Sentence
stringlengths 154
2.26k
| video_title
stringlengths 14
105
|
|---|---|
So essentially subsidized home ownership. Subsidized... I should say not home ownership, subsidized home borrowing. And I want to make that clear because if everyone now has more borrowing power to buy a home, then most likely that will just increase the price of houses. So it's really not subsidizing home borrowing, but that's a whole other topic. But once again, the government is getting involved. Here they're trying to do a little bit of engineering. | 20th Century Capitalism and Regulation in the United States.mp3 |
And I want to make that clear because if everyone now has more borrowing power to buy a home, then most likely that will just increase the price of houses. So it's really not subsidizing home borrowing, but that's a whole other topic. But once again, the government is getting involved. Here they're trying to do a little bit of engineering. And once again, this goes against letting the market do its thing. This is a distortion in the market. This is a distortion in the market. | 20th Century Capitalism and Regulation in the United States.mp3 |
Here they're trying to do a little bit of engineering. And once again, this goes against letting the market do its thing. This is a distortion in the market. This is a distortion in the market. It's a distortion because, once again, it's anti-competitive. If someone else wanted to do what Fannie Mae did, but didn't have the backing of the government, it wouldn't be able to compete because it wouldn't be able to borrow money as cheaply. And you keep fast-forwarding. | 20th Century Capitalism and Regulation in the United States.mp3 |
This is a distortion in the market. It's a distortion because, once again, it's anti-competitive. If someone else wanted to do what Fannie Mae did, but didn't have the backing of the government, it wouldn't be able to compete because it wouldn't be able to borrow money as cheaply. And you keep fast-forwarding. You get to Lyndon Johnson's administration. Obviously there were other people in between. You get to Lyndon Johnson's administration, you have the Great Society, and the Great Society, amongst other things, food stamps, war on poverty, Medicare, Medicaid. | 20th Century Capitalism and Regulation in the United States.mp3 |
And you keep fast-forwarding. You get to Lyndon Johnson's administration. Obviously there were other people in between. You get to Lyndon Johnson's administration, you have the Great Society, and the Great Society, amongst other things, food stamps, war on poverty, Medicare, Medicaid. So once again, saying, hey, society needs to have some base level of support for people. It can take sides one way or the other, but the pendulum was definitely swinging in the direction of more social safety nets and more attempts to make kind of a level playing field. And you can debate whether they were successful or not. | 20th Century Capitalism and Regulation in the United States.mp3 |
You get to Lyndon Johnson's administration, you have the Great Society, and the Great Society, amongst other things, food stamps, war on poverty, Medicare, Medicaid. So once again, saying, hey, society needs to have some base level of support for people. It can take sides one way or the other, but the pendulum was definitely swinging in the direction of more social safety nets and more attempts to make kind of a level playing field. And you can debate whether they were successful or not. And the other thing, and this is completely unrelated to what this conversation is about, but whenever someone learns about Teddy Roosevelt and Franklin Roosevelt in the same video, it begs the question, how were they related in some way? And it does turn out they were fifth cousins. But even more interesting, Eleanor Roosevelt, who was Franklin Roosevelt's wife, was Teddy Roosevelt's niece. | 20th Century Capitalism and Regulation in the United States.mp3 |
And you can debate whether they were successful or not. And the other thing, and this is completely unrelated to what this conversation is about, but whenever someone learns about Teddy Roosevelt and Franklin Roosevelt in the same video, it begs the question, how were they related in some way? And it does turn out they were fifth cousins. But even more interesting, Eleanor Roosevelt, who was Franklin Roosevelt's wife, was Teddy Roosevelt's niece. So there actually was a pretty close relationship between all of these Roosevelt's. And another interesting thing, I just found this on the internet, Teddy Roosevelt was also the first president to ride in the open in an automobile. And it's funny to see his secret service agents over here riding bicycles to keep up. | 20th Century Capitalism and Regulation in the United States.mp3 |
But even more interesting, Eleanor Roosevelt, who was Franklin Roosevelt's wife, was Teddy Roosevelt's niece. So there actually was a pretty close relationship between all of these Roosevelt's. And another interesting thing, I just found this on the internet, Teddy Roosevelt was also the first president to ride in the open in an automobile. And it's funny to see his secret service agents over here riding bicycles to keep up. Anyway, complete tangent. So you had, just to review where we are, end of 1800s, you have what some people have called, if they want to be insulting of these people, the robber barons, the people, they've concentrated a huge amount of wealth. Then the pendulum starts swinging back with Teddy Roosevelt, Franklin Roosevelt, and then Lyndon Johnson. | 20th Century Capitalism and Regulation in the United States.mp3 |
And it's funny to see his secret service agents over here riding bicycles to keep up. Anyway, complete tangent. So you had, just to review where we are, end of 1800s, you have what some people have called, if they want to be insulting of these people, the robber barons, the people, they've concentrated a huge amount of wealth. Then the pendulum starts swinging back with Teddy Roosevelt, Franklin Roosevelt, and then Lyndon Johnson. And then you fast forward, even through the 70s, you still have kind of a fairly heavy regulation of many industries in the US. Jimmy Carter, who's considered quite liberal, you have to give him, if you are anti-regulation, give him some credit. He actually deregulated the airline industry, and frankly that's why airline tickets are actually fairly inexpensive if you look at them on an inflation-adjusted basis. | 20th Century Capitalism and Regulation in the United States.mp3 |
