How did settlement of the West increase tension between the North and the South?
351184
Because they were arguing over whether new states would permit slavery.
395123
In the South they own tobacco plantations. In the north They were bootleggers .
470985
There wasn't much of a coherent argument. People were scared because of the Panic of 1893 that the US was running out of natural resources and capital, and businesses feared that they would need to have new land to be able to be competitive in the industrial world. The actual expansion that took place was justified by accusations that Spain was abusing its colonies, and so we had a moral obligation to come to their aid, but that's clearly not why we went to war with Spain.
1051430
When the US government opened the west for colonization around the second half of the 19th century, people went there because America offered what no other nation could at the time. It accepted immigrants who wished for a better life. Also, if you could make it to the territories out west, filed your claim (on a given piece of land), survive there farming for five years, then it was yours. It was like making a bet with the American Government that you could.  What better enticement could there be?\n\nAlso overpopulation in the East and an entire country all the way to the west coast where there was nothing except maybe native american indian tribes and virgin country was too much to resist. Hundreds upon hundreds flocked west to see their dream come true. Of course it was not easy, the harsh weather, hostile tribes and human greed made it hard for many families who finally relinquished their claims and went back east.\n\nThe American Government did not handle the situation with the Native Americans very well. The Native Americans were lied to. While the Government kept telling them that their lands would not be taken, they would then tell the Pioneers that it was ok to do it. As a result there were clashes between the Native Americans and the Pioneers (prejudice against the indians got to the point that they coined a saying: the only good indian is a dead indian) and finally the Government justified sending troops to control the Native Americans, who were massacred at will, their lands taken away, entire tribes of survivors sent to the worst possible places where reservations were set up, their children forced to attend schools and indoctrinated to adapt as soon as possible to the American ideal life, denying them their cultural heritage, and a lot of other terrible mistakes no one likes to talk about, mistakes that continued all the way to the first half of the 20th century. The western genre deals a lot with that era, and movies about it were still going strong all the way to the 1950's. \n\n Hope this answers your question.
366407
Conflict is essential to growth of the society. History has proved that. So it is necessary that difference of opinion are expressed and they clash with each other. \n\n"Let a hundred flowers bloom and a hundred schools of thought contend" - Chairman Mao Tse Tung
986157
They were down there helping lay the groundwork for the coming takeover of Latin-America by the Anglo-American aristocracy who will soon be migrating south seeking refuge from the coming Ice Age.\n\nOh, I'm sorry, were you looking for a serious answer?\n\nWell I'm half-serious; there must be some reason why all the elite factions of the Western world seem to be trying to move their powerbase south.  \n\nThink about it.....\n\nNimadan
218572
This is going to be just a quick summary...\nFor the most part, it was not all about slavery. The states North of the Mason-Dixon line were content with slavery in the South...the problem was the "Westward Expansion." The North wanted the new states to be free from slavery, whereas the South wanted those states to be open to slavery. There were a few compromises made years before the actual war began, however, those obviously did not work. On December 20, 1860, South Carolina announced it's leave from the Union...Mississippi, Florida, Alabama, Georgia, Louisiana and Texas followed. \nOn February 4th, 1861, the Confederate States of America was formed with Jefferson Davis as the president. A new constitution was drawn up. Key differences were:\n*The president and vice president were elected for six year terms whereas the North had only four years. \n*The protection of slavery in new territories was given. \n*No slave trade with Africa\n*President Davis could take a loan for $15 million for the creation of a military force of 100,000. \nPresident Davis was inaugurated February 18, 1861. \n\nPresident Lincoln for the Union said, "Physically speaking, we cannot separate. We cannot remove our respective sections from each other, nor build an impassable wall between them. A husband and wife may be divorced and go out of the presence and beyond the reach of each other, but the different parts of our country cannot do this. They cannot but remain face and face, and intercourse, either amicable or hostile, must continue between them. Is it possible, then, to make that intercourse more advantageous or more satisfactory after seperation than before? Can aliens make treaties easier than friends can make laws? Can treaties be more faithfully enforced between aliens than laws can among friends?Suppose you go to war, you cannot fight always; and when, after much loss on both sides, and no gain on either, you cease fighting, the identical old quesetions as to terms of intercourse are again upon you. In your hands, my dissatisfied fellow countrymen, and not in mine, is the momentous issue of civil war. The government will not assail you. You can have no conflict without being yourselves the aggressors. You have no oath registered in heaven to destroy the government, while I shall have the most solemn one to 'preserve, protect, and defend' it..." (Page 8)\nThe first shots of the Civil War were fired on April 12th, 1861 at Ft. Sumter, South Carolina. The fight lasted for thirty-four hours, and ended by the North surrendering. The war continued until April of 1865. \nAfter it was all said and done, most of the South was destroyed and the loss of lives on both ends, are up to this day, only an estimate (over 100,000). It is said, the number of Yanks and Rebels who died are greater than the loss of American lives in both World Wars, the Korean War, and the Vietiman War...all combined.\n\nI hope this has been helpful to you. Here are some other books to check out if you are really interested in the Civil War:\n-"After the Civil War" by John S. Blay\n-"The Life of Johnny Reb" by Bell I. Wiley\n-"The Life of Billy Yank" by Bell I. Wiley\n-"Embattled Courage" by Gerald F. Linderman\n-"The Civil War: Strange & Fascinating Facts" by Burke Davis
861451
Politics control an area. Everything such as slavery, King Cotton, and the lack of industrialization in sourth influnced politics which in turn influenced the relationships. The north and south had become very different areas. If a new tariff or law that helped one area, always hurt the other area. All these were decided in Congress, especially the slave laws.
408786
It was, as usual, a fight between the native peoples and the new inhabitants that were trying to take their land away.  \n\nIt was known as Yarmirr v Northern Territory.
246871
1861\nFort Sumpter\nThe less populous south detested the more populous north using its majority position to dictate policies regarding economics and slavery in ways that benefitted the north and appeared to harm the south.
145474
toward the north east FROM the southwest
915305
The 100 year war was somewhere around there. It delayed the Northern Renessaince, well that and the Black Death.
703395
the people from the north\n\n:> peace
509566
The north put so many restrictions on the South, it was cruel\n\nGeneral Robert E. Lee said that if he had known what it would be like, then he would have kept fighting to the bitter end with his troops (I think through guerrilla warfare)\n\nbetter to die than to live in post-civil war south?
619809
1) the North had a bigger population = more soldiers\n2) the North had more factories to make stuff in\n3) the North had more railroads = transportation\n4) the North had more money to spend on the war
1121334
The mountains made it hard to expand westward and build the railroads.\n\nThe rivers and natural resources made it easy to make metals and become industrial.
709265
Ok homework question right?????c'mon dont lie.\nOk here it is in a nut shell,\nthe south and north were at odds with each other,some of this was on slavery but most of it was on the economical ideas on where Gov't should place the nations money and interests.\nThe north had more seats in congress at this time(per capita of how many voting persons per state there were living in them)since the north had more voting persons in them they held more congressional seats in the Gov't,while the sourthern part of the United States had fewer people(that could vote)in them giving them less representation in the senate and congress.So the the southerm states came up with an idea of using the number of slaves to get them more house seats but not representing them as a voting population(no rights etc)this was seen as an outrage by the north and the abolisionists in the northern states so the  resentments of north and south increased to a point of attack(Ft.Sumtner) in the south which was the start of the civil war.slavery only became an issue after the fact..but I believe this is what you should be skimming through in your history books and what your teacher is looking for