1answer.
Ask question
Login Signup
Ask question
All categories
  • English
  • Mathematics
  • Social Studies
  • Business
  • History
  • Health
  • Geography
  • Biology
  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Computers and Technology
  • Arts
  • World Languages
  • Spanish
  • French
  • German
  • Advanced Placement (AP)
  • SAT
  • Medicine
  • Law
  • Engineering
Ilya [14]
4 years ago
9

The great economic and social divisions between the North and South in the first half of the 1800s eventually led to the Civil W

ar. During those prewar years, the North industrialized, urbanized, and became more reliant on wage labor. In contrast, the South remained a rural, agricultural society that focused on slavery to harvest cash crops like cotton and tobacco. Historians have often said that due to the huge differences between the two regions, the Civil War was inevitable. What do you think could have been done, if anything, to prevent the war? Also consider the issue of slavery, which became so central to the disagreements between the North and South. Could simple compromise or political debate between the two sides have eventually ended slavery without a war? Be sure to point to evidence from throughout this unit or that you have found on your own that supports your viewpoint.
History
2 answers:
algol134 years ago
6 0

It is unlikely that any compromise or political debate could have prevented the Civil War. The North was intent on maintaining the strength of the Union, which would have remained at risk if the issue of slavery was ignored. On the other hand, the South depended completely on slavery. As they were reliant on agriculture and this required slave labour, they could not have emancipated the slaves without completely destroying their economy. It is unlikely that any politician would have seen this as a good alternative.

The great divide between their industrialization levels was also a significant problem. Even if the South were to become more industrial, the change would have been a difficult one, and it is unlikely it would have been achieved without enormous economic disruption.

Sunny_sXe [5.5K]4 years ago
3 0
The differences between the North and South were great both socially, economically, and politically. It is difficult to see the institution of slavery being ended in the South without the threat of violence or actual violence. The institution of slavery was believed to be integral to the Southern economy that it is hard to imagine it going away through compromise at that point in history. 
You might be interested in
How did Colonists respond to the stamp act
rusak2 [61]

There is a violent spirit of opposition raised on the Continent against the execution of the Stamp Act, the mob in Boston have carried it very high against Mr. Oliver the Secry (a Town born child) for his acceptance of an office in consequence of that act. They have even proceeded to some violence, and burnt him in Effigy &c. They threaten to pull down & burn the Stamp Office now building, and that they will hold every man as Infamous that shall presume to carry the Stamp Act into Execution; so that it is thought Mr. Oliver will resign. I don’t find any such turbulent spirit to prevail among us, if it should, the means are in our Hands to prevent any tumults or Insults; what the consequences may be in the Colonies who have no military force to keep the rabble in order, I cannot pretend to say.

3 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
In the late 1800s, after treaties and reservations failed, the United States Army went to war with American Indians in the West.
Georgia [21]
I’ll give you two:

Yes: The “War” on the Indians was not a traditional war of declaration but of skirmishes. When wagon trains of people headed West Indians would commonly target them for raids and pillage, so along many routes forts where built and patrols would try and make sure they were safe. If the problem became worse the local garrison would find the tribe and come with a list of demands. Most of the time they were fired upon arrival out of fear or anger. This would lead to a small battle or skirmish which would likely cause collateral damage.

No: The wars raged in the west against the Indians were that of near genocide, and to call it anything but is misleading. To claim that the slaughter of hundreds of innocent people was a “battle” is absurd and shouldn’t be considered. Though in films that depict such events are dramatized and inaccurate, situations much like those were taking place around the west yearly.
7 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
1. In "The Ramayana," Rama most likely knew that Sita was not married because
maksim [4K]
1)C she did not cause him to recoil from her
2)B
3)c
4)A
7 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
According to ancient Greek philosophers, with whom did a tyrant share power? A.the people B.the aristocracy C.a group of philoso
luda_lava [24]

Hey! Sorry for the late response. I know it's fustrating.

Answer: According to ancient Greek philosophers, Tyrant shared power with <em>nobody.  </em>I don't know is this is just in general, but Tyrant gained alot of power with the support of the people and therefore, held all of the power himself which later on, affected society.

I hope this answer helps :) have a great day.

6 0
4 years ago
Which of the following did John Muir encourage in his articles and books?
kap26 [50]

The correct answer is C.

John Muir ( also known as John of the Mountains  and Father of the National Parks ), was a Scottish-American naturalist, book author, environmental philosopher and an <em>avid advocate for the preservation of wilderness in The United States.</em>

In his books and essays he described his adventures in nature, especially in the Sierra Nevada. With his dedicated work he helped to preserve many wilderness areas such as the Yosemite Valley, the Sequoia National Park and many others.

Muir was also the co-founder of the Sierra Club which is a prominent conservation organization.

Muir's life work has been inspiration to many politicians, congressmen and leaders to take action to preserve large nature areas.

6 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Other questions:
  • Why was Susan B. Anthony put on trial?
    8·1 answer
  • Many social critics in the 1950s criticized an American emphasis on
    11·1 answer
  • How many settlers died in the first 6 months?
    10·2 answers
  • The trends represented in this chart could BEST be described by A) stiff immigration laws passed by Congress. B) the increased i
    7·1 answer
  • The reign of Alfred the Great is not related to: the Danelaw translations of Latin manuscripts into Anglo-Saxon the founder of t
    15·2 answers
  • Which statement would most likely be a belief shared by both Martin lurther and John Calvin
    9·1 answer
  • The main reason the Europeans introduced Western formal education in the Gold Coast was not to help the local people but their t
    7·1 answer
  • Which two of the facts below might help explain Keppler's depiction of Standard Oil?
    13·1 answer
  • In federal midterm elections, voters choose
    13·1 answer
  • Briefly explain the significance of the Petrine theory to the development of the
    6·1 answer
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!