Then the pendulum starts swinging back with Teddy Roosevelt, Franklin Roosevelt, and then Lyndon Johnson. And then you fast forward, even through the 70s, you still have kind of a fairly heavy regulation of many industries in the US. Jimmy Carter, who's considered quite liberal, you have to give him, if you are anti-regulation, give him some credit. He actually deregulated the airline industry, and frankly that's why airline tickets are actually fairly inexpensive if you look at them on an inflation-adjusted basis. But then the pendulum swings back again into less government, less regulation, under Ronald Reagan. So this is Ronald Reagan here, and he's kind of most known, amongst other things, I mean, some people think that he brought communism to the brink, but he also was big on less government. So from the story of the 1900s until then was kind of more and more regulation, more safety nets, more government, and then Ronald Reagan comes in less government, lower taxes, although he spent a ton on the military, and the military is government. | 20th Century Capitalism and Regulation in the United States.mp3 |
He actually deregulated the airline industry, and frankly that's why airline tickets are actually fairly inexpensive if you look at them on an inflation-adjusted basis. But then the pendulum swings back again into less government, less regulation, under Ronald Reagan. So this is Ronald Reagan here, and he's kind of most known, amongst other things, I mean, some people think that he brought communism to the brink, but he also was big on less government. So from the story of the 1900s until then was kind of more and more regulation, more safety nets, more government, and then Ronald Reagan comes in less government, lower taxes, although he spent a ton on the military, and the military is government. And what's interesting is that this period, during the 80s, you start having an economic boom. You could debate whether it was due to Ronald Reagan or it was maybe due to things that were completely out of his control. Maybe it was due to automation and information technology. | 20th Century Capitalism and Regulation in the United States.mp3 |
So from the story of the 1900s until then was kind of more and more regulation, more safety nets, more government, and then Ronald Reagan comes in less government, lower taxes, although he spent a ton on the military, and the military is government. And what's interesting is that this period, during the 80s, you start having an economic boom. You could debate whether it was due to Ronald Reagan or it was maybe due to things that were completely out of his control. Maybe it was due to automation and information technology. He starts becoming big, and he has nothing to do with that. But regardless to say, you do start having an economic boom in the 80s. And then the 90s, it starts to accelerate under Bill Clinton. | 20th Century Capitalism and Regulation in the United States.mp3 |
Maybe it was due to automation and information technology. He starts becoming big, and he has nothing to do with that. But regardless to say, you do start having an economic boom in the 80s. And then the 90s, it starts to accelerate under Bill Clinton. And the interesting thing you see is when things are good, the temptation for government to regulate goes down. And under Bill Clinton, who's a Democratic, considered liberal, you have welfare reform, which does undo a lot of, or I guess it takes a more conservative take on welfare. It makes it harder to have welfare for longer periods of time. | 20th Century Capitalism and Regulation in the United States.mp3 |
And then the 90s, it starts to accelerate under Bill Clinton. And the interesting thing you see is when things are good, the temptation for government to regulate goes down. And under Bill Clinton, who's a Democratic, considered liberal, you have welfare reform, which does undo a lot of, or I guess it takes a more conservative take on welfare. It makes it harder to have welfare for longer periods of time. And you also have the repeal of Glass-Steagall. So the repeal of Glass-Steagall. So even though Bill Clinton was considered liberal, I mean, maybe he would blame these things on having a Republican Congress who forced him into it or whatever else, the reality is it did happen under his administration, that kind of government stepping out of welfare a little bit and allowing to, or kind of a deregulation of banks, allowing for investment banking and commercial banking to start getting commingled again. | 20th Century Capitalism and Regulation in the United States.mp3 |
It makes it harder to have welfare for longer periods of time. And you also have the repeal of Glass-Steagall. So the repeal of Glass-Steagall. So even though Bill Clinton was considered liberal, I mean, maybe he would blame these things on having a Republican Congress who forced him into it or whatever else, the reality is it did happen under his administration, that kind of government stepping out of welfare a little bit and allowing to, or kind of a deregulation of banks, allowing for investment banking and commercial banking to start getting commingled again. And then you keep forwarding through the Bush administration once George W. Bush, I could put his dad in here in between, but actually he was forced to raise taxes. So you can't really include him in the conversation of less government, and he would claim that he was forced to do that because of Democrats. But all the way through all of these presidencies, while things were kind of on this upward march, you had this constant stream of deregulation. | 20th Century Capitalism and Regulation in the United States.mp3 |
