Between 1815 and 1860, the progression of mechanization and the revolutionizing of the economic market caused the United States to experience drastic societal development. These advancements in American technology allowed society to further collaborate in order to create a complex system of trade that began regional specialization within the workforce. Advanced methodologies of efficient mass production, in factories especially, shaped the lifestyles of citizens living in the Northeastern region of the United States. As production shifted completely in order to serve the extensively growing nation, many benefits and hardships were to be reaped. Under-represented citizens, such as women, were able to gain opportunities in big businesses searching for low-priced labor. This also allowed African Americans to gain more civil rights due to reduced popularity of slavery as Caucasian workers wanted to avoid competition for employment. However, independent merchants faced monopolized competition that exposed employees to horrific conditions. Ultimately, new techniques to enhance inexpensive, timely production and the supplying of goods created hierarchies, both socially and financially, that dictated new matters of freedom and reliance for American citizens in the Northeast.
As manufacturing became more prominent in America, the country became much more self-reliant. In the Northeastern region, cities like New York quickly emerged and thrived by hosting large factories. These factories provided the ability to quickly produce materials that were needed among the states. Efficiency and capability became increasingly prevalent for American entrepreneurships so that quantities of products could be easy attained without the importation from foreign nations. Vast amounts of materials were able to be processed in small, compact spaces. With production occurring primarily within the Northeast, the area became a very strong international trade hub. Quickly the United States gained a city, New York, which had the same potential and rank as Rome or Paris. The region developed to be much more cultured and iconic for the United States, which gave citizens a more sophisticated and elite persona. The city lifestyle raised levels of intellectual stability and created a center for the young country. Bankers became more prominent because of the stimulation and need to monitor the expanding economy, reflecting the development of new careers in general to keep up with the pace of the industrialized society. As the market in America became stronger, the Northeast served as a center of big business and international relations.
Factories began monopolies within the American manufacturing market. Since mass amounts of products would easily be produced in one location, large corporations formed and began to dominate the market. Machinery contributed to the effectiveness of production, furthering the control wealthy companies could hold. Independent merchants were much less likely to hold a stand in producing the same quantity of goods. Due to the more individualized creation, prices were much higher, which made them undesirable to the masses. This served to commercialize industries in America as it became easier and inexpensive to get lower quality, mass produced products. Transportation exceeded in importance to deliver products throughout the states. They were able to provide products to the entire nation, with little expense. As a result, the owners of such production businesses thrived. This created greater social divides between successful businessmen and the average industry worker. The playing field lost its sense of equal status that existed when the colonies originally formed. Some citizens now were able to make plentiful livings rather than beginning together at the bottom of the social ladder. Choice of endeavors became crucial in determining the fate of Americans, though the competition was fierce to attempt to break through.
While dependence on an international level declined, within the nation it rose. Citizens started to become reliant on corporations for products and for employment. Within Northeastern cities, the most likely jobs to hold had to do with the factories. In some ways, this seemed like a wonderful opportunity for Americans. There were many factories that provided a surplus of jobs. Businesses accepted the work of nearly anyone, making it more likely for women and children to join the labor force. In a sense, it could be said that this made a huge stride for women’s rights by allowing them to earn their own wage and gain independence from a male counterpart. It also relieved pressure for African Americans in the Northeast. Since so many people were after jobs, no one wanted to have to compete with the inexpensive work that slaves could provide. As a result, slavery was generally unsupported in the Northeast, giving African Americans their first chance at more equal rights. However, these jobs also created great lengths of abuse from employers. There was no true monitoring of the factories, which allowed big business owners to get away with poor work conditions and low salaries. In order to feel capable in society or make enough finances to live, employees went along with mistreatment. In the Northeast, employment was fairly plentiful, yet left many to endure abuse simply due to the lack of options.
Overall, the Northeastern region of the United States experienced many of the most noticeable effects from mechanization and the market revolution. The early to mid-1800’s proved to be a breaking point that launched giant strides of progression for the American economy. While the Northeast could not have done it without the Southern and Western regions of the country, it very easily could be considered to be the center of the American economic action. Not everything ended up as intended, nor was everything beneficial to American society. Some things, such as the hierarchies, still prove to be national conflicts that are still faced today. However, the impacts that this phase of industrialization had on the Northeast and the future of the United States are extraordinary. In this region, the financial elements blossomed, the entire stock market began to form, and civil rights truly began to take shape. Many conflicts were faced that have led the nation to develop into a stronger force and increase unity. Greed and ambition were truly sparked among Americans to change the ideal American Dream from focusing on freedom to focusing on wealth and success. Without the impact of mechanization and the market revolution, the United States would lack its greatest economical center, as well as much of its Northeastern culture.
