Civil War Essay: The Major Contributing Factors to the Civil War Essay

If asked, most people would blame as the cause of the civil war the issue of slavery. This is understandable; many people in the U.S. at the time were against slavery, going to far as to help runaway slaves escape to the free north. But, while slavery at face value was a major factor, international politics and economics played a major role. Several factors, including the election of Lincoln, the raid on Harper’s Ferry, the Dred Scott decision, and, most importantly, the fugitive slave law, contributed to the growing rift between the North and South and, eventually, the Civil War. Abraham Lincoln is most always associated with the Civil War. But, he was not elected through a majority of the popular vote. In fact, with only forty percent of the popular vote, he wasn’t even close to a majority. His Republican platform reached out to many groups, but left out the South. Many southerners thought he was an abolitionist, although he did favor monetary compensation and a Union. As a result of southern fears over Lincoln, he was not allowed on the ballot in ten southern states, and many states threatened to secede if he was elected. His election prompted the first state, South Carolina, to secede from the Union, and started the Civil War. This contributed to the growing rift greatly, in that the South not only felt their livelihoods were being threatened through the potential loss of their slaves, but also had a sense of disenfranchisement at the polls, because the minority candidate won. But, even though if Lincoln had not been elected, the Civil War would have been delayed, Lincoln was really just the straw that broke the camel’s back. The south was looking for an excuse to secede, and Lincoln gave it too him, which makes this election a relatively minor event in contributing to the civil war. But, while Lincoln was the straw, the North had placed many other burdens on the South’s proverbial camel. In 1859, abolitionist John Brown decided to attempt to incite a slave uprising. At Harper’s Ferry, Brown attacked an arsenal. The result was seven people dead, no slave uprising (they were not aware of the endeavor), and John Brown martyred for the abolitionist cause. Zealous abolitionists praised Brown, but southerners saw him as a murderer. What angered the south most, however, was not that a fanatic murdered seven people, but that abolitionists in the North financed him. The rift widened  between the North and South for southerners, who believed there was a conspiracy in the North to send armed gangs to steal slaves and murder innocent people. The Raid on Harper’s Ferry added more to the growing fissure between the North and the South than Lincoln’s election. Whereas the Raid on Harper’s Ferry increased tensions in the south, the Dred Scott Decision worried the North. Dred Scott was a black slave on free territory who sued for his freedom. The Supreme Court ruled that he was not a citizen, but also included the more comprehensive judgment that slaves could be taken into any territory and held in slavery. Northern abolitionists were shocked; their plan for compromise was no more slavery in any territory, and this ruling shut down their cause. Abolitionists feared that slavery would now spread into more territories, and Northern democrats, who favored popular sovereignty, and southern democrats, who favored slavery, were divided further in the Dred Scott Decision. This case contributed to the division of the Democratic Party, who then nominated three separate candidates, resulted in the election of Lincoln, and set in motion the secessions that caused the Civil War. Although Dred Scott did frighten many abolitionists, the most important contributor to the growing rift between the North and the South was the Fugitive Slave law. This law empowered every person to act as a slave catcher, forbid anyone from helping an alleged slave, and allowed slave owners to only state ownership of the slave in question in order to take him into custody. While originally a political move to appease the south, the result was a widening rift. The South was angered by a widespread refusal of Northerners to execute the law, another northern conspiracy to disenfranchise the south. The North was angered because they were being forced to go against their principles, against their deepest beliefs, and send fugitive slaves, or even freeborn blacks, back to the south. The northerners were forced to choose between abiding by the law, and helping a fellow human being. It put a human face on slavery for northerners, and polarized the two regions. The Fugitive Slave law was the most significant factor in contributing to the rift between the North and the South, and, ultimately, the Civil War. The Civil War had numerous, complicated causes. The tensions between the manufacturing North and the agrarian South had been growing for decades before it rose to a boil in 1861. Slavery was a major factor, both politically and morally. The Civil War kept the Union together, at the cost of thousands of lives, but at the same time resulted in a new lease on life for thousands of slaves. The Fugitive Slave Law, the election of Lincoln, the raid at Harper’s Ferry, and the Dred Scott decision all contributed to the Civil War, and thus, to the ending of slavery in America