So even though Bill Clinton was considered liberal, I mean, maybe he would blame these things on having a Republican Congress who forced him into it or whatever else, the reality is it did happen under his administration, that kind of government stepping out of welfare a little bit and allowing to, or kind of a deregulation of banks, allowing for investment banking and commercial banking to start getting commingled again. And then you keep forwarding through the Bush administration once George W. Bush, I could put his dad in here in between, but actually he was forced to raise taxes. So you can't really include him in the conversation of less government, and he would claim that he was forced to do that because of Democrats. But all the way through all of these presidencies, while things were kind of on this upward march, you had this constant stream of deregulation. And all the way until you get to 2008, and you have a major, major financial crisis. And who knows, now sitting in 2011, where that pendulum will swing back, but there is a sense that maybe all of this went too far. And probably the worst signs of this is this whole idea that emerged during the 2008 crisis of too big to fail. | 20th Century Capitalism and Regulation in the United States.mp3 |
But all the way through all of these presidencies, while things were kind of on this upward march, you had this constant stream of deregulation. And all the way until you get to 2008, and you have a major, major financial crisis. And who knows, now sitting in 2011, where that pendulum will swing back, but there is a sense that maybe all of this went too far. And probably the worst signs of this is this whole idea that emerged during the 2008 crisis of too big to fail. Too big to fail. Which is kind of the worst of capitalism and socialism. It's kind of like corporate welfare. | 20th Century Capitalism and Regulation in the United States.mp3 |
And probably the worst signs of this is this whole idea that emerged during the 2008 crisis of too big to fail. Too big to fail. Which is kind of the worst of capitalism and socialism. It's kind of like corporate welfare. It's like, not only are you not giving benefit to those who want to innovate or do well, you have these huge entities that control so much wealth, that control so much of the economy, and they get there by taking huge amounts of risk. And as soon as they do incompetent, stupid things that put all of us at risk, the government comes in to bail them out, because it's essentially they're holding the economy hostage. If the government does not bail these characters out, they might take the entire economy with them. | 20th Century Capitalism and Regulation in the United States.mp3 |
It's kind of like corporate welfare. It's like, not only are you not giving benefit to those who want to innovate or do well, you have these huge entities that control so much wealth, that control so much of the economy, and they get there by taking huge amounts of risk. And as soon as they do incompetent, stupid things that put all of us at risk, the government comes in to bail them out, because it's essentially they're holding the economy hostage. If the government does not bail these characters out, they might take the entire economy with them. My sense is that they tried to scare the government a little bit more to have the government believe that, so they do get bailed. But regardless, it does lead to a moment in time where society, or at least American society, really the world, has to question how much regulation is appropriate. How much control over the financial system should private institutions be allowed to have? | 20th Century Capitalism and Regulation in the United States.mp3 |
If the government does not bail these characters out, they might take the entire economy with them. My sense is that they tried to scare the government a little bit more to have the government believe that, so they do get bailed. But regardless, it does lead to a moment in time where society, or at least American society, really the world, has to question how much regulation is appropriate. How much control over the financial system should private institutions be allowed to have? And Fannie Mae is an interesting one, because once again, it's a government-sponsored institution that was pseudo-private. It was kind of the worst of both worlds. And once again, it's still being propped up by the government, and it's a major distortion. | 20th Century Capitalism and Regulation in the United States.mp3 |
How much control over the financial system should private institutions be allowed to have? And Fannie Mae is an interesting one, because once again, it's a government-sponsored institution that was pseudo-private. It was kind of the worst of both worlds. And once again, it's still being propped up by the government, and it's a major distortion. It's a major distortion in markets, but to some degree the government is afraid of letting it completely fall through now, because it would probably tank the economy to some degree. So anyway, hopefully you found that interesting. I just wanted to give you some perspective on the swinging of the pendulum between government regulation and more kind of capitalism without regulation that we've seen in the United States over roughly the last 100 or so years. | 20th Century Capitalism and Regulation in the United States.mp3 |
This was a particularly famous image that really kind of helped spark indignation in the North amongst abolitionists, because you can see how this person was beaten or whipped. Yes, absolutely. And so it's this kind of, you know, and today we all, it's like this morally reprehensible thing, but you go back not too far in the whole scope of history. We're going to the early 1800s, and you know, this was something that was debated. It was slavery was allowed in a large chunk of the United States. And in the last video, we talked about that this issue of slavery only got exacerbated the more territory that was added. You have the Louisiana Purchase in 1803 that adds all of this territory. | Increasing political battles over slavery in mid 1800s US History Khan Academy.mp3 |