Saturday, January 21, 2012
In what ways did the Second Great Awakening in the North influence temperance and abolitionism?
The Second Great Awakening was a very moving revolution within nineteenth century American culture and philosophy. During this period, Americans began to truly question and explore new ideas of a devout lifestyle. Traditional customs were generally rebelled against, with many citizens challenging common beliefs that remained throughout the immigration from Europe. Religious beliefs during the Second Great Awakening greatly relied on reflecting what one believes to be morally correct. Expression within such environments mimicked societal ideals of increasing civil rights, and sought purity by avoiding misbehavior from intoxication. As a result, movements such as those against alcohol consumption and slave ownership became a controversial part of the search for utopia. The Northern region of the United States brewed these concepts to higher levels than in the South. This was partially due to the elite universities within New England, specifically Harvard which served as the birthplace of transcendentalism, a leading force for American enlightenment led by Ralph Waldo Emerson. The spread of the Second Great Awakening also was affected by the economic differences between the North and the South. Americans in the North embraced ideas of a social revolution during the Second Great Awakening to better their lives by becoming more sophisticated, family-oriented citizens who could interact peacefully in a nation of individualism.
Religions gained great momentum during the Second Great Awakening. Unitarians, Methodists, Deists, Baptists; it did not matter which group you fell under, opinions were rapidly becoming more prominent in attempt to shape political governing of states. The market revolution invoked great emotions of greed and corruption that easily could be scrutinized for the lack of morality that was present. While the initial basis of religious reformation was certainly personal salvation, the greater idea of setting standards of life for the masses of society and the United States dominated the motives of many great leaders from the time. Lyman Beecher, Peter Cartwright, and Charles Finney all served as strong spokesmen for their religions and preached their message to attempt to convert the many immigrants that were attracted to the thrill of America’s new industrial industry. Faith-based organizations felt that their beliefs should be the framework for American society. At this point, laws and regulations were still fairly unset and many wished to impose their opinions upon writing the details of the United States government. New extremes in restrictions and ideals were expressed to constantly outdo another group at being the most innocent, perfect civilian. This fueled desire to build new movements, especially about abolitionism and tolerance.
The temperance movement truly began to blossom due to striving for a perfected state of morality during the Second Great Awakening. Many felt that alcohol demented the mindset of consumers to a degree that prevented them from being civilized members of society. With mental “corruption” from the “demon rum,” as it commonly was referred, people forgot their duties to the community and their families. Since people were not able to appropriately present themselves, liquor was viewed to be the cause for many evils in society. Temperance groups, such as the Daughters of Temperance, formed by the thousands under the American Society for the Promotion of Temperance. In 1851, Maine became the first state to prohibit the consumption and sale of alcohol statewide. Neal Dow was known as the “Father of Prohibition” and is responsible for sponsoring this legislation. The new ideals being developed in America further created conflict with immigrants from Ireland and Germany. In European countries such as those, the view of liquor was much more liberal and immigrants were not always in favor of the temperance standpoint. The overall popularity among the lower class, such as laborers and new immigrants, lead the more elite members of society to attack and try to eliminate the more disliked groups. In the South, vineyards also were an important industry for citizens, so it was more illogical for them to want to destroy part of their economical market. Temperance movements were fueled by the desire of serving a God and reaching perfection; alcohol was seen to be a distraction from the goal.