Education in Victorian Essay

Nowadays, people get educated easily although they are upper class, middle class or low class. Do people think why will they get educated easily? Is that a normally happen or some people made that happen? Education in Victorian Era was not normally. They don’t get educated like us, although the middle class people just get the basic education which mean the grammar and the English words. People get educated much easier during Victorian Era than before the Victorian Era in England. In Victor Era, education change becoming more important and easier to get educated. In the Victorian Era, the schools had many rules to say who can go to school and who cannot. People will not get education until they are upper class like noble. If the people who are rich, but they are not a noble, they can engage a teacher to teach their children in the house however those educations are the Basic English which is the English that understand the word (1 p. 20-22). Those children could not read a book because they just the word, those teachers do not know too. If the teachers know how, they will not be there and will not be a teacher because before the Victorian Era, if people get good education, they must get rich because not many people work for the bank or the government if they do not know good English. Before the Victorian Era, public school is not for everyone. Those public schools are the school for upper class because if people want to go to school there, they have to people a lot of money. There have some rules that is so unfair with the teacher which is public school cannot have any female teachers. The goal of the schools is train those boys to be a leader. People will try to give their children good education as much as possible if they can because they can promise that their children will get rich really easy. Because of the education system, the effect form this system made those people focus on boys. Most girls also cannot go to school because of that system. If they have a son, they will much happier than a girl because girl will not stay in the family for a long time. When the time is come, those girls have to marry with someone. Although those girls want to get a job as something like lawyer or doctor which jobs need to get a good education which mean they do not have a change to get one. However, there have some schools that just for poor family like church school, but those schools are not good and some schools not even teach how to read or word, they teach only that how to read the bible and teach what they think is useful. They also had the school called â€Å"Girls school† or â€Å"home school† (2 p. 23-27). In the school that is not public school will just teach the Basic English and the skill which made those children can live in life. The education system start change when Queen Victoria come and she find out that education is one of the most important to make the country to be stronger. She made some rule that made people can go to school and get good education. The rules which made by Queen Victoria that say every people who are under 14 have to go to school and they can decide that keep going to school or go to work when they are over 14(3 p. 104). Those schools are not the school like church school or â€Å"girl school†. The school that the rule means is the public school. People do not need to pay for school however people have to pay when they are over 14 years old. That rule is most important rule in the entire rule that Queen Victoria made for people. That rule also made people get good education without using too much money so made everyone can go to school although they are poor family or not upper class. Queen Victoria also made a rule that girl can go to school and women can be a teacher and they can have a job in public school (1 p. 78-83) The effect form those rule that Queen Victoria made, can make more people can go to school and get educated so that the empire will got stronger during Victorian Era. More people have be educated so that the power of the government will divide because not only upper class or noble can educated (3 p. 59) Although people cannot get educated before Victorian Era, but they can when Queen Victoria made those rule. People can easier to get education although they are not rich or noble. Because Queen Victoria made those change, the power of the government have to divide so that no noble have all the power and control the empire so that make the country stronger than ever before. At the end, Education changed becoming more important and easier to get educated because Queen Victoria find out education is important and she made those rule can change. Works Cited Avery, Gillian. Victorian People In life and In literature, New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1970. Print. Jones, Frances Hope, Public school Education in Victorian Era, the Classical Curriculum, and British Imperial Ethos. BA thesis. Wesleyan University, 2008. Print; Singler, Garelyn. Victorian Literature. Duluth: university of Minnesota, 2013. Print.

