I believe the Civil War was fought over the issue of slavery, state’s rights, and also the power to control the West. What ultimately caused the Civil War would be the Compromise of 1850. Other main factors that caused the Civil War would be John Brown’s raid, the Second Great Awakening, and also the involvement of women in the Abolitionist movement. The reason as to why the Compromise of 1850 was the main cause of the Civil War would be due to the fact that it increased sectionalism, did not solve the issue of slavery, and also paved the way for the Fugitive Slave Laws of 1850. The reason why these events are the most significant are that they are the most pivotal events to occur during this time, which ultimately paved the way for the first
…show more content…
One such event would be the Compromise of 1850 which pertained to the admittance of California as a Free-State or a Slave-State. The South feared that if California was admitted as a free state, they would lose their already dominant power in Congress. The Compromise did not necessarily solve the issue of slavery, but instead fended it off. This caused for increased sectionalism, stronger slave laws, and promoted the Civil War. The South describes itself as its own entity and wished to preserve the Union instead of merging with the North. The way the South understands power was through politics, they wanted Supreme control over Congress. Slavery fit in to this proclamation by being the issue that sparked the Compromise to occur in the first …show more content…
She had no compromise to offer but the Constitution, and no concession or surrender to make. She has already surrendered so much that she has little left to surrender. Such a settlement would go to the roof of the evil, and remove all cause of discontent, by satisfying the South that she could remain honorably and safely in the Union, and thereby restore the harmony and fraternal feelings between the section which existed anterior to the Missouri agitation.” (Hewitt & Lawson, p.369) This was a selection from Document 12.2 entitled On the Compromise of 1850. John Calhoun 's view on what were the principle issues between the North and the South, the greatest question was what begun the entire trial of sectionalism where he calls attention to the Missouri Compromise, which did not explain the countries position on servitude. John Calhoun communicates how subjection is profoundly installed inside American culture, essentially the South, which is the reason it must be protected. Calhoun depicts the South as effectively frail since the begin of bargains and demands that if any trade off to be made, it be built up in the fine print of the Constitution, instead of an understanding between the two. Calhoun is communicating that the South can 't work effectively with the North as they are conflicting with them in a restricting way, instead of in concordance. Calhoun 's perspectives on sectionalism clarified
One such event would be the Compromise of 1850 which pertained to the admittance of California as a Free-State or a Slave-State. The South feared that if California was admitted as a free state, they would lose their already dominant power in Congress. The Compromise did not necessarily solve the issue of slavery, but instead fended it off. This caused for increased sectionalism, stronger slave laws, and promoted the Civil War. The South describes itself as its own entity and wished to preserve the Union instead of merging with the North. The way the South understands power was through politics, they wanted Supreme control over Congress. Slavery fit in to this proclamation by being the issue that sparked the Compromise to occur in the first …show more content…
She had no compromise to offer but the Constitution, and no concession or surrender to make. She has already surrendered so much that she has little left to surrender. Such a settlement would go to the roof of the evil, and remove all cause of discontent, by satisfying the South that she could remain honorably and safely in the Union, and thereby restore the harmony and fraternal feelings between the section which existed anterior to the Missouri agitation.” (Hewitt & Lawson, p.369) This was a selection from Document 12.2 entitled On the Compromise of 1850. John Calhoun 's view on what were the principle issues between the North and the South, the greatest question was what begun the entire trial of sectionalism where he calls attention to the Missouri Compromise, which did not explain the countries position on servitude. John Calhoun communicates how subjection is profoundly installed inside American culture, essentially the South, which is the reason it must be protected. Calhoun depicts the South as effectively frail since the begin of bargains and demands that if any trade off to be made, it be built up in the fine print of the Constitution, instead of an understanding between the two. Calhoun is communicating that the South can 't work effectively with the North as they are conflicting with them in a restricting way, instead of in concordance. Calhoun 's perspectives on sectionalism clarified