Why John Brown Chose Violence

778 Words2 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: Thesis statement regarding the kansas nebraska act

Why do you believe that John Brown believed that the situation in the U.S. at the time could only be solved by bloodshed and not compromise? I believe that there are many reasons why John Brown believed that violence was the only way he could prevail in the fight to end slavery in the United States. First of all; at this time in history, issues were moving fairly quickly. As soon as Kansas was to become a territory, supporters from both the North and South rushed to settle on the land and tried to gain control of the vote in the area. Secondly, it probably seemed that any attempts at compromise at that time had not, and would not, get very far in the issue. Lastly, the most prominent reason I believe that John Brown felt violence was the only answer, was because of his belief in God. As he stated in his speech to the courts during his trial, he felt that what he did was not wrong. Sacrificing his life was worth it; even if it was just one step towards ending slavery, something that was so cruel and wicked anyway, his violence was no worse than the slavery. When the Kansas-Nebraska Act was introduced in the U.S., the North was upset because the new territories would probably be pro-slavery. As soon as they could, both sides of the issue sent in settlers to try and gain control. This “race for Kansas” made the race to make a final decision on the issue of slavery in the U.S. an even more urgent issue. This battle to decide what side the two new territories would be on probably pushed the issue so hard it caused a lot of discomfort and probably hurried people like John Brown into making decisions quickly, because people were afraid. I believe that the rush to make a ruling for or against slavery was one reason why John Brown chose bloodshed over compromise. The second reason I believe Brown picked violence over negotiation was because of the lack of communication. It probably seemed a hopeless endeavor to even try to correspond with the South on the issue, especially after violence had already begun in many places; not to mention in the act of slavery itself. It would have been very hard for either side to civilly speak or negotiate with the opposition in an reasonable manner.

Show More
Related

  • Bleeding Kansas Pros And Cons

    251 Words  | 1 Pages

    To put it simply (as I recall and it's been years since I've had to read about this subject)a new territory was opened to settle in. It was decided that the settlers of these states would decide whether or not slavery would be permitted. This gave birth to the new Republican Party which opposed slavery. The Act was designed by Stephen A Douglas a Democratic senator from Illinois (the same who would later defeat a young Abraham Lincoln for the senate in 1858) and repealed the Missouri Compromise of 1820. Thousands of settlers both pro and anti slavery rushed into Kansas particularly and bloody, murderous fights broke out among the groups hence the nickname "Bleeding Kansas". It was actually one territory but this Act divided it into two states.

    Read More

  • Summary And Slavery: The Causes Of The Missouri Compromise

    672 Words  | 2 Pages

    Tempers raged and arguments started because of the Missouri Compromise. The simple act caused many fatal events because of what was changed within the United States. It may not seem like a big thing now, but before slavery had been abolished, the topic of slavery was an idea that could set off fights. The Missouri Compromise all started in late in 1819 when the Missouri Territory applied to the Union to become a slave state. The problem Congress had with accepting Missouri as a slave state was the new uneven count of free states and slave states. With proslavery states and antislavery states already getting into arguments, having a dominant number of either slave or free states would just ignite the flame even more. Many representatives from the north, such as James Tallmadge of New York, had already tried to pass another amendment that would abolish slavery everywhere. Along with other tries to eliminate slavery, his effort was soon shot down. The fact that people couldn’t agree on whether or not slavery should be legalized made trying to compose and pass a law nearly impossible.

    Read More

  • Tony Horwitz Midnight Rising Sparknotes

    792 Words  | 2 Pages

    ... go ahead with the death sentence made the North realize that he was a hero whereas the South believed that Brown was a terrorist and committed an act of treachery and horror. This specific invasion also assisted on choosing Abraham Lincoln for president, who advanced to achieve the vision of John Brown with the Emancipation Proclamation.

    Read More

  • John Brown: Villain Or Hero?

    342 Words  | 1 Pages

    John Brown should be remembered as a villain and a hero because he took armed possession of the federal arsenal and launch a massive slave insurrection to free the nation’s 4 million slaves.

    Read More

  • The Differences between the North and South on the Eve of the Civil War

    650 Words  | 2 Pages

    The North always looked at the South with antipathy and kept trying to abolish slavery, but the South didn’t like the North interfering and wanted to continue the use of slavery. The Missouri compromise was another issue between the North and the South. Missouri was a territory state, and it opted to be in the Union in 1818. There was a proposal to ban Slavery in Missouri, even though there were more than 2000 slaves living there, in desperation, Missouri asked for help from the South. Maine was another territory that had petitioned to enter the union, so in 1820 a compromise was set and Missouri was allowed to stay a slave state, and Maine was declared a free state.

    Read More

  • The Missouri Compromise and the Compromise of 1850

    637 Words  | 2 Pages

    Ever since the formation of the colonies, differences stood in the way of a fundamental relationship between the north and the south. Despite these differences they were not the cause of the problems. In the 1820’s, the growth between territories and regions were increasing. This expansion went too far causing it to become a worldwide crisis. More chaos arouse since the north and the south did not agree on anything. The north strongly disagreed with the expansion of slavery, while south agreed to expand slavery throughout new territories and regions. The north's decision was based on factors such as political and economical threat instead of a moral threat, as it was depicted in the Missouri Compromise. However, the Compromise of 1850 , showed a more argument towards the morality threat, making it more united than ever.

