Hello!
Our topic this time is the Civil War. I'd like to discuss whether the was had more pros or more cons. An examples of this are massive amounts of people dying vs. the creation of ironclad warships. Is the Civil War more helpful to the nation, or was one of the most dreaful things to happen on our soil? Also, could Civil War ultimately been averted?
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
What can this map tell you about early exploration?
This is the wonderful blog for 1st period AP US History at Lincoln Park High School. This blog is your space to create connections between the history that we study and events that are happening in the world right now. It is a place to extend our conversations, ideas and understanding beyond the classroom. You, the class, are in charge of maintaining this blog and its effectiveness and level of engagement is what you make it. Be thoughtful and have fun!
Early Map of New World
What can this map tell you about early exploration?
23 comments:
Okay well lets see:L
The south was destroyed.
The war was primarily an economic war just like most wars. In this case, over cotton.
The South was threatening to have their cotton sent to Europe and bypass the East. The East would have been hurt tremendously and used the slavery issue as a way to garner public support.
The pros were that the East kept their manufacturing and slavery was abolished.
The cons are too numerous to mention. People's lives and livelihoods were destroyed for decades to come. Carpet baggers made it even worse after the war was over. Many blacks stayed on the farms and helped with the recovery.
The of this is that basically the confederacy had to return to the union against there wishes whcih would caus etension and conflict in the territory. They also had to reconstruct there land becaus eit was destroyed by the fight
One top of that there land was teh only way they had to make a living and survive...the war destroyed there plantations and due to the weapons damage dthe fertility of the soil
The pros were more for the Union and everyone who supported its cause.
Yes slavery was abolished but that isn't as important as racism being abolished in my opinion so though thats the one that everyone remembers it not teh most important.
The African Americans were being giin opportunities to work for pay
legalize themselves as citizens of the Us and live tehre lives as frred men no longer under the ruling of any southern masters.
Unfortunateky there freedom came at a period where the president (Johnson) wasn' in favor of giving them rights so the process to there rights giving wasn't as smooth as they may have hoped.
Ok then, i see what u mean by the pros of abolishment of slavery, and the cons of the south unwilling. However, what about long-term effects? Don't forget that with the invention of better guns and rifles, war tactics had to be changed(just an example, there's plenty more). Now with the better guns, would you argue that it's a pro that the U.S. has a better chance in wars, or worse for the nation as a whole, as it's just more ways to kill a human faster and more efficently? Also, how does the Civil War affect our lives today? are those effects good or bad?
Well the war really did boost the economy of the North. For one the South could not produce any of its equipment so it relied on the North for boots, clothes, and weapons. The North made sure those things weren't made from quality materials. This was in order to get the South to buy more materials. If you want to look at it this way then for the North the North had a major boost to its economy, it being a pro.
The major con I think that affects us today is the resentment towards the North that some Southerners still feel today due to the harshness of the North during the war and the excessive suffering the South had to go through (like being forced to pledge allegiance to the Union, having their farms and growing lands be destroyed, and being forced to ratify the constitution and accept the 14th and 15th amendments in addition to the abolition of slavery in general. This all created a rift between the North and South that has the potential to remain forever and could cause further conflict if one group were to set off the other while debating another controversy. The pros of the war were limited, like the abolishment of slavery. Although very important, I feel that slavery could have been abolished without the use of war and would have prevented the harsh feelings the South carry. Another pro was the ability for all men, of age, to vote (including black men) which also could have been accomplished by other means. Finally, another pro was the ability to expand west and settle without further issues of deciding which states would be slave states and how to get equal representation. This allowed faster settlement which came with it the introduction of new revenue, crops, and industries. The negative of this (which is an indirect con to the Civil War) was the dying out of the buffalo, the suppression of the Native Americans and Mexicans, and the ruin of the land, which was already fairly dry and difficult to cultivate.
Going off of what Alex said, I think the war has lasting effects even today. First off, Northerners still look down upon Southerners and we have this bias in our heads that they are racist. Sure, you can go to the South and find a few Confederate flags, but does that mean that they're all racist? Even though Johnson wanted to reduce the wait time to allow the Confederate states back into the Union, the conditions under which they rejoined were still nothing short of hasty and ill-organized. While being allowed to regain their land, they did not regain the manpower they had so long been dependent on. Sure, it made the process go by more swiftly, but at the cost of the South's dignity. Overall, I think the Civil War's effects have been generally negative, with the continuing conflicts of North vs. South and the destruction of Southern values and pride.
Also, in no way am I in support of slavery, and nor do I wish that along with their land rights the South should have been granted rights to their slaves. I just don't think it was a fair trade, especially for a country with a weak leader [Jefferson Davis] and a lower hand in the war.
I'd say there are more cons than pros because looking at how many people are lost shows nothing but defeat.
For the Union, about 110,000 killed in action, 360,000 total dead, and 275,200 wounded; for the Confederacy, about 93,000 killed in action, 260,000 total dead, and 137,000+ wounded.
Even though the Union won the war, looking at those numbers above shows no victory at all.
Wars are never a great thing. No matter if it was for some odd purpose, this being because even though there was a very important purpose for that war it means that there are two or more conflicting sides.
Pros of war.....Fighting for what one might believe in. Technological advancements. Sense of strength from the winning party
Cons.....
-death
-economic downturn
-conflicting views
-harsh resolutions
-psychological disrruptions in the veterans
-Upset citizens
(even though i stated technological advances as a pro, the creation of stronger weapons)
-too much use of resources
-environmental hazzards
First thing I wanna say abut the Civil War is that it really is unnecessary because if the south would just stop fighting over every single little detail then the war wouldn't have happen. Anyway, the Civil War was definitely a pro in the nation even though it was unnecessary. The reason is the Civil War gave the nation more rights to the black and also the abolish of slavery really shaped the economy into a more positive perspective.
