Introduction
Political parties in the United States in the late 1700s resulted from the coalition of factions into federalist and antifederalist groups. The main issue that sparked the formation of the partisan divide was Hamilton’s support of policies that favored commercial interests at the disposal of agricultural initiatives. Therefore, Madison and Jefferson charged him with undermining Republican initiatives, thus calling their movement the Republicans (Heersink, 2018). On the other hand, Hamilton and his supporters proposed that they intended to strengthen the republic, hence adopting the name Federalists. These developments led to the establishment of the first-party system.
The expeditious evolution of political parties was a response to the increasing conflict between the Federalist and Antifederalist factions. Friction between these parties was aggravated by their struggle over the ratification of the 1787 constitution. The federalists wanted a strong central government, suggesting that it would be in the best interest of all US citizens. However, the anti-federalists advocated for state rights (Heersink, 2018). Antifederalists coalesced around agrarian regions in the south while the Federalists established commercial sectors in the north, thus dividing the US into two major territories with differing opinions. Nevertheless, George Washington was quick to warn of looming adversities due to the partisan divide.
The Development of the Second Party System
The American Second Party system is a political framework that dominated the US from 1828 to 1854. According to Lucchese (2021), this period experienced increased public interest in partisan politics, leading to the establishment of the Whig and Democratic parties. The Democratic Party supported citizens’ interests while the Wig Party was inclined toward industrial and business interests, thus garnering the support of individuals in the North and South. However, both parties emerged from the Democrat-Republican and agreed on the need for internal developments.
The Whig Party was established in 1833 to oppose the Democrats and Andrew Jackson. It was a coalition of disgruntled Democrats, Anti-Masons, and National Republicans. Its leaders were Henry Clay, Daniel Webster, William Henry, and Harrison Zachary Taylor. Supporters of the Whig party advocated for a powerful federal government, higher tariffs, and relief legislations to curb economic constraints during the 1837 and 1839 financial waves of panic. On the other hand, the Democratic Party was established in 1828 with Andrew Jackson as its leader (Heersink, 2018). The party constituted former Democratic-Republican factions, most of which had collapsed by 1824. Martin Van Buren was one of the key players in the formation of the new Democratic Party, which constituted a coalition of Irish Catholics, farmers, and city dwellers. (Estes, 2020) The followers of the Democratic Party supported economic and social equality, greater government contributions to the economy, and decentralized government powers. However, they were against the powers of the Federal government, suggesting that it only required enough powers to function and limited involvement in private and non-economic issues.
The Second Party System facilitated increased democratization of the American political landscape as it drew the attention of more citizens to issues of politics. The system encouraged more people to vote on the election date and popularized political rallies. Additionally, newspapers and ordinary Americans were allowed to share their opinions, thus providing a platform where all human rights and citizens’ wants were acknowledged (Lucchese, 2021). Moreover, it strengthened Americans’ loyalty to political parties that represented their interests, thus allowing individuals to engage in arguments and advocate for democracy.
The Major Events and Movements that Facilitated the Civil War
The key issues that contributed to the Civil War were slavery, states’ rights, and Western expansion. The economy of white people in the South depended on agriculture. As a result, their argument for slavery was that no one would harvest cotton, tobacco, or sugar from the farms, which would cause their economy to collapse (Stewart III, 2019). On the other hand, abolitionists pushed for the emancipation of slaves and an end to segregation and discrimination. The arguments of the abolitionists during the antebellum era were that slavery was sinful and contrary to basic human rights. Therefore, they believed that the United States had a moral obligation to free these people and return them to Africa. Furthermore, they argued that slavery was not a viable business because countries such as Britain did not depend on the slave trade (Stewart III, 2019). Expansion to the West also exacerbated problems as both Northerners and Southerners wanted to extend their values and ideals to the West. Northerners perceived slavery as a distinct institution and feared that Southerners would spread the vice to the West and the rest of the Union. The divide between the two regions intensified as most decisions were one-sided and favored slavery, ultimately leading to the collapse of American democracy and the Civil War.
The Kansas-Nebraska Act is one of the major events that fueled the Civil War because the act allowed settlers in those regions to decide whether to ban or allow slavery. It undermined the Missouri Compromise and ignited people’s passion for war. Territorial conflicts also contributed to the war, as the United States was divided into Union States and Confederate States with opposing views and demands. Western expansion was crucial to U.S. interests because of its idea of the nation’s “manifest destiny,” which claimed that it had a God-given responsibility to spread capitalism and democracy in North America (Estes, 2020). However, the interests of the United States in the North and the Confederates in the South were at odds, resulting in controversy. The court case of Dred Scott v. Sandford was also a source of heightened tension, as this decision declared the Missouri Compromise unconstitutional (Stewart III, 2019). As a result, it sparked controversy over the expansion of slavery and convinced Northerners that the government was full of pro-slavery people.
Conclusion
In addition to the Kansas-Nebraska Act and Scott v. Sandford, another prerequisite for the development of the American Civil War was the presidential election of 1860. During this election, the three main candidates Lincoln, Douglas, and Bell expectedly emerged as leaders in different geographic areas of the United States, leading to increasing tensions and geopolitical discord. As a consequence of this election, South Carolina issued a “Declaration of Reasons for Secession,” detailing its reasons for wanting to secede from the Union forces. The main motivators for this decision in South Carolina cited the anti-slavery policies of the overall Victor Lincoln and bias against the South. In the mere months before Lincoln’s inauguration, six more states seceded from the Union, further fueling the divide between the South and the North. For this reason, the results of the presidential election must be considered on a par with the Kansas-Nebraska Act and Scott v. Sandford as key causes of the Civil War.
References
Estes, T. (2020). Beyond Whigs and Democrats: Historians, historiography, and the paths toward a new synthesis for the Jacksonian era. American Nineteenth Century History, 21(3), 255-281.
Heersink, B. (2018). Politicians, Interest groups, and next steps in the study of American political parties as institutions. Sponsored by the Southern Political Science Association, The Journal of Politics, 80(4).
Lucchese, E. (2021). Moving Past the Two-Party System. Grossmont College Journal of Politics, 1(1), 13-19. Web.
Stewart III, C. H. (2019). Lessons from the post-Civil War era. In, Cox, G.W., & Kernell, S., (Ed.), The politics of divided government (pp. 203-238). Routledge.