What were the political and economic causes of the Civil War?

1. 72

   davenmidtownposted 13 years ago

   What were the political and economic causes of the Civil War?
   
   When you read historical accounts of the civil war, one of the key statements is that the war turned brother against brother... literally dividing houses.  So what are the political and economic causes of the Civil War? What were the key changes that would evoke such strong emotional determinations within kin?

   replyreport
2. 0

   msorenssonposted 13 years ago

   I was not born and raised here. I studied it in High School to pass a course. I think perhaps watch the series, North and South.

   replyreport
3. 67

   conradofontanillaposted 13 years ago

   Political causes of the American Civil War that come easily to mind are that the South wanted to protect their rights to own slaves and to make a state more sovereign than the Federation. One economic cause is that the South was being dominated economically by the North. read more

   replyreport
4. 76

   Mr. Happyposted 13 years ago

   "The problem was that northerners and southerners had a very different understandings of liberty. To northerners it was freedom to pursue their self-interest without competition from the slaves; to southerners it was freedom to dispose of slaves, their legally aquired property, as they chose. Thus the Compromise soon began to come apart at the seems. Northerners resented and resisted enforcement of the Fugitive Slave Act and saw southern support of the Kansas-Nebraska bill as proof that southerners still wanted to extend slavery. In turn, Southerners angered by northern defiance of the Fugitive Slave Act interpreted northern outrage against Douglas's bill as further evidence of the North's disrespect for the law ...
   By mid 1850s sectional tensions were spinning out of control. The Whig party collapsed, and ties between northern and southern Democrats frayed. "Bleeding Kansas" pushed many former Whigs and northern Democrats toward the new - and purely sectional - Republican party. Even as Southerners wavered on the idea of secession, northern hostility toward Dred Scott decision and sympathy for John Brown seemed to prove that the North's real design was to destroy slavery - and the South ... War finally erupted between siblings who claimed the same heritage but had become strangers to each other."  - The Enduring Vision: A History of the American People, Fourth Edition, 2002 Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston

   replyreport
5. 77

   stclairjackposted 13 years ago

   well we used this deep question, that deserves and equaly deep and well though out answer to ....
   
   A) pimp out a hub
   B) quote an already published and much refered back to book on the subject
   C) sugest we all watch a sexed up movie about it
   
   as an american i'm very depressed right now.
   
   for my part, i would have carpel tunnel before i could type enough to explain my thoughts on the issue.
   
   it is unique in our country to still debate the war 150 years later when other nations and princepalities of the world have had civil wars that are closed subjects for the most part,.. "this is why, this is how, this is who won"...
   
   its truely american to complicate something so thoroughly that 150 years later we can still argue about it.
   
   in a nut shell,.... the US civil war was brough about by both economic and moral conditions,... economics and morals have seldom if ever meshed well,... thus it was, is and will always be confusing and conveluted.
   
   a lot like america today,... we cannot reconcile our economics with our morals.

   replyreport
6. 93

   RachaelLeflerposted 13 years ago

   I think part of it has to do with the fact that the north became industrialized and advanced more rapidly while the South remained agricultural. This meant the economy of the South relied on slave labor in the plantations, while the North had machinery that needed fewer workers to operate, so the basis of its economy was not slave ownership. Thus, it was easier for the abolitionists to champion their cause in the north than in the south, causing a cultural divide. And I think this cultural rift caused Southerners to think they were being controlled by a dictatorship in Washington (their way of life was threatened by those in power), and this fueled people's paranoia and resistance to federal control.

   replyreport
7. 60

   Marturionposted 13 years ago

   I've actually answered this question, in varying forms, a few times.  Why, because I like history, and love to tick people off by disrupting their firm opinions with genuine fact.
     First off, slavery wasn't even an issue until after the war was started (Abolitionist support was key, and considerations were made accordingly)  How can I say this?  Because their were just as many northern slave owners as in the south, according to census reports of the time.  There were a decidedly larger number of actual slaves in the south, since they worked the plantations and fields, while northern slaves were predominately household servants (northern farmers had immigrants, who worked to pay off increasing debts and cottage rental, so they didn't need slaves for that.)
     Second, war was not the intent of the southern states when they seceded.  They had hopes that the northern states would acknowledge their departure and work with them to pay a fair price for textile and agricultural goods.
     third, the biggest reason for the seceding, and ultimately, the war, was economic.  Northern businesses were lobbying the federal government to impose heavy tariffs and taxes on southern goods, far exceeding that of goods from Europe.

   replyreport
8. 72

   davenmidtownposted 13 years ago

   @ Marturion: Well done!.. I hope that I can talk you  into writing a hub that 1) explains your answer, 2) notes if you feel that those causes are present today, and three can tie today's political process into the political process of that time frame.   
   
   ds

   replyreport
9. 78

   Wesman Todd Shawposted 13 years ago

   I think the best way to arrive at a good conclusion would be to take whatever is taught in most public schools, and especially ones in Texas - and rule those things out.
   
   From there...you'll have a place to start.
   
   For instance...when I was in school it seemed like they just taught it as a war over slavery.
   
   Slavery wasn't THE issue, but something that needed to end sooner rather than later...and was a factor in the Southern aristocracy.
   
   Its also noteworthy here that England and France tried to aide the South by sending supplies...but the Russians sent a fleet to blockade for Lincoln.  The Romanov did have it's finer points.

   replyreport
10. 61

    DeanCashposted 13 years ago

    War is to show your power over another country, but there are many different reasons why war starts, Most nations think it helps answer their problems and solve political issues so they hurt each other pretty bad. Other causes : Greed - the desire for more power and more territory, Religious idealism, Corrupt governments, Discontent and poverty, Man's innate sinfulness. Sometimes it starts in your own family.

    replyreport