Differences Between North And South

Due to differing economies, the North and the South have contrasting views over slavery. The North had more cities and factories, which caused the North to be more dependent on less skilled laborers in order to work in the factories. Most of the Northerners were also Republicans, a party that came from the Free- Soil Party, and was anti-slavery. The parties emphasized on business and believed that slavery could negatively impact business as it seemed to be incompatible with free labor. On the other hand, the South made living off of plantations. Many people in the South believed that “slavery was vital to the continuation of its livelihood and lifestyle” (Ret); therefore, many of the southerners supported slavery. They feared if slavery was
abolished, the Southern economy would fall due to lack of slaves to tend the crops. As the demand for crops such as cotton the South increased, “many white Southerners came to believe that the viability of cotton as a crop depended on slave labor.
Over time, most took for granted that their prosperity, even their way of life, was inseparable from African slavery” (NPS). The regional divisions caused by the difference in economies were furthered deepened by the Missouri Compromise. The Missouri Compromise admitted Missouri as a slave state and Maine as a free state in order to keep the balance of power of the Senate. It also established a line so that any state north of the line would be a free state and any state south of the line would be a slave state. The compromise created a line dividing the North and the South, which increased tensions among the two sides as it created a clear division showing which side supported slavery and which side opposed
it. The differing economies led to opposing views of the social status of African Americans. Many of the Northerners viewed African Americans as free but not equal. The North argued that “all men are created equal” and believed African Americans also deserve the right to “Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.” Abolitionists fought for “political equality” (McCardell 296) of African Americans and wanted to end slavery. On the other hand, many of the Southerners viewed them as their property. In Dred Scott vs. Sanford, the court ruled that “Dred Scott was a slave” (Oyez). The court also decided that African Americans were not citizens of the United States, and thus does not have any legal standing in court and thus they were seen as property. The Southerners used this case to argue for “the belief that slave property was protected under the Constitution” (Hamilton 13). With this, they argued that slavery was justified by the Constitution; therefore, slavery is legal and could be practiced. While the South fought for slavery because Southerners viewed African Americans as their “property” (McCardell 300), Northerners fought against slavery based on the idea that African Americans are “equal to an Anglo-American”(McCardell 300). The opposing point of views of African Americans further led the United States into disunion as it deepened the regional divisions between the North and the South.
While the Bible lacked opposition or support for slavery, biblical interpretations have also been debated by the North and the South to oppose or support slavery.
Abolitionists of the North argued against slavery by presenting moral arguments against it and bringing more attention to the cruelty of the issue. However, Southerners defended slavery by stating that slavery was mentioned numerous times in the Bible. As the Christian belief in unity of the human race, Abolitionists believed that their attacks on slavery were “a vindication of Christianity, moral accountability, and the unity of mankind” (Davis 130). Some Northerners argued that “slavery was sinful in itself” (Margaret 164). Many writings attempted to show the harsh conditions of slavery to bring attention to the issue. For example, The Liberator by Harrison Lloyd Garrison brought attention to the abolition movement by showing the truth and immorality of slavery. Other newspapers such as those by Elijah Lovejoy and Fredrick Douglass also wrote about slavery and the abolition movement, showing how slaves were cruelly treated to inspire a sympathetic response from many northerners and to inspire more people to join the abolition movement. On the contrast, Southerners noted that Bible mentions that Abraham had slaves, and noted that Jesus never opposed slavery even though it was common during the Roman era. According the John C. Calhoun in his speech on slavery, he argued that slavery was “indispensable to the peace
and happiness of both” whites and blacks and claimed that slavery is “a good- a positive good” instead of an evil. Although the Bible never specifically states its opposition or support for slavery, it nevertheless intensified the regional divisions between the North and South. Other factors also contributed to the growing tensions between the two regions. For example, Abraham Lincoln’s victory at the presidential election of 1860 caused many southern slave states to secede from the United States. This further divided the union as the southern states formed the Confederate States of America, ultimately leading to the Civil War. However, the reasons for southern succession were also related to slavery. Lincoln was the first Republican president, and his party was anti-slavery. The South was convinced that President Lincoln was going to end slavery and was concerned of how their way of life would be altered if Lincoln ended slavery, as slavery was vital to their livelihood of agriculture. While there were several other issues leading the nation to Civil War, debates over slavery most significantly deepened the regional divisions by separating the country into anti-slavery ideology in the North and pro-slavery ideology in the South.