• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

Territorial expansion was the main cause of the civil war. To what extent do you agree with this statement?

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

Jennifer Felipe IB Contemporary History Topic: Territorial expansion was the main cause of the civil war. To what extent do you agree with this statement? The civil war is associated with southern succession, slavery, and the Republican Party, all factors which this dispute entailed. The initiation for such conflict though, lies in the territorial expansion that Americans believed was destined for the United States at the time. Territorial expansion pinned Americans against one another when debating whether the new states should be slaves states or not, questioned the power the Federal government had in comparison to states' rights, and put at risk the unity of the U.S.A as a nation. With a vast majority of land acquired through agreements such as the Louisiana Purchase it was difficult to decide whether slavery should spread further west, not do so, or be equally distributed. ...read more.

Middle

The expansion was enough to destroy the sense of nationalism that was heartedly felt during the American Revolution. As the dispute escalated and became more emotional, states such as Kansas and Nebraska felt they deserved the right to choose independently from what the federal government had proposed. They passed the Kansas-Nebraska Act which the idea of "popular sovereignty" was strongly agreed upon, the choice as to whether the state should be admitted as free or not they believed, depended solely on the citizens living there. Unfortunately this led to a great upheaval which ended in a bloody fight amongst the residents in Kansas, but fortunately yielded the Republican Party which opposed the spread of slavery and played a key role in the development of the war. The Fugitive Slave Act, which demanded that escaped slaves to Free states be forcibly returned to their owners, angered many and tilted the loyalty from federal to the more dependable state pride. ...read more.

Conclusion

Such dissimilar personal interests made the two regions feud and develop a separation that grew all a result of the expansion. With the threat of the succession of the south, the civil war became long and costly. Not only was the survival of the U.S as one nation at risk, but the ideas of liberty, equality, and justice all depended on the outcome of the war. In summation, territorial expansion, in comparison to slavery or economic greed was of a greater degree a main cause of the civil war. Expansion led to a heated debate over slavery that threatened the unity of the United States, and called into question the federal government's power over that of the states. Had it not been for the westward territorial gain, slavery would not have been called into question as quickly and the emancipation of the slaves would have been deterred perhaps a couple of decades. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our International Baccalaureate History section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related International Baccalaureate History essays

  1. the causes and consequences of the spanish civil war

    USA combined to provide much-needed funds that the country began to recover. Of course, as the Cold War continued, the reason behind USA's support for Spain was because it saw it as a valuable ally against communism. By the 1970s, Spain had the fastest growing economy in Europe.

  2. To what extent did Alexander II's reforms cause more problems than they solved?

    It seems that Alexander II's rule had a clear pattern of liberalism - which raised people's expectations- then conservatism -which infuriated people as their previously granted liberty was taken away. In this sense what historian Hugh Seton-Watson wrote is completely true: 'The reign of Alexander II, which began with bright promise, and changed to dreary stagnation, ended in tragedy.'

  1. To what extent was Imperialism the key cause of World War One ?

    Overall it is clear that imperialism played a strong role in creating some important tensions, but perhaps of greater importance were those connected to nationalism. Nationalism was very much at the heart of this conflict. It was nationalism that lay at the centre of many nations' desire to expand, both within Europe and outside it.

  2. The Missouri Compromise. The fear of politicians was that if Missouri was admitted ...

    Hence, a compromise had to be reached. The fear of politicians was that if Missouri was admitted as a slave state the Louisiana Purchase would be influenced in terms of allowing or disallowing slavery. However, when words were exchanged both Northerners and Southerners had reasons to fight for slavery and against it.

  1. What was the main cause of the French Revolution?

    Also ?the young men who had fought in (American War) had seen at close ranged a new people governed by a wise constitution. Their heads were turned. They brought back badly digested ideas?[3] and decided to execute them within France.

  2. Notes on the History and Development of the Arab-Israeli Conflict

    They could no longer claim that 'Jordan is Palestine'. - In 1974 the PLO adopted the 'Stages Plan' stating that a state should be achieved in any area that might be evacuated by Israel in exchange for a peace settlement. Arafat also gave his Olive Branch speech to the UN this year.

  1. The Chinese Civil War - Background and Main Events

    90% of the population was Han. In 1900, the reading of the unequal treaties led to an anti-foreign movement, known as the Boxer Rising. The failure of the uprising led to more discontent with the Manchus The boxers were revolting against more loss of Chinese sovereignty and they were joined by the Manchu government.

  2. The Great Revolt (Indian Mutiny) of 1857 came as a surprise to the British, ...

    This led them to look for other sources of income, which was difficult ?as the destruction of Indian handicrafts was not accompanied by the development if modern industries.? Moreover, as said by Dadabhai Naroji and Sumit Sarkar, the British were not helping India modernise but were instead regressing its economy.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work