Chap 13
What ideas did the term Manifest Destiny reflect? Did it cause historical events, such as the new political support for territorial expansion, or was it merely a description of events?
For the next two decades, the professional politicians who managed the Second Party System avoided policies, such as the annexation of the slave holding Republic of Texas, that would prompt regional strife. This shows how the passion on the abolitionist side, struck fear into the opposing side, enough to avoid confrontation.
During the 1840s, many citizens embraced an ideology of conquest that proclaimed their God-given duty to extend American republicanism and capitalism to the Pacific Ocean. Although, there were conflicts over slavery, there was unity in the decision to extend America forwards. Unfortunately, how America would move forward, had to be settled between the Abolitionists and pro-slavery parties, which didn't look like it was to be settled anytime soon.
Why did President Polk go to war with Mexico? Why did the war become so divisive in Congress and the country?
The war was started to obtain Mexican land for capitalist production. It was also to create a continental nation with trading post near Asia. It was fueled by a Manifest Destiny ideology and supported by Christians. The war got attention from Congress because it was focused …show more content…
The Congress has no right to regulate slavery in the territories following squatters or popular sovereignty and Congress should restrict slavery within its existing boundaries and then extinguished it completely. Taney argued that Congress and the government had no authority to prohibit slavery and that the slave owners could take their property into another territory and own it. Taney endorsed the principle of popular sovereignty and that settlers could write a constitution, request statehood, and then decide if slavery would be
What ideas did the term Manifest Destiny reflect? Did it cause historical events, such as the new political support for territorial expansion, or was it merely a description of events?
For the next two decades, the professional politicians who managed the Second Party System avoided policies, such as the annexation of the slave holding Republic of Texas, that would prompt regional strife. This shows how the passion on the abolitionist side, struck fear into the opposing side, enough to avoid confrontation.
During the 1840s, many citizens embraced an ideology of conquest that proclaimed their God-given duty to extend American republicanism and capitalism to the Pacific Ocean. Although, there were conflicts over slavery, there was unity in the decision to extend America forwards. Unfortunately, how America would move forward, had to be settled between the Abolitionists and pro-slavery parties, which didn't look like it was to be settled anytime soon.
Why did President Polk go to war with Mexico? Why did the war become so divisive in Congress and the country?
The war was started to obtain Mexican land for capitalist production. It was also to create a continental nation with trading post near Asia. It was fueled by a Manifest Destiny ideology and supported by Christians. The war got attention from Congress because it was focused …show more content…
The Congress has no right to regulate slavery in the territories following squatters or popular sovereignty and Congress should restrict slavery within its existing boundaries and then extinguished it completely. Taney argued that Congress and the government had no authority to prohibit slavery and that the slave owners could take their property into another territory and own it. Taney endorsed the principle of popular sovereignty and that settlers could write a constitution, request statehood, and then decide if slavery would be