We're going to the early 1800s, and you know, this was something that was debated. It was slavery was allowed in a large chunk of the United States. And in the last video, we talked about that this issue of slavery only got exacerbated the more territory that was added. You have the Louisiana Purchase in 1803 that adds all of this territory. You start having states getting carved. Once you get a critical population, a critical mass of people in a certain state, they can apply to be, or in a certain territory, they can apply to be a state. And as each of these states are added and they want to get representation, it's a political issue. | Increasing political battles over slavery in mid 1800s US History Khan Academy.mp3 |
You have the Louisiana Purchase in 1803 that adds all of this territory. You start having states getting carved. Once you get a critical population, a critical mass of people in a certain state, they can apply to be, or in a certain territory, they can apply to be a state. And as each of these states are added and they want to get representation, it's a political issue. You mentioned how, you know, the North, they didn't like it on moral grounds that if it was a slave state, and they also didn't like it on economic grounds because it's hard to compete economically with slavery, while the South was afraid of losing its political power if more free states were to join the Union. And you know, in Compromise of 1820, you mentioned that, well, that compromise, Missouri is a slave state, Maine gets carved out of Massachusetts, becomes a free state. But that didn't solve the problem. | Increasing political battles over slavery in mid 1800s US History Khan Academy.mp3 |
And as each of these states are added and they want to get representation, it's a political issue. You mentioned how, you know, the North, they didn't like it on moral grounds that if it was a slave state, and they also didn't like it on economic grounds because it's hard to compete economically with slavery, while the South was afraid of losing its political power if more free states were to join the Union. And you know, in Compromise of 1820, you mentioned that, well, that compromise, Missouri is a slave state, Maine gets carved out of Massachusetts, becomes a free state. But that didn't solve the problem. That problem only continues because we only add more territory. Yeah, I mean, most of the history of the 1800s, when it comes to slavery, is a history of putting off the problem, right? You know, Henry Clay becomes this very famous legislator because he's good at compromising. | Increasing political battles over slavery in mid 1800s US History Khan Academy.mp3 |
But that didn't solve the problem. That problem only continues because we only add more territory. Yeah, I mean, most of the history of the 1800s, when it comes to slavery, is a history of putting off the problem, right? You know, Henry Clay becomes this very famous legislator because he's good at compromising. He's called the Great Compromiser. So instead of trying to actually solve the issue of slavery, which many people think of as an unsolvable problem, they're just saying, all right, well, how can we put off the conflict over this a little bit longer? And they just keep doing that. | Increasing political battles over slavery in mid 1800s US History Khan Academy.mp3 |
You know, Henry Clay becomes this very famous legislator because he's good at compromising. He's called the Great Compromiser. So instead of trying to actually solve the issue of slavery, which many people think of as an unsolvable problem, they're just saying, all right, well, how can we put off the conflict over this a little bit longer? And they just keep doing that. You know, in 1836, the territory expands further, or it starts to, I guess, the expansion is catalyzed further by the Texas Revolution. Texas gets its independence from Mexico, which itself got independence only a few decades before that from Spain. But so Texas, for a brief amount of time, is its own independent country. | Increasing political battles over slavery in mid 1800s US History Khan Academy.mp3 |
And they just keep doing that. You know, in 1836, the territory expands further, or it starts to, I guess, the expansion is catalyzed further by the Texas Revolution. Texas gets its independence from Mexico, which itself got independence only a few decades before that from Spain. But so Texas, for a brief amount of time, is its own independent country. But then it joins the US. It's annexed by the US in 1845. So it's more territory for the US, and that was slave territory, Texas. | Increasing political battles over slavery in mid 1800s US History Khan Academy.mp3 |
But so Texas, for a brief amount of time, is its own independent country. But then it joins the US. It's annexed by the US in 1845. So it's more territory for the US, and that was slave territory, Texas. Right, yeah, so again, this is an area in the south where most of the reasons that slavery existed in the south is because it's a very fertile agricultural region, right? Where the things that you grow, crops, are very labor-intensive. So they figure, you know, how are we going to find enough people to grow these crops? | Increasing political battles over slavery in mid 1800s US History Khan Academy.mp3 |
So it's more territory for the US, and that was slave territory, Texas. Right, yeah, so again, this is an area in the south where most of the reasons that slavery existed in the south is because it's a very fertile agricultural region, right? Where the things that you grow, crops, are very labor-intensive. So they figure, you know, how are we going to find enough people to grow these crops? And the answer is that they've been importing African slaves and forcing them to work. And the annexation of Texas, there's border disputes with Mexico, which leads to even another conflict with Mexico, this time with the US and Mexico. This is the Mexican-American War from 1846 to 1848. | Increasing political battles over slavery in mid 1800s US History Khan Academy.mp3 |
