The correct answer is the following.
When <em>Richard Wright is talking about the “Lord of the Land”</em> he is refefring to the owner of the fields where he used to work for. He refers that way he is leaving the place and he is heading North, to Chicago.
He literally describes it like this:<em> “We take one last furtive look over our shoulders to the Big House high upon a hill beyond the railroad tracks- where the Lord of the Land, and we feel glad for we are living.”
</em>
Richard Wright wrote “The One-Room Kitchenette”. In the story, he describes the moments when he left the South where he used to live and work, in order to go North, looking for better opportunities. In a bitter-sweet manner, Wright he refers to what that meant to him and his family to leave that place and then arrive in Chicago where they lived in a one-room place in a tenement in Chicago.
Answer:
Southerners argued for states rights and a weak federal government.
Explanation:
It is however possible to give a general perspective behind southern states reasoning.
Slavery is the most apparent example. I won't go into depth because it's been discussed several times. Slavery, on the other hand, had far-reaching and multifaceted consequences in pre-war America. Slavery, for example, became one of the most contentious topics during westward expansion. It was one of the most pressing concerns to be addressed as new territories were established and new states were admitted to the Union. The reason was simple: a balance between slave and free states was required to preserve the Constitution and its amendments.''
The second thing, which is also tied to slavery, are the States rights,especially a right of individual state to seceede from the Union. The political and legal debates about this particular state right are still ongoing. The southern states decided that the matter was important enough to take up arms and fight over it.
Then there are social and economic aspects. The Southern society was extremely aristochratic. This doesn’t mean that in the North there was no aristocracy, but average person in the North had way more oportunities to make a good life. In the South, hard work, witts and ability would lead you only as far as your bloodline would allow it. Before the Civil War, USA politics were dominated by Southern politicians, and there is no better evidence than preservation of slavery which couldn’t be abolished through politics in the Congress.
North and South were also opposites when it comes to production. South’s main cash products were sugar, tobacco and cotton. However they were mostly exported as bulk products and shipped to either North or Europe where other would make a final product that can be sold at much higher cost (like clothes). North started to become more independent from European goods. It still imported a lot of them, but factories and industries were built that aimed to make those same products at home and not to import them from overseas. South was unable to form any substantial industry, apart from cotton gin they never developed any industty aimed at making the final product amd exporting it.
This two reasons esentially made South a reneisance society in industrial revolution world. The average Southener was disgusted by crowded industrial cities of the North, where people lived in conditions that were often worse than what slaves had to endure. The society of the South resisted industrial progres from its very core.
Thanks,
Eddie
Edict of Nantes
It was issued in 1598, by king Henry IV Bourbon of France. It was the second document (after The January Edict of 1561) issued by a French sovereign to provide religious freedom in the country. It was a consequence of the long-lasting religious conflicts in France between Catholics and Huguenots (other name for Calvinists), situated mainly in Southern France. King Henry IV succeeded Henry III Valois and his infamous mother Catherine de Medici. Henry IV was one of the most prominent leaders of the Protestant opposition in France, but had to convert to Catholicism (for the second time in his life) in order to inherit the throne. The Edict of Nantes was one of the first things that he did as a king, and, basically, it allowed for the Protestants across the land to hold on to the cities that they had turned into their strongholds, while Catholics did the same, too. This was a compromise and angered many, Catholics because they could not get rid of the "heresy" among their lands, and Protestants because they could not succeed in reforming France once and for all.
The league of Nations, I believe.