Along with temperance, abolition movements were also greatly fueled by religious motives. The expanding religions that became more expressive and influential during the Second Great Awakening began to condemn the idea of slavery. With Christianity especially, the Second Great Awakening had its biggest strive toward abolition as citizens wanted the perfect Christian republic. It was theorized that God would favor the United States if the country was based upon his values and avoided sin. However, slavery became a very moral debate as the mistreatment and neglect of slaves made their owners “evil.” People felt that with these kinds of citizens composing America, America would not be graced by God’s blessing. Over 250,000 members joined William Lloyd Garrison’s American Anti-Slavery Society in favor of the universal and immediate abolition of slavery. Many abolition leaders felt that in order to overcome the troubles of slavery, the key to success was moral inducement and disobedience. John Brown led his movements with violence in order to show rebellion against slave ownership. He felt that if some citizens, primarily Southerners, were in favor of slavery, then he was sent from God to destroy them. Others decided that evangelizing slaves was the way to convert the ideals and values of their owners. African Americans also began to have their impact on expressing the need for spreading abolition. Frederick Douglass published his memoir which explores the struggles of growing up and living in slavery. The Second Great Awakening provided many moral conflicts through the increase of religion which questioned traditional social norms.
The Second Great Awakening opened the eyes of Northern Americans to many different ideas. The market revolution and immigration created very populated areas that were filled with ideas that meshed together. As the ideas competed for superiority, religions thoroughly fueled the basis of how Americans should approach living life. The government was still fairly unregulated, and was open to being influenced and formed through movements at the time. In order to approach being a “free” country where equality and human decency could prevail, many great activists and leaders felt that temperance and abolition were key issues to address. Temperance and slavery were viewed to have evil qualities that would guide the United States down the same path of struggles and malevolence they tried to escape in Europe. Searching for excellence and exploring new approaches to embracing priorities in life were fueled during the period in order to shape the American Dream and build innocence in a setting that would allow everyone to succeed. These movements were designed to eliminate any setbacks such as discrimination or addictions that distracted from friendship and love. The Second Great Awakening awakened Americans to their new freedom to challenge tradition and form a newly structured nation that could excel together as a whole.
Religions gained great momentum during the Second Great Awakening. Unitarians, Methodists, Deists, Baptists; it did not matter which group you fell under, opinions were rapidly becoming more prominent in attempt to shape political governing of states. The market revolution invoked great emotions of greed and corruption that easily could be scrutinized for the lack of morality that was present. While the initial basis of religious reformation was certainly personal salvation, the greater idea of setting standards of life for the masses of society and the United States dominated the motives of many great leaders from the time. Lyman Beecher, Peter Cartwright, and Charles Finney all served as strong spokesmen for their religions and preached their message to attempt to convert the many immigrants that were attracted to the thrill of America’s new industrial industry. Faith-based organizations felt that their beliefs should be the framework for American society. At this point, laws and regulations were still fairly unset and many wished to impose their opinions upon writing the details of the United States government. New extremes in restrictions and ideals were expressed to constantly outdo another group at being the most innocent, perfect civilian. This fueled desire to build new movements, especially about abolitionism and tolerance.
The temperance movement truly began to blossom due to striving for a perfected state of morality during the Second Great Awakening. Many felt that alcohol demented the mindset of consumers to a degree that prevented them from being civilized members of society. With mental “corruption” from the “demon rum,” as it commonly was referred, people forgot their duties to the community and their families. Since people were not able to appropriately present themselves, liquor was viewed to be the cause for many evils in society. Temperance groups, such as the Daughters of Temperance, formed by the thousands under the American Society for the Promotion of Temperance. In 1851, Maine became the first state to prohibit the consumption and sale of alcohol statewide. Neal Dow was known as the “Father of Prohibition” and is responsible for sponsoring this legislation. The new ideals being developed in America further created conflict with immigrants from Ireland and Germany. In European countries such as those, the view of liquor was much more liberal and immigrants were not always in favor of the temperance standpoint. The overall popularity among the lower class, such as laborers and new immigrants, lead the more elite members of society to attack and try to eliminate the more disliked groups. In the South, vineyards also were an important industry for citizens, so it was more illogical for them to want to destroy part of their economical market. Temperance movements were fueled by the desire of serving a God and reaching perfection; alcohol was seen to be a distraction from the goal.