So they figure, you know, how are we going to find enough people to grow these crops? And the answer is that they've been importing African slaves and forcing them to work. And the annexation of Texas, there's border disputes with Mexico, which leads to even another conflict with Mexico, this time with the US and Mexico. This is the Mexican-American War from 1846 to 1848. But in the context of this conversation, the reason why it helped bring the slavery issue even more to a head is that when the US wins it, it gets even more territory. It gets all of this area in the west right over here. Right, it's more territory and it's more sort of southern territory, which means that it has a high probability of becoming slave states. | Increasing political battles over slavery in mid 1800s US History Khan Academy.mp3 |
This is the Mexican-American War from 1846 to 1848. But in the context of this conversation, the reason why it helped bring the slavery issue even more to a head is that when the US wins it, it gets even more territory. It gets all of this area in the west right over here. Right, it's more territory and it's more sort of southern territory, which means that it has a high probability of becoming slave states. And so this map that we looked at earlier in the other video, this is kind of showing what the US looked like as we exit out of the Mexican-American War. We're getting to about 1850. And so what happens then? | Increasing political battles over slavery in mid 1800s US History Khan Academy.mp3 |
Right, it's more territory and it's more sort of southern territory, which means that it has a high probability of becoming slave states. And so this map that we looked at earlier in the other video, this is kind of showing what the US looked like as we exit out of the Mexican-American War. We're getting to about 1850. And so what happens then? I mean, is it just one compromise after another at this point? Well, this is the point where compromise begins to break down, right? Henry Clay, again, is the architect of what's called the Compromise of 1850. | Increasing political battles over slavery in mid 1800s US History Khan Academy.mp3 |
And so what happens then? I mean, is it just one compromise after another at this point? Well, this is the point where compromise begins to break down, right? Henry Clay, again, is the architect of what's called the Compromise of 1850. As soon as the US goes to war with Mexico, people in Congress are wondering, all right, if we get this territory that we're trying to get, what's going to happen? Are they going to be free states or slave states? And this compromise over free and slave states has been going on for 30 years since the Missouri Compromise, and even longer if you take it back to 1776. | Increasing political battles over slavery in mid 1800s US History Khan Academy.mp3 |
Henry Clay, again, is the architect of what's called the Compromise of 1850. As soon as the US goes to war with Mexico, people in Congress are wondering, all right, if we get this territory that we're trying to get, what's going to happen? Are they going to be free states or slave states? And this compromise over free and slave states has been going on for 30 years since the Missouri Compromise, and even longer if you take it back to 1776. So they're doing exactly the same thing. They're saying, all right, well, let's try to keep a balance of power between free states and slave states, except they add in a couple of provisos that make people really angry in the 1850s. And who gets angry? | Increasing political battles over slavery in mid 1800s US History Khan Academy.mp3 |
And this compromise over free and slave states has been going on for 30 years since the Missouri Compromise, and even longer if you take it back to 1776. So they're doing exactly the same thing. They're saying, all right, well, let's try to keep a balance of power between free states and slave states, except they add in a couple of provisos that make people really angry in the 1850s. And who gets angry? Both, I would say, slave owners and abolitionists and anti-slavery activists in the North. So I guess that's what makes it a compromise, a little bit of something to make everyone angry. And so what made the slave owners angry about the Compromise of 1850? | Increasing political battles over slavery in mid 1800s US History Khan Academy.mp3 |
And who gets angry? Both, I would say, slave owners and abolitionists and anti-slavery activists in the North. So I guess that's what makes it a compromise, a little bit of something to make everyone angry. And so what made the slave owners angry about the Compromise of 1850? One of the parts of the Compromise of 1850, apart from deciding whether these new territories were going to be slave or free, was a part of the act what's called the Fugitive Slave Act. And the Fugitive Slave Act said that it was a federal offense not to help slave owners recover. So this was something that would make the abolitionists angry or the anti-slavery angry. | Increasing political battles over slavery in mid 1800s US History Khan Academy.mp3 |
And so what made the slave owners angry about the Compromise of 1850? One of the parts of the Compromise of 1850, apart from deciding whether these new territories were going to be slave or free, was a part of the act what's called the Fugitive Slave Act. And the Fugitive Slave Act said that it was a federal offense not to help slave owners recover. So this was something that would make the abolitionists angry or the anti-slavery angry. Yeah, absolutely both. So, for example, if you're maybe living in Massachusetts, you're a white middle-class person living in Massachusetts, you don't think slavery is great. You think it's morally wrong, but it hasn't really directly affected your life, right? | Increasing political battles over slavery in mid 1800s US History Khan Academy.mp3 |