Character Is Fate

Character is Fate – Essay â€Å"A man’s character is his fate† once said the Greek philosopher Heraclites. By this he meant that our personalities and actions shape the outcomes of our lives and therefore our destiny. This statement opposes the traditional view that man’s fate is determined by an external force (name it god or even chance). This argument is basically one of faith: do you believe we shape our own futures by how we act, or are our lives programmed in a certain unchangeable way? In other words, do you believe in an omnipotent being that has our lives or at least our futures predetermined? As we shall see, a man’s character defines his life (as his behaviour, emotions and actions determine his daily life), but I believe that our fate is predetermined and unchangeable and that there is divine intervention, therefore a matter that we have no control over. To support the fact that we might be able to define our daily life but not our fates or futures there is the unanswered question of ‘why do bad things happen to good people? Furthermore, character is not the only aspect in deciding a man’s fate: external events (chance and Nature) will also alter the processes and outcomes of our lives. Heraclites and Novalis (German philosopher)[1] had an interesting argument, but unfortunately one that only applies in a utopian world. Many people believe that a person’s personality determines their place in life, therefore supporting Heraclites’ idea. Basically, this suggests that depending on how a person lives, what he does and how he deals with events the outcome of his life will be shaped accordingly. For example, in Thomas Hardy’s ‘The Mayor of Casterbridge’, we understand that Mr. Henchard’s personality flaws (his temper and his naivety especially) lead him slowly to worse situations, which finally end up in him not wanting to be remembered once he is dead. On the other hand, Farfrae, a character which is much more appealing, sensitive, humane and kind is victim of fortunate events such as the prosperity of his business and his marriage to Lucetta. Both these cases can be attributed to the fact that life is working against Henchard while it works very well for Farfrae due to their aforementioned personalities. Unquestionably, the way in which we act will attract positive or negative outcomes respectively. In this matter, we could say that we are the architects of our fates[2] and that even though it might be very difficult to do so, we can manage to change our personality and therefore change our fates in a desired direction. Fate is in our hands (or should we better say in our character), as Scottish author Samuel Smiles words tell us: â€Å"Sow a thought, and you reap an act; Sow an act, and you reap a habit; Sow a habit, and you reap a character; Sow a character, and you reap a destiny. †[3] On the other hand, if we follow the argument discussed in the previous paragraph, then we could draw the conclusion that good things should always happen to good people and bad things to bad people. In real life, this is almost never true, and in many examples we can find quite the opposite: bad things happening to good people and vice versa. How many good and innocent people have been victims of the greed of evil people such as the Holocaust, the Iraq War or the bombings in Nagasaki and Hiroshima? If we want to narrow this to a theological explanation, then we can argue that God made us all in his image, therefore making us independent of moral choice and giving us total freedom (this suggests that we can control our characters in the way we decide because we have been given the freedom to do so. I don’t support this idea, but it is however the most rational to explain why bad things happen to good people: as there are also bad people in the world that act freely, then you can be a victim of their acts no matter who you are or how you are). However, as he has given everyone freedom, then we can all be victims of good and bad from other people. [4] Your character might determine your fate, but it is not the sole factor because as we can see, bad things can happen to good people and vice versa. I believe that this is a matter of chance (the fact that a good person might get in the way of a bad one and therefore have a terrible outcome which his/her character doesn’t reflect) and even tough we might have a certain personality that should lead us to a consequent destiny, unexpected and random variables get in the way and might change the course of our fates. Definitely our character will have an important role to play in determining the outcomes of our lives, but from this idea we can draw the idea that although character controls our life, we can’t control our fates: our fates are predestined. We can call these omnipotent force God, devil, providence or chance, but the fact is that our fate has already been planned for us and even if we could change our character (making us believe that we are changing our fate), we are only changing direction into a fate we think is new, but in reality is the fate that was always predestined for us. Furthermore, character is not the only factor in determining our lives. We must consider external factors such as the environment, nature and fortune. For example, in the novel ‘The Mayor of Casterbridge’ by Thomas Hardy, the main character, Mr. Henchard organizes a fair for the townspeople in order to show the people that despite what he appears to be, he is really kind and humane. Everything turns out wrong for him because heavy rain ruins the event (Nature intervenes) and later on in the book when he finally tries to redeem himself by taking good care of her daughter, he finds out that she is really not her daughter and that her real daughter died many years ago (fortune intervenes). We can’t attribute this ‘bad luck’ to Henchard’s character; this is simply a series of external factors that play against him in a random and unfortunate way. Yet another example is a Jewish story about a man, Moishe Lipsky, who moved into New York in the time of the Great Depression and when he applied for the only job he could find (a janitor), he was turned down because he was illiterate. So, he opened a little storefront and gradually became a rich and successful man. One day, when he goes to the bank to ask for a loan and he signs the papers with an X (as he was illiterate) and the loan officer tells him ‘Just think, in just a few years you have become a very rich man. It makes me wonder what you would have become if you could read and write’ and Lipsky answers ‘A janitor’. 5] It is ironical how things turn out in this story, but chance certainly plays a role in the success of this good and honest man. He arrives to America just in a difficult time and his predestined conditions make him illiterate. Without these factors of Nature, chance or omnipotence, the man could have actually turned out to be a janitor and not the successful businessman he turned out to be. Anyone who has a belief in an omnipotent body must understand that our nature is predestined and that our futures are set, so no matter what we do, we will always make our choices to lead the way to our predetermined fate. In an idealistic world, our character is certainly our fate, if no external factors (chance or nature) intervene. However, even though in practice we can definitely say that our personalities shape our destiny, I believe that God has a definite purpose for each one of us and therefore He has determined our destiny from the very first moment we were conceived. Furthermore, the fact that good things happen to bad people and vice versa reflects the fact that our fates must be predetermined, and therefore while our personalities might lead us in a certain way, our fate (whether good or bad) is already written. We can change our characters at free will and this will make us lead an ensuing life, but our destiny is set and no matter what we do, we will never be able to determine it. [1] â€Å"Character and fate are two words for the same thing† – Novalis [2] â€Å"Each man is the architect of his own fate. † – Appius Claudius [3] http://www. americanchronicle. com/articles/view/20750 [4] http://judaism. about. com/library/3_askrabbi_o/bl_simmons_murder. htm [5] http://www. petermalakoff. com/character_and_fate. html