Along with temperance, abolition movements were also greatly fueled by religious motives. The expanding religions that became more expressive and influential during the Second Great Awakening began to condemn the idea of slavery. With Christianity especially, the Second Great Awakening had its biggest strive toward abolition as citizens wanted the perfect Christian republic. It was theorized that God would favor the United States if the country was based upon his values and avoided sin. However, slavery became a very moral debate as the mistreatment and neglect of slaves made their owners “evil.” People felt that with these kinds of citizens composing America, America would not be graced by God’s blessing. Over 250,000 members joined William Lloyd Garrison’s American Anti-Slavery Society in favor of the universal and immediate abolition of slavery. Many abolition leaders felt that in order to overcome the troubles of slavery, the key to success was moral inducement and disobedience. John Brown led his movements with violence in order to show rebellion against slave ownership. He felt that if some citizens, primarily Southerners, were in favor of slavery, then he was sent from God to destroy them. Others decided that evangelizing slaves was the way to convert the ideals and values of their owners. African Americans also began to have their impact on expressing the need for spreading abolition. Frederick Douglass published his memoir which explores the struggles of growing up and living in slavery. The Second Great Awakening provided many moral conflicts through the increase of religion which questioned traditional social norms.
The Second Great Awakening opened the eyes of Northern Americans to many different ideas. The market revolution and immigration created very populated areas that were filled with ideas that meshed together. As the ideas competed for superiority, religions thoroughly fueled the basis of how Americans should approach living life. The government was still fairly unregulated, and was open to being influenced and formed through movements at the time. In order to approach being a “free” country where equality and human decency could prevail, many great activists and leaders felt that temperance and abolition were key issues to address. Temperance and slavery were viewed to have evil qualities that would guide the United States down the same path of struggles and malevolence they tried to escape in Europe. Searching for excellence and exploring new approaches to embracing priorities in life were fueled during the period in order to shape the American Dream and build innocence in a setting that would allow everyone to succeed. These movements were designed to eliminate any setbacks such as discrimination or addictions that distracted from friendship and love. The Second Great Awakening awakened Americans to their new freedom to challenge tradition and form a newly structured nation that could excel together as a whole.
To what extent did the debates following the Mexican War reflect the sectional interests of New Englanders, westerners, and southerners in the period from 1848 to 1855?
The Mexican War is often regarded as one of the United State’s most controversial wars. The idea of Manifest Destiny was beginning to consume the minds of many Democratic Americans. They wished for the United States to expand their land to possess a continental control; it was believed that more land would mean furthered economical success. Meanwhile, the Whigs felt that the key to expanding the country was embracing the economical endeavors that were already being pursued. In order for the continent to be dominated by Americans, western expansion would need to occur, taking land from Mexico. Mexicans had long threatened that if the United States decided to impose on their territories and annex Texas, they would begin a civil war with the country. When James K. Polk, a Whig president, agreed to declare war on Mexico, turmoil began to arise. Americans were incredibly victorious and undefeated between 1846 and 1848, while the war was occurring, and accumulated extensive amounts of land that had been under Mexican rule. That is when the true war really began. American citizens in New England, the West, and the South all had very different political motives that greatly challenged the sectional interests regarding state versus federal power, betrayal of political parties, and the ideal plan for incorporating new regions into a very polarized country.
When the new land was acquired from Mexico, there was a rather heated argument on whether it should be considered a “free state” or a “slave state.” In 1849, Zachary Taylor became the last Whig president and decided in favor of making California and New Mexico automatically admitted “free states.” Southerners, who were pro-slavery, were primarily Whigs and felt that their president was alienating them. Politicians supposedly standing for southern views were instead collaborating with northern efforts. Some southerners took the idea to such an extreme that they were known as “fire-eaters” and met to discuss plans for secession at the Nashville Convention. Since politicians were not staying true to their parties, it became much more difficult for American citizens to truly trust their elected officials. The North and South had such different economical priorities regarding slavery that it was hard for a political figure not to need to take a “side.” No matter which side they would have chosen, half of the country would end up being displeased. The mistrust in political parties began to break-down the two-party system within the United States. New parties such as the Know Nothing Party and the Free Soil Party began to emerge in rebellion. By 1854, the Whig Party has been disassembled entirely, and the Democrats began a split into the two most prominent modern political parties; Democrats and Republicans. The Mexican War really led the beginning of regionalization and political stance interfering with national advancement.