So this was something that would make the abolitionists angry or the anti-slavery angry. Yeah, absolutely both. So, for example, if you're maybe living in Massachusetts, you're a white middle-class person living in Massachusetts, you don't think slavery is great. You think it's morally wrong, but it hasn't really directly affected your life, right? You're hundreds of miles away from the nearest slave state. But now the federal government says that if there is a person who has escaped from slavery who has come to your town, it is a federal offense for you not to help return that person to slavery. So this Fugitive Slave, this is part of the Compromise, this is part of the Compromise of 1850, is that I could be sitting in Massachusetts, I could be anti-slavery, or I could even be ambivalent about it, but now I have to be complicit in it. | Increasing political battles over slavery in mid 1800s US History Khan Academy.mp3 |
You think it's morally wrong, but it hasn't really directly affected your life, right? You're hundreds of miles away from the nearest slave state. But now the federal government says that if there is a person who has escaped from slavery who has come to your town, it is a federal offense for you not to help return that person to slavery. So this Fugitive Slave, this is part of the Compromise, this is part of the Compromise of 1850, is that I could be sitting in Massachusetts, I could be anti-slavery, or I could even be ambivalent about it, but now I have to be complicit in it. If there's a slave I can't, or if there's someone who escapes from the South who was a former slave, I have to actively, I can't in any way help them. If I do, I could go to jail. If I'm a law officer, I have to capture that person and I have to bring them back. | Increasing political battles over slavery in mid 1800s US History Khan Academy.mp3 |
So this Fugitive Slave, this is part of the Compromise, this is part of the Compromise of 1850, is that I could be sitting in Massachusetts, I could be anti-slavery, or I could even be ambivalent about it, but now I have to be complicit in it. If there's a slave I can't, or if there's someone who escapes from the South who was a former slave, I have to actively, I can't in any way help them. If I do, I could go to jail. If I'm a law officer, I have to capture that person and I have to bring them back. So it's kind of forcing people who are already not happy about slavery, it's kind of bringing it close to them. They have to partake in it. Yeah, and these are people who have very strong religious convictions. | Increasing political battles over slavery in mid 1800s US History Khan Academy.mp3 |
If I'm a law officer, I have to capture that person and I have to bring them back. So it's kind of forcing people who are already not happy about slavery, it's kind of bringing it close to them. They have to partake in it. Yeah, and these are people who have very strong religious convictions. This is the mid-19th century is a time when people feel their religion very strongly, and so there are people in the North who are Quakers, who are otherwise religiously opposed to slavery, who have maybe prayed for the souls of slaves, but it's never been their job to try to keep someone in slavery before. So that is really infuriating. One of the things that you get out of this is a really strong backlash of abolitionist sentiment in the North. | Increasing political battles over slavery in mid 1800s US History Khan Academy.mp3 |
Yeah, and these are people who have very strong religious convictions. This is the mid-19th century is a time when people feel their religion very strongly, and so there are people in the North who are Quakers, who are otherwise religiously opposed to slavery, who have maybe prayed for the souls of slaves, but it's never been their job to try to keep someone in slavery before. So that is really infuriating. One of the things that you get out of this is a really strong backlash of abolitionist sentiment in the North. For example, Harriet Beecher Stowe, she's the daughter of a reverend who's against slavery. She writes the book Uncle Tom's Cabin, which becomes this smash hit of the book. And when was this, roughly? | Increasing political battles over slavery in mid 1800s US History Khan Academy.mp3 |
One of the things that you get out of this is a really strong backlash of abolitionist sentiment in the North. For example, Harriet Beecher Stowe, she's the daughter of a reverend who's against slavery. She writes the book Uncle Tom's Cabin, which becomes this smash hit of the book. And when was this, roughly? That was about 1852. Okay, so this is after the Compromise of 1850. So people are getting, it really is coming to a head. | Increasing political battles over slavery in mid 1800s US History Khan Academy.mp3 |
And when was this, roughly? That was about 1852. Okay, so this is after the Compromise of 1850. So people are getting, it really is coming to a head. The people in the North, they're having to partake in this because of the Fugitive Slave Act. You have Harriet Beecher Stowe writes Uncle Tom's Cabin. It makes people even more upset about the realities of slavery. | Increasing political battles over slavery in mid 1800s US History Khan Academy.mp3 |
So people are getting, it really is coming to a head. The people in the North, they're having to partake in this because of the Fugitive Slave Act. You have Harriet Beecher Stowe writes Uncle Tom's Cabin. It makes people even more upset about the realities of slavery. Right, and in the South, they've kind of gotten away, white slave owners in this time, with people saying, eh, slavery's not really my problem, I don't like it. But now they're seeing a concentrated attack, a moral and social attack against slavery in the North, and their response is to become even more violently in favor of slavery. They pose the idea that slavery is not just something that we could turn our eyes away from, but it's necessary, but it's a positive good. | Increasing political battles over slavery in mid 1800s US History Khan Academy.mp3 |
