What is Sectionalism?
Sectionalism is shifting a nation’s focus on a single predominant region, creating changes that benefit the favored region. This can result in a multitude of aftereffects influencing the political landscape of the United States; rearranging the socioeconomic climate towards the benefit of a certain area and tightening the fabric of the lower class until it tears. The contrast between the North and South is preeminent in U.S history and is an epitome of the results of sectionalism; the ideological differences between the North and South possess a gravity so strong it seems to split the earth’s geography, although it happens to split the borders in the U.S’ hemispheres in a bloody civil war. Complex and contrasting morals intertwined to a poorly designed structure to accommodate these unfamiliar changes caused the gradual disappearance of the unity amongst Americans as a society. This predates to the Missouri Compromise in 1820.
In the Missouri Compromise, Maine was admitted as a free state and Missouri counted for a slave state; similarly prohibiting slavery behind the latitude of 30*36. At surface level, this seems to be a reasonable compromise when referring to the individual wants of the states themselves, adjusting to the primary economic industries of each state – the products of agriculture comprising the exports in the South. Although beneficial for a short-term crisis, this law emphasized the separation of the country and lacked longevity as time progressed similar to the aspirations for Manifest Destiny. It is crucial to remember that this law was the glue that kept the U.S together in the midst of the country on the verge of breaking up over slavery. Personally, I think that the impact of this change could have been lessened by investing money into Southern agriculture, as this may reverse the South’s dependency on slavery in order for farmers to make a living. Adjusting the country’s system distinctly favoring the rich could be highly beneficial in reducing tensions that events like Bleeding Kansas portray. The Missouri Compromise was sufficient in preserving the stability of the U.S for 30 years.
The insatiable appetite for the spread of power can unite nations transcending political orientation, although in an overpowering, negative context. In 1850, newly acquired territory from the Mexican-American war required a decision as whether to be admitted as a slave state or a free state, in which California became a free state. Similarly, the Fugitive Slave Act stated that escaped slaves must be returned to their owners regardless of being located in a free state, the legal obligations to not interfere with the re-capturing of slaves in the North further sparked the debate through the people of the free states observing the cruelty. This carved the division separating those advocating for slavery and those protesting for freedom deeper.
As tensions grew, a turning point and unofficial battle that converted this political mess into bloodshed was Bleeding Kansas, a violent act that quickly escalated and normalized violence in order to settle this dispute. This occurred as the Missouri Compromise was repealed, making way for popular sovereignty through combat. After the blood washed away, it left bloodstains.
Other events led to the South’s tight grasp on slavery, such as the Dred Scott decision in which slaves were not counted as citizens and therefore could not sue for freedom, but slave uprisings created a voice for the enslaved. Lincoln’s victory in being elected and anti-slavery was perceived as a threat towards the south, essentially cutting the final tie between Northern and Southern states.
In conclusion, several factors such as an underdeveloped economy in the south as well as the addition of new states profoundly impacted the dissociation between the North and South whereas battles such as Bleeding Kansas further split the states and marked a violent dissent of the U.S.
