Wednesday, October 21, 2020

We're Not Heading to CW 2.0, We've Been There, for Some Time

 It's been a long-simmering war.

Like CW 1.0, it didn't start when the first cannon fired. That just formalized the situation.

No, it all started earlier. The Missouri Compromise of 1820 could be considered the first skirmish. At that time, neither side was happy about the agreement. The North had to agree to allow the South to have slavery in their territory, and the South had to agree to limit slavery in Northern territory.

In 1850:

  • No slave trade in Washington, DC
  • Slavery not banned in Washington, DC
  • CA is a free state
  • No limits on slavery
  • Stronger Fugitive Slave Law
All of the above caused each side to feel as though they got the worst of the deal. It did not allow tensions to lessen.

Bleeding Kansas

    Popular sovereignty is the new rule for deciding whether a state would be free or slave. As a result, people flooded into the territory to be able to vote for their choice. Tensions rose, and the first major actions, with guns, occurred. Although some had used guns to handle disputes in the past, this was the first time it became widespread.

Fanatic John Brown becomes notorious for his actions against opponents during this time.

1860 - Lincoln wins the election; slave states immediately begin making plans for secession.

April, 1861 - Fort Sumter is fired upon, and falls to the South.

It didn't start with Sumter, or even Bleeding Kansas. Long before Lincoln's election, the train was in motion.

It didn't start with Trump. It may END with him, however.


Ed Bonderenka said...

But there were distinct geographical positions reflecting political positions. And standing armies on both sides when "formal" hostilities began.

Linda Fox said...

Mostly, yes. But those lines weren't hard and fast - for example, the southern part of OH contained a lot of Confederate sympathizers.