It makes people even more upset about the realities of slavery. Right, and in the South, they've kind of gotten away, white slave owners in this time, with people saying, eh, slavery's not really my problem, I don't like it. But now they're seeing a concentrated attack, a moral and social attack against slavery in the North, and their response is to become even more violently in favor of slavery. They pose the idea that slavery is not just something that we could turn our eyes away from, but it's necessary, but it's a positive good. Slavery is going to actually make the country better. If it weren't for slavery, all of these enslaved Africans, African Americans, their lives would be worse without us. And so, just to be clear on the Compromise of 1850, and there was a bunch of things, and we'll do a whole video on the Compromise of 1850, all of the different facets of it, but it's one of its, in terms of this conversation, one of its outcomes is because of the Fugitive Slave Law, it infuriated many of the anti-slavery abolitionists in the North. | Increasing political battles over slavery in mid 1800s US History Khan Academy.mp3 |
They pose the idea that slavery is not just something that we could turn our eyes away from, but it's necessary, but it's a positive good. Slavery is going to actually make the country better. If it weren't for slavery, all of these enslaved Africans, African Americans, their lives would be worse without us. And so, just to be clear on the Compromise of 1850, and there was a bunch of things, and we'll do a whole video on the Compromise of 1850, all of the different facets of it, but it's one of its, in terms of this conversation, one of its outcomes is because of the Fugitive Slave Law, it infuriated many of the anti-slavery abolitionists in the North. They became more entrenched in their positions, which made the Southerners more entrenched in their positions. The Southerners didn't necessarily, they liked the Fugitive Slave Law, the Southerners. So the Compromise of 1850, it sounds like, it was a compromise, not everyone was happy, but it sounds like it made the anti-slavery folks more unhappy than the slavery folks. | Increasing political battles over slavery in mid 1800s US History Khan Academy.mp3 |
And so, just to be clear on the Compromise of 1850, and there was a bunch of things, and we'll do a whole video on the Compromise of 1850, all of the different facets of it, but it's one of its, in terms of this conversation, one of its outcomes is because of the Fugitive Slave Law, it infuriated many of the anti-slavery abolitionists in the North. They became more entrenched in their positions, which made the Southerners more entrenched in their positions. The Southerners didn't necessarily, they liked the Fugitive Slave Law, the Southerners. So the Compromise of 1850, it sounds like, it was a compromise, not everyone was happy, but it sounds like it made the anti-slavery folks more unhappy than the slavery folks. Yeah, absolutely. So it makes the anti-slavery folks super unhappy, but it also means that now white slave owners in the South, they feel like there's a target on their heads, and so they're going to dig in even further to make sure that their interests in slavery are protected. And this gets us to the election of 1860, which I guess in some ways was the straw that breaks the camel's back, I guess from a Southern perspective, and why is that? | Increasing political battles over slavery in mid 1800s US History Khan Academy.mp3 |
So the Compromise of 1850, it sounds like, it was a compromise, not everyone was happy, but it sounds like it made the anti-slavery folks more unhappy than the slavery folks. Yeah, absolutely. So it makes the anti-slavery folks super unhappy, but it also means that now white slave owners in the South, they feel like there's a target on their heads, and so they're going to dig in even further to make sure that their interests in slavery are protected. And this gets us to the election of 1860, which I guess in some ways was the straw that breaks the camel's back, I guess from a Southern perspective, and why is that? Well, during the 1850s, you have all of these political battles over slavery. In fact, it kind of breaks the major political party of the 1850s, the Whig Party. So in 1860, some of these leftover Whigs, they reorganize as the Republican Party, and this is the first election with the Republican Party that we know today, but obviously in 1860, the things that they're interested in, their goals and aims are completely different. | Increasing political battles over slavery in mid 1800s US History Khan Academy.mp3 |
And this gets us to the election of 1860, which I guess in some ways was the straw that breaks the camel's back, I guess from a Southern perspective, and why is that? Well, during the 1850s, you have all of these political battles over slavery. In fact, it kind of breaks the major political party of the 1850s, the Whig Party. So in 1860, some of these leftover Whigs, they reorganize as the Republican Party, and this is the first election with the Republican Party that we know today, but obviously in 1860, the things that they're interested in, their goals and aims are completely different. And the Republican Party is an anti-slavery party. They're deliberately and publicly against slavery. So they nominate as their political candidate for 1860, Abraham Lincoln, who is well known in the country for having been an anti-slavery agitator. | Increasing political battles over slavery in mid 1800s US History Khan Academy.mp3 |
So in 1860, some of these leftover Whigs, they reorganize as the Republican Party, and this is the first election with the Republican Party that we know today, but obviously in 1860, the things that they're interested in, their goals and aims are completely different. And the Republican Party is an anti-slavery party. They're deliberately and publicly against slavery. So they nominate as their political candidate for 1860, Abraham Lincoln, who is well known in the country for having been an anti-slavery agitator. He's given many speeches where he's made very eloquent arguments against slavery. And he's, we talked about it in the previous interview, he's against it, I guess on moral grounds, but perhaps even more, his own father wasn't able to be a successful farmer because he had to compete with slave owners. Right, so he's brought up to hate slavery because it's a big business that has harmed his own family's economic future. | Increasing political battles over slavery in mid 1800s US History Khan Academy.mp3 |
