sectionalism definition us history

sectionalism definition us history

The Impact of Sectionalism on United States History

1. Introduction to Sectionalism in U.S. History

As the American society sectionalized, the goals and aspirations of each area grew in opposite directions. This led to an internal struggle in the country, better known as sectionalism. Sectionalism has had a very considerable impact because of the role it played in causing the U.S. Civil War (1861-1865). Most historians characterize the Civil War as a war between a modern, self-sufficient, industrial North that was expanding its influence, and a rural, agricultural South that clung to the traditions of the Old South. That opinion is probably closer to the truth in that it is the root cause of the sectionalism of the 19th century. And so it is due to sectionalism that we were able to find the true distinguishing individual, political, and economic differences between the southern and the northern states in U.S. history.

The United States of America, a free country, was able to grow from a few states located on the eastern seaboard to fifty powerful states that were nationally bound due to a unique form of values and economic production of its society. With a diverse society that could not be bound together by Confederate nationalism due to its regional differences, the United States, in the early 19th century, faced a situation in which it became clear that the interests of different areas were so different that a federal government would not be able to resolve their problems since both lay at opposing ends of the spectrum.

2. Economic, Social, and Political Divisions: Causes of Sectionalism

The economy, in turn, is organized around specific social institutions, that is, the way in which people interact and relate to one another. These are what are termed “economic systems:” that is, the method of organizing the production and distribution of goods and services to satisfy the needs and wants of a society. There was always going to be a conflict of interest between those involved in a small-scale rural subsistence economy—primarily the states of the South—those involved in an urban-industrial consumer economy—primarily the northern states—and the social institutions which facilitated the way in which economic behavior took place. In their struggle to resolve this conflict, the early leaders of the United States laid the foundations of the federal system today. This system has important consequences for the economy and society. It weakened the basis of a merchant capital developing and undermined the interests of the country’s particular factions. The country was constituted in such a way that it might become practically independent of the world economy. Nonetheless, the majority of politicians and businessmen today do not seriously question the basis of the American economy. They are not anxious for economic and social change. In the mid-19th century, however, profound economic changes took place on which depended international distribution and interests and the fate of many sectors within society.

The first step in addressing sectionalism is to determine what it is and what causes it. Sectionalism is a natural result of the territorial division of any society. In the case of the United States, however, it was aggravated by the practice of slavery which went against everything for which the USA as a democracy stood. Two divisions in particular were quite significant—the North-South between the northern and southern states; and the rural-urban division. Added to these were a number of quite different, but very real economic problems that led to the War, but which, interestingly, most of the textbooks and in the end political leaders barely mention. This is not surprising as the impact of the industrial revolution and indeed of capitalism cannot be underestimated. The main purpose of any society is to satisfy the needs and wants of its members. These depend on the capacity of the economy, i.e., the ability to design, produce and distribute goods and services, to meet them. Failure to do this frustrates people and leads to problems.

3. Key Events and Figures: Manifestations of Sectionalism

These divisional opinions originated over time and the South erected legal obstacles to teaching slaves how to read and write. On the other hand, religious leaders in the South encouraged personal salvation and private acts of kindness. The industrial revolution influenced the North where jobs in factories were available. However, both sections’ response to their social problems was markedly different in their belief systems and the corresponding institutional foundations they developed. Religion, however, contributed to the regional identification rather than the other way around. The South developed and supported religious denominations that justified the institution of slavery, while the North’s theological interpretation, initially by sect and later by denominations that developed in the states of the Old Northwest, supported its negative position towards slavery. The South’s only feasible mode of transportation was via navigable rivers and harbors. The North maintained a more favorable transportation system of contiguous canals and adjacent railroads that connected the chief cities, making intercity travel and communication more efficient. In time, the marketplace of ideas pertaining to sectionalism became a studied political profession and their practice widened the gap as much as the gap developed their lobbying interests.

The temperance and abolitionism movements best evidenced the ideological differences between regions. The temperance movement sought, through educational and legal activities, to reduce the high rate of alcohol consumption. Women were active agents in this reform effort and identified saloons as the particular effects of sin that perpetuated violence and debauchery. This reform movement took hold more in the North than in the South. The strong use of alcoholic beverages for medicinal purposes, where laws often were ignored or not enforced, tended to weaken the credibility of the temperance argument. Southern consumers of alcohol found the reform restrictive, yet it did not evoke as much antipathy as the abolitionist movement.

4. Consequences of Sectionalism: Civil War and Reconstruction

American sectionalism, already related to the country’s dispersion, increasing specialization of agriculture and industry, and the occupation of new territories like letter-height indexes of the original diversity of building and of American expansion tendencies. However, as plural tendencies and erratic movements do not define philosophy or policies, the development of the American society organization and customs confronted and sealed regional divergences in structures, opinions, and doctrines. The geometry of the United States regions brought sectional conflicts, contingent or circumstantial, that belonged or referred to the country’s automatic operation force to interpret and guide social change and progress.

By the time of the Civil War, the sectional framework of the United States society and the interests of its regions assumed an explicitly political character that shaped its internal and external policies. The elaboration of institutions and the doctrines and reasons that justified sectional interests corresponded to a definition of sectional identity that disappeared any trace of the initial American tendency of diversity in the agreement. The predominance of the property concept in the relations and the public-business transactions tended to index sectional political radicalization.

5. Legacy of Sectionalism: Impact on Modern America

The example of the American Civil War is that even in times of difficulty and dissension two parts of the same country can work together and through a common effort not only rebuild their own country but also greatly enhance the future welfare of the world. Unfortunately, this message has not been learned in too many instances, and the influence of the American Civil War has been limited. Its tragic loss of life and property might have been reduced had it been better understood and appreciated. The 100th anniversary of the conflict does give present-day United States citizens an opportunity to recognize this contribution of the past to the present, and to the future.

Perhaps the most important legacy of the sectional conflict is its demonstration of the connective fabric of our nation. The patriotism and dedication of individuals such as Washington, Hamilton, John Adams, John Marshall, Henry Clay, and others since have woven together a nation of many disparate interests and have fought to prevent them from pulling apart. Without the constructive, nation-building efforts of these and other American leaders, the protection and perpetuation of slavery would have created two political entities in North America in the 19th century, as it had in the 18th century. It was not the people of the United States who wanted disunion, but a small group of ethnocentric slave leaders who refused to accept the pro-Union policies of the Northern majority.