Between the North and the South, neither side was truly able to settle about having slavery, or not having slavery, within the new states. Each wanted to force their view onto the new western lands. At the time, the federal government felt that during their annexation, they had the ability to choose the status of rights within the states. This brought about the proposal of the Compromise of 1850, by Henry Clay. Basically, the proposal meant that California would be deemed a “free state” by the federal government, but New Mexico and Utah would be granted the freedom to choose being a “free state” or a “slave state” by popular sovereignty. Since most citizens in the western areas were in favor of abolition, the North was generally pleased with this component of the compromise. However, it also worked to suit the South by passing the Fugitive Slave Law, which would allow southerners to pursue the recapturing of their escaped slaves. Abolitionists within the North were very angered by this idea, causing southerners to be more likely to antagonize northerners by invading the North in search of their African American fugitives. While the compromise was intended to give both the North and the South some benefit that they desired, each side still felt the need to overpower the other. This continued throughout the time period and reignited fiercer in 1854, after the passing of the Kansas-Nebraska Act. This act repealed the Missouri Compromise of 1820, and again allowed popular sovereignty to decide the fate of slavery within Kansas and Nebraska. This provoked both southerners and northerners to send masses to the territories in order to try to dominate the votes. The New England Emigrant Aid Company was founded in the North to force immigrants that were against slavery into Kansas so that it would be annexed into the United States as a “free state.” The sectional dividing of the North and the South pushed citizens of each region to attempt to manipulate politics to allow new regions to reflect corresponding interests.
The West was generally very trampled by northerners and southerners. The area was more undeveloped, but truly was the region that the land expansion would affect most. Westerners generally did not have a lot of political power in the mid-1800s, as citizens from the South and from New England felt they could just dominate with their views. The westerners tried not to really interfere with the feuding between the North and the South, though tended to have more similar views with the North. Only a small section of citizens in the West desired slave states, so they were rather agreeable to the Compromise of 1850. By having the compromise initiated, it would give freedom to the new western states, which was much desired. The West was very in favor of self-ruling, so popular sovereignty was greatly desired. The West remained neutral throughout the impacts of the Mexican War, and was greatly against the sectionalism it had caused. Being caught in the middle put the West in a rough position to get controlled by the other rivaling sections. It was accepted that something needed to develop a form of law and order to unite the United States together. This raised a debating question on how much should the government govern its territory, and how should new land have its fate decided. With the country sectionalized, there would always be a disagreement on which views were right to instill in the new area. Whichever should be chosen would simply further advance the domination of that interest. Henry Thoreau was a very strong anti-slavery leader, who in his essay “Civil Disobedience” wrote, “That government is best which governs least.” This stands true yet contradicting for the views of Western citizens, as they wished to be set free from the sectionalized government dictating and fighting over the new region, but also false in the sense that it was apparent that that could only truly occur if the country was able to band together as a whole. Differences needed to be overcome, and the debates after the Mexican War only alienated westerners who did not wish to be sectionalized.
The Mexican War was a very influential event in American history. The impacts that it made stirred up debate that could not truly reach a true resolution. Each section of the United States had its own idea of how issues should be handled, and the federal government was not able to suit all three sections at once. The sectional interests of the North and South especially reached new extremes as political actions bounced between favoritism. The West, in result, went even more extreme in wanted their independence to choose their political stance on their own rather than get trapped in between the debate over slavery. The Untied States began its whirlwind towards continual splitting and disagreement that would eventual cause the Civil War. Between 1848 and 1855, the sectional interests overran any unity that remained in the United States as the debates that occurred eliminated trust within the government and destroyed the party system of the time. The United States was going through a stage of rapid change to find a solution that could suit each region of the country and still maintain a federal level of governing. The quest for compromise met many tedious conflicts, making the Mexican War spark the beginning of one of America’s biggest civil disagreements.
When the new land was acquired from Mexico, there was a rather heated argument on whether it should be considered a “free state” or a “slave state.” In 1849, Zachary Taylor became the last Whig president and decided in favor of making California and New Mexico automatically admitted “free states.” Southerners, who were pro-slavery, were primarily Whigs and felt that their president was alienating them. Politicians supposedly standing for southern views were instead collaborating with northern efforts. Some southerners took the idea to such an extreme that they were known as “fire-eaters” and met to discuss plans for secession at the Nashville Convention. Since politicians were not staying true to their parties, it became much more difficult for American citizens to truly trust their elected officials. The North and South had such different economical priorities regarding slavery that it was hard for a political figure not to need to take a “side.” No matter which side they would have chosen, half of the country would end up being displeased. The mistrust in political parties began to break-down the two-party system within the United States. New parties such as the Know Nothing Party and the Free Soil Party began to emerge in rebellion. By 1854, the Whig Party has been disassembled entirely, and the Democrats began a split into the two most prominent modern political parties; Democrats and Republicans. The Mexican War really led the beginning of regionalization and political stance interfering with national advancement.
