I better stop this line of reasoning. Legal marriages, legitimacy of children, access to land titles, and choosing of surnames were important moral things the blacks received. Though Confederate armies surrendered inwhite Southerners fought on by other means, wearing down a war-weary North that was ambivalent about if not hostile to black equality.
The iron and steel manufacturing and western settlement of the mining, cattle and agricultural frontiers were surging. But on the other hand the war had resolved the question of union and ended the debate over the relationship of the states to the federal government. For political, social, and economic reasons, each region saw expansion as vital to its interests.
Presumably, and independent South, cut off from the manufacturing of the North, would have been forced to industrialize even more quickly.
We lost more than eight times that number fighting our own. I write a series on immigrants during the Civil War that now is more thanwords long for an immigrant community website.
In other words, they understood that even though they personally did not enlist for that purpose and they in fact opposed it, their military efforts in the future would serve a purpose with which they disagreed 7.
But unless someone invents a time machine and goes back to mess with the past, we will never know how different decisions might have played out.
So we are left with speculating about and ultimately shaping our future. Lincoln called for 75, state militiamen for only 90 days of service; this supported the notion theory that the war would be short.
On the other side of the ledger is the hastened demise of slavery, which surely would have persisted for some time to come otherwise.
June 22, at 8: We may have lost hundreds of thousands of men, but we gained a foundation for a more industrialized and more educated nation.
What cause would we consider righteous enough to sacrifice hundreds of thousands of our fellow Americans in a war?
Much of the tension that led to the war was caused by decades of competition over the western territories. Southern states were simply asserting the same right as the British colonies when they formed the United States in the first place.
The war was also a war to bring the Union back together. The fact that the question says a lot about me does not mean there is no answer to the question of who won the game.
One could just as easily, however, blame the North for the war. Was the Civil War Worth the Cost? On December 20,South Carolina seceded. When I cover the Civil War with my history classes, the root cause I keep coming back to is Southern paranoia. For the Southern white secessionist, the very figure who chose not a path of constitutional challenge nor diplomacy but war, the war was definitely not worth it.
President Lincoln must have spent many sleepless nights wondering if he and the Congress had made the correct decision. Some would argue that conflict was going to happen eventually even if the Southern states were allowed to secede.
The one embodying the principle that equality is the right of man, expands upon the horizontal plane of pure democracy; the other, embodying the principle that it is not the right of man, but of equals only, has taken to itself the rounded form of a social aristocracy.
The war had also resolved the issue of slavery that so long had plagued American life. But he argues that white supremacy was so entrenched, North and South, that war and Reconstruction could never deliver true racial justice to freed slaves, who soon became subject to economic peonage, Black Codes, Jim Crow, and rampant lynching.
The South had visions of plantations, cotton fields, and slave labor; the North saw a future of family farms, businesses, factories, towns, and wage labor. This, I fear, is an inadequate conception of the controversy.
Now if these were soldiers in an engineer corps, settle up a pontoon bridge across the Rappahannock, what then did they die for?Apr 09, · Was it worth it? Discussion in 'Civil War History - General Discussion' started by YankeeDoodle, Apr 8, The Civil War had an enormous effect on industry in the North.
As a result, it helped change the U.S. from a country that was farm centered and plantation-centered to one that was mechanical and was reliant on the market system. Before the civil war there was only a small industry in the North.
Was the Civil War worth it?
I believe that the civil war was worth it. Even though a lot of negative consequences came out of it, the positive outweighed the negative.
If correct, the Civil War claimed more lives than all other American wars combined, and the increase in population since means that a comparable war today would cost million lives.
This horrific toll doesn't include the more than half million soldiers who were wounded and often permanently disabled by amputation, lingering disease, psychological trauma and other afflictions.
Horwitz’s interview with Fitz Brundage and David Goldfield raised the question of whether the Civil War was a good war and whether the bloodletting was worth it in the end.
I tend to avoid these questions. If you are referring too the North/Union, than yes, the war was worth it for them. To them, the war was about keeping the United States as one whole nation. If you are referring too the South/Confederacy, than I would say no, it was not worth it for them.Download