplified in William Golding’s The Lord of the Flies wherein is another instance of greed; “Jack shouted above the noise. ‘You go away, Ralph. You keep to your end. This is my
The war is the unfolding of miscalculations." -Barbara Tuchman Lasting from 1861 to 1865, the Civil War is considered the bloodiest war in American history. However, the Civil War had seemingly been a long time coming. There were many events that took place within the fifteen years leading up to the Civil War that foreshadowed the eventual secession of seven “cotton states” from the Union.
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.
Although the American Civil War mainly occurred because of slavery, the fact is that slavery had a lot to do with economic and social issues.
In spite of the prominence of the states in everyday life, the most demanding public policy questions former to the American Civil War involved discussions over the possibility of national power with most Americans believing it should remain partial. Yet federalism was still the center of political arguments. The Constitution did not report if states did nor did not reserve any remaining sovereignty in the powers given to the national government. The fact that the states were much more capable in accomplishing governmental purposes adequately t...