Jimmy, I completely forgot about the casualties! Taking those numbers into account, I agree that it was a loss all around. I don't think we need a bloody battle to take pride in our beliefs. I think it could've been done in a much more organized way, one that didn't involve so much bloodshed.
I remember the Sumner-Brooks incident, where Charles Sumner (Radical Republican) was severely beaten by Democrat Preston Brooks over the issue of slavery. (And this was in a [somewhat empty, but occupied] Senate room where others could have jumped in, but simply let them be).
If such an incident showed the extreme passion these people had for their causes, I could've only expected worse on the battlefield. I honestly think slavery would've been abolished without a war, without public canings...We should take pride in our beliefs, but we shouldn't get carried away.
In regards to the advance of technology, I'd also like your opinion on this following quote (paraphrased from my old issues and ideas teacher, since I forgot the actual thing)
"Human nature (and technology) only excels itself in times of war and destruction"
As further proof of this statement, just look at why atomic bombs or machine guns or pretty much any weapon was created: to beat the opposition at obtaining the best weapons possible. The Cold War was fought along this principle, with rising tensions over fear of nuclear bombs. The Atomic Age was started as a result of WW2/ wanting a quick method to end the war
Putting this in perspective, would the advancement of weapons (and ironclad ships) created by the Civil War be a pro or con for the nation and mankind?
I do agree that technology excelled during the time of war. For example, you could take Eli Whitney and his mass production of guns with interchangeable parts. This allowed the North to produce more efficient and more quantities of guns. Another technological improvement was the iron clad ships. I think without the war, the massive ship building wouldn’t have boomed as much as it did to satisfy the needs of the war. The ships were specially built to, in theory, be indestructible and to be good for blockading the South from trade and restricting their actions, as well as war of course. The advanced build of these ships allowed the United States to become known as a country that had great potential to become a major naval force in the world, or at least compared to the naval superiority of Britain.
I do agree with all of you that without the war some technological advancements would not have been reached without the Civil War. i completely agree with Alex about the ship building industry, and with Loius upon the concept of "I have a bigger stick than you, dont mess with me concept". What is a terrible concept is that things that are discovered, and advancing in the name of science most of the time is used as a military application first, then used as how it should further mankind. And example of this would be with the fissions of an atomic Bomb. The original ideal use of that was to gain great amounts of energy with only the use of small matter. ----Military steps in--"Can we make this go boom?"---Scientist "That is a possibility"---Military "Good make a bomb and ship it"
This isnt how it really happened but you get my point. Youn dont have to agree but i just wanted that point to come across
Louis the you asked us if the war could have been possibly been avoided. I do not feel there was in any way to avoid the Civil War. Too many tensions even before the War individuals took into their own hand, like the Sumner-Brooks incident, the people would take their own reasons into the battle field and fight for that. Tensions in politics were everywhere. Copperheads, War Democrats, Republicans, and all those other political groups could not agree with each other. When you can't agree with one another and all you do is argue expect some fighting.
Will Louis I think the advancement of weapon brings the con and the pros in the mankind. Its because there are weapons we can able to defend ourselves and safe our nation. But it also brings the con because people would develop weapons to destroy each other so I'll say it is debate able whether advancement in weapons are pros or cons.
well with alex's point i don't exactly think that we would never have some of the inventions created in the war, it would just take longer to realize that we needed better technology and then we would make it...sure a war is one way to make technological advances speedier but really if we needed those advances in machinery we would have found a way, one way or another to make those machines and hey it may take some time, if (and this would never happen) there wasn't the civil war. So just take into account that those advances could have still happened without the war, just not in such a timely manner.
I think there are many negative aspects to the Civil War, such as he casualties, but ultimately it benefited the United States. Weapons were improved and having the Union and the Confederacy united also shows a stronger country in the eyes of other countries.
The issue of slavery was also dealt with, which led to abolishing it. Although people had to die and a war had to be fought to get the message clear, at least it was faced. Having the north and the south reconstruct also brings together the strengths of both sides, show a much stronger country economically. For example, the north was industrially strong with the creation of weapons and the south had cotton.
With the north having factories and the south having cotton, i don't think that during the civil war cotton was a big aide to the south because they had poor harvests and what they did try to export was stolen by the north and then the north sold it themselves, so really the south had nothing for profit and thats why in teh industrial age, they start to have factories of their own because agriculture was no longer a supporting factor to their economy
I agree with Edgar because there seem to have no way to avoid the Civil War and yes there was too many tensions before the War especially with politics. As said earlier the numbers shows devastation and i agree with Lisa that it could have been settled in an easier way with less blood shed
ok most people have already discussed detailed pros and cons but I realy like what Alex and Lisa were saying about the long term negative effects. I would say that immediatly the war was nessicary because of the need to keep the nation together, also it was an unavoidable conflit because of the ever growing state vs. central power. It was constantly growing and it would eventually boil over, and the war ironically left the south with almost no state rights left compared to what they had before (especially as far as reconstruction is concerned.)
But the negative reprocussions are mainly felt today, with the social divide that is still left by the north south seperation. And with the fact that this conflict happened so long ago, many people are left uneducated about what actually caused and happened during the civil war. Because of this negative feelings between the two secions are unfortunatly formed off nothing.
Just thought of an extention thought to my last comment. With the social reprocutions today. Some ways you could appreciate the diversity of the regions because of what different cultural aspects they contribute to one country. I feel like the civil war is somewhat responsible for this, (even though there was already differences culturally simply because of the types of agriculture and economic environment) it still made the north and south regions appreciate their differences more, though it would have been nice for people to get over the negative social conflicts that remain today it is still kind of cool.
Post a Comment