    Read More

  • John Brown's Abolishment Of Slavery

    1214 Words  | 3 Pages

    Although I do not necessarily agree with Brown’s actions of killing in retaliation when trying to end something that had been practiced in America since its creation, I do believe that when faced with such a large task that is seemingly impossible to overcome that some often take rash measures to force a result. Had Brown not taken the actions he did there might not have been another big push against the south, which sparked the civil war. Who is to say that some aspects of slavery wouldn’t have carried on into the twentieth and twenty-first centuries? So by saying that I think that Brown was much more of a martyr than a terrorist, because if he had not jump started the war with the South then the corruption may have carried on much longer.

    Read More

  • The American Civil War: The Inevitable Confrontation

    1753 Words  | 4 Pages

    ...ry as inhumane and against universal suffrage. Both abolitionists agreed that compromise was not probable and slave labor was morally wrong. Thus, its expansion must be halted. Similarly the Southern Democrats, although their ideology was the opposite, were not willing to compromise on the issue of the expansion of slavery. Southern Democrat, James Henry Hammond, believed that slavery was necessary for the economic growth of the nation and without it, the North would also perish. Furthermore, the Constitutional Convention of South Carolina agreed secession was unavoidable when Abraham Lincoln was appointed into office. Therefore, initiated the beginning of an inevitable confrontation between the North and the South. These two exceptionally strict and uncompromising ideologies regarding slavery led to one of the most controversial and bloody wars in American history.

    Read More

  • How The Civil War Became A War To Free The Slaves

    1389 Words  | 3 Pages

    When President Lincoln first called for troops to put down the confederate rebellion, he made no connection between this action and an attempt to end slavery. In fact, he explicitly stated "the utmost care will be observed to avoid any devastation, any destruction of, or interference with, property..." At this point, slavery was not yet integral to the struggle, it was much more important for the Union to air on the side of political prudence and avoid angering loyal boarder states. However, despite this lack of political dialogue, many abolitionists, slaves, and free blacks felt the war to preserve the union could also be a war to end slavery. In the end, they were right, as military need overwhelmed potential political dangers, slaves and the institution of slavery became a central issue in the civil war.

    Read More

  • Analysis Of The Irrepressible Conflict Between The North And South

    1061 Words  | 3 Pages

    The people of the North and South each believed fiercely in their cause, one for a free people the other for life servitude. Neither group, based on the documents presented were willing to budge regarding their beliefs. They North wanted to abolish slavery completely and the South could not understand why they had to give up their way of life because the concept was so ingrained in them as a people. The two completely different ideals could not co-exist peacefully and therefore the eventual climax of this issue, the war, was an inevitable

    Read More

  • John Brown

    414 Words  | 1 Pages

    John Brown became a legend of his time. He was a God fearing, yet violent man and slaveholders saw him as evil, fanatic, a murderer, lunatic, liar, and horse thief. To abolitionists, he was noble and courageous. John Brown was born in 1800 and grew up in the wilderness of Ohio. At seventeen, he left home and soon mastered the arts of farming, tanning, and home building.

    Read More

  • Events Leading To The Civil War

    866 Words  | 2 Pages

    Going back to the quote, "The 1850's was a time of attempted compromise when compromise was no longer possible." During the 1850's compromise was attempted by both the North and South and failed. It failed because both sides wanted different things, and this made compromise impossible. This quote is just another way of saying that the Civil War was going to occur no matter what either side, the North or South, did to try to stop it.

    Read More

  • Causes of The American Civil War

    2128 Words  | 5 Pages

    ...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).

    Read More

  • Political Compromises Essay

    1062 Words  | 3 Pages

    Between the period of 1820-1861 there was a number of political compromises done in order reduce the sectional tension between the North and the South. While each of the compromises created helped the issue that the country was facing at that time, they did not help overall. The compromises were only a temporary fix to the country’s problem of sectionalism. Therefore, while political compromises were effective in reducing the tension between the North and the South, it did not help in preventing the civil war. The North and the South had a vast amount of political differences, one of the major ones was slavery.

    Read More

  • How Did John Brown Help Abolish Slavery?

    543 Words  | 2 Pages

    What did John Brown do? John Brown was trying his very best to help abolish slavery. John Brown believed that violence would be the best way to overthrow the slavery system, him and his son attacked pro-slavery residents. John Brown thought his actions were ok by saying his actions were “the will of god”. After John’s actions he became a hero in the eyes of the Northern extremists. John Brown created a group and their goal was to get supplies and then use the supplies to protect them during the slave rebellion. In 1855 John brown helped a lot of slaves escape. Like it said on History.com,” In 1855, after assisting the escape of several slaves, Brown and his five sons moved to Kansas just after that territory had been opened for the possible expansion of slavery by the Kansas-Nebraska Act.” John Brown did not get to abolish slavery completely, but he did everything he could to help.

    Read More

More about Why John Brown Chose Violence

Open Document