1832 // Nullification Crisis
Thomas Jefferson introduced us to the idea of nullification during the whole debacle with the Alien and Sedition acts and the Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions. The issue was reintroduced in 1828 with the enforcement of the Tariff of 1828, also dubbed the “Tariff of Abomination.” This tariff was a payment put on other nations’ imports. Sounding innocent, it was meant to protect the North’s growing industrial impact, reserving it the most room to prosper. It tended to be more taxing (bad dum tiss!) on the South, deterring trade with potential businesses John C. Calhoun, senator from South Carolina, argued the his state had the right to nullify this tariff. In 1832, South Carolina called for a special state convention …show more content…
For one, it stirred up a debate so powerful, it could lead to a potential war. While it can be argued as a precursor to the actual Civil War, this event in particular was meaningful for similar but smaller scale reasons. Another was the continual validation of the federal government's power over the states. Ideas were discussed in the Webster-Hayne debate, all of these setting precedents for years to come. One the biggest pieces this debate provides is the further sectioning between the North and South. With the aforementioned North and South’s interests being prioritized for the sake of Clay’s American System, there is going to be disagreement especially when one notices the other gaining more attention. This was can be noted as the near beginning of what each section stood for, something that would only be further …show more content…
In fact, in the early 1800s, many people’s interpretation of this event was that it was perfectly legal and just, especially those wanting to migrate to Georgia for various reasons. Their justification was that they wanted and deserved the land more, Native Americans simply weren’t cultivating a land so ripe for opportunity. A historian’s interpretation of this event is a lot different nowadays, for the Trail of Tears is often regarded as one of the darkest human tragedies of American history. Blatant racism and oppressive tactics used by Jackson and why they were devastating to the Cherokee people has been admitted across the board as what was the. They would no doubt expand on the assimilation of the Native Americans into the culture that Americans called their own at the time. Equality and morality are a tricky slope to define with each person’s experience defining those two. Because of this, we find there are variations of this modern interpretation but is still in the
Thomas Jefferson introduced us to the idea of nullification during the whole debacle with the Alien and Sedition acts and the Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions. The issue was reintroduced in 1828 with the enforcement of the Tariff of 1828, also dubbed the “Tariff of Abomination.” This tariff was a payment put on other nations’ imports. Sounding innocent, it was meant to protect the North’s growing industrial impact, reserving it the most room to prosper. It tended to be more taxing (bad dum tiss!) on the South, deterring trade with potential businesses John C. Calhoun, senator from South Carolina, argued the his state had the right to nullify this tariff. In 1832, South Carolina called for a special state convention …show more content…
For one, it stirred up a debate so powerful, it could lead to a potential war. While it can be argued as a precursor to the actual Civil War, this event in particular was meaningful for similar but smaller scale reasons. Another was the continual validation of the federal government's power over the states. Ideas were discussed in the Webster-Hayne debate, all of these setting precedents for years to come. One the biggest pieces this debate provides is the further sectioning between the North and South. With the aforementioned North and South’s interests being prioritized for the sake of Clay’s American System, there is going to be disagreement especially when one notices the other gaining more attention. This was can be noted as the near beginning of what each section stood for, something that would only be further …show more content…
In fact, in the early 1800s, many people’s interpretation of this event was that it was perfectly legal and just, especially those wanting to migrate to Georgia for various reasons. Their justification was that they wanted and deserved the land more, Native Americans simply weren’t cultivating a land so ripe for opportunity. A historian’s interpretation of this event is a lot different nowadays, for the Trail of Tears is often regarded as one of the darkest human tragedies of American history. Blatant racism and oppressive tactics used by Jackson and why they were devastating to the Cherokee people has been admitted across the board as what was the. They would no doubt expand on the assimilation of the Native Americans into the culture that Americans called their own at the time. Equality and morality are a tricky slope to define with each person’s experience defining those two. Because of this, we find there are variations of this modern interpretation but is still in the