Between the North and the South, neither side was truly able to settle about having slavery, or not having slavery, within the new states. Each wanted to force their view onto the new western lands. At the time, the federal government felt that during their annexation, they had the ability to choose the status of rights within the states. This brought about the proposal of the Compromise of 1850, by Henry Clay. Basically, the proposal meant that California would be deemed a “free state” by the federal government, but New Mexico and Utah would be granted the freedom to choose being a “free state” or a “slave state” by popular sovereignty. Since most citizens in the western areas were in favor of abolition, the North was generally pleased with this component of the compromise. However, it also worked to suit the South by passing the Fugitive Slave Law, which would allow southerners to pursue the recapturing of their escaped slaves. Abolitionists within the North were very angered by this idea, causing southerners to be more likely to antagonize northerners by invading the North in search of their African American fugitives. While the compromise was intended to give both the North and the South some benefit that they desired, each side still felt the need to overpower the other. This continued throughout the time period and reignited fiercer in 1854, after the passing of the Kansas-Nebraska Act. This act repealed the Missouri Compromise of 1820, and again allowed popular sovereignty to decide the fate of slavery within Kansas and Nebraska. This provoked both southerners and northerners to send masses to the territories in order to try to dominate the votes. The New England Emigrant Aid Company was founded in the North to force immigrants that were against slavery into Kansas so that it would be annexed into the United States as a “free state.” The sectional dividing of the North and the South pushed citizens of each region to attempt to manipulate politics to allow new regions to reflect corresponding interests.
The West was generally very trampled by northerners and southerners. The area was more undeveloped, but truly was the region that the land expansion would affect most. Westerners generally did not have a lot of political power in the mid-1800s, as citizens from the South and from New England felt they could just dominate with their views. The westerners tried not to really interfere with the feuding between the North and the South, though tended to have more similar views with the North. Only a small section of citizens in the West desired slave states, so they were rather agreeable to the Compromise of 1850. By having the compromise initiated, it would give freedom to the new western states, which was much desired. The West was very in favor of self-ruling, so popular sovereignty was greatly desired. The West remained neutral throughout the impacts of the Mexican War, and was greatly against the sectionalism it had caused. Being caught in the middle put the West in a rough position to get controlled by the other rivaling sections. It was accepted that something needed to develop a form of law and order to unite the United States together. This raised a debating question on how much should the government govern its territory, and how should new land have its fate decided. With the country sectionalized, there would always be a disagreement on which views were right to instill in the new area. Whichever should be chosen would simply further advance the domination of that interest. Henry Thoreau was a very strong anti-slavery leader, who in his essay “Civil Disobedience” wrote, “That government is best which governs least.” This stands true yet contradicting for the views of Western citizens, as they wished to be set free from the sectionalized government dictating and fighting over the new region, but also false in the sense that it was apparent that that could only truly occur if the country was able to band together as a whole. Differences needed to be overcome, and the debates after the Mexican War only alienated westerners who did not wish to be sectionalized.
The Mexican War was a very influential event in American history. The impacts that it made stirred up debate that could not truly reach a true resolution. Each section of the United States had its own idea of how issues should be handled, and the federal government was not able to suit all three sections at once. The sectional interests of the North and South especially reached new extremes as political actions bounced between favoritism. The West, in result, went even more extreme in wanted their independence to choose their political stance on their own rather than get trapped in between the debate over slavery. The Untied States began its whirlwind towards continual splitting and disagreement that would eventual cause the Civil War. Between 1848 and 1855, the sectional interests overran any unity that remained in the United States as the debates that occurred eliminated trust within the government and destroyed the party system of the time. The United States was going through a stage of rapid change to find a solution that could suit each region of the country and still maintain a federal level of governing. The quest for compromise met many tedious conflicts, making the Mexican War spark the beginning of one of America’s biggest civil disagreements.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)