So they nominate as their political candidate for 1860, Abraham Lincoln, who is well known in the country for having been an anti-slavery agitator. He's given many speeches where he's made very eloquent arguments against slavery. And he's, we talked about it in the previous interview, he's against it, I guess on moral grounds, but perhaps even more, his own father wasn't able to be a successful farmer because he had to compete with slave owners. Right, so he's brought up to hate slavery because it's a big business that has harmed his own family's economic future. But he comes, I think, to his own conclusion that slavery is morally wrong. What he doesn't think that he can do as president is legally or constitutionally get rid of slavery. He doesn't think that the Constitution allows it. | Increasing political battles over slavery in mid 1800s US History Khan Academy.mp3 |
Right, so he's brought up to hate slavery because it's a big business that has harmed his own family's economic future. But he comes, I think, to his own conclusion that slavery is morally wrong. What he doesn't think that he can do as president is legally or constitutionally get rid of slavery. He doesn't think that the Constitution allows it. But he is seen as enough of a threat by Southerners that in many cases, on the presidential ballots in 1860, you couldn't even vote for Abraham Lincoln if you wanted to. He didn't show up on the ballot in Southern states. Nonetheless, he still gets enough electoral votes that he's elected. | Increasing political battles over slavery in mid 1800s US History Khan Academy.mp3 |
This is Sal here, and I'm with Kim Cutts, who's Khan Academy's American History Content Fellow. And what I'm curious about is, you know, in school you learn about the Civil War, you learn about slavery, that slavery was a cause of the Civil War, but at least for myself, I never got a full context of what were all the dynamics that led to the Civil War? Is it just something that happened overnight? Oh, definitely not. You know, I think the seeds of the Civil War were really with the United States at its creation. You know, I think there's sort of an essential contradiction in the United States as it's born, you know, where this country, where all men are created equal, except that most of the states in the South have slavery, where people are clearly not created equal. So, you know, they couldn't win the Revolutionary War without including those states and kind of giving them what they wanted and retaining slavery, but it means that, you know, the U.S. is born with both free states and slave states, and they're gonna continue to try to figure out how to balance those for the rest of the 1800s. | Slavery and Missouri Compromise in early 1800s US History Khan Academy (2).mp3 |
Oh, definitely not. You know, I think the seeds of the Civil War were really with the United States at its creation. You know, I think there's sort of an essential contradiction in the United States as it's born, you know, where this country, where all men are created equal, except that most of the states in the South have slavery, where people are clearly not created equal. So, you know, they couldn't win the Revolutionary War without including those states and kind of giving them what they wanted and retaining slavery, but it means that, you know, the U.S. is born with both free states and slave states, and they're gonna continue to try to figure out how to balance those for the rest of the 1800s. And we have this map here, and this map is a later period, but it shows the, this is actually closer to the Civil War, but if we were even to look at the original 13 colonies, you can see which ones were free states and which ones were slave states, and then you obviously have these other states that come in later, which we'll talk about. But this, what you're saying is, the founding of the country, this was already an issue. People were, you know, there were people in the North who weren't fans of slavery, and people knew that at some point this would be an irreconcilable, or maybe they hoped it would be reconcilable, a difference, but they said, no, we gotta unify against Great Britain. | Slavery and Missouri Compromise in early 1800s US History Khan Academy (2).mp3 |
So, you know, they couldn't win the Revolutionary War without including those states and kind of giving them what they wanted and retaining slavery, but it means that, you know, the U.S. is born with both free states and slave states, and they're gonna continue to try to figure out how to balance those for the rest of the 1800s. And we have this map here, and this map is a later period, but it shows the, this is actually closer to the Civil War, but if we were even to look at the original 13 colonies, you can see which ones were free states and which ones were slave states, and then you obviously have these other states that come in later, which we'll talk about. But this, what you're saying is, the founding of the country, this was already an issue. People were, you know, there were people in the North who weren't fans of slavery, and people knew that at some point this would be an irreconcilable, or maybe they hoped it would be reconcilable, a difference, but they said, no, we gotta unify against Great Britain. And so they said, let's just become a country and do it. You know, even Thomas Jefferson, the author of the Declaration of Independence, he knew that slavery was a contradiction. He called the issue of having slavery like holding a wolf by the ears, right? | Slavery and Missouri Compromise in early 1800s US History Khan Academy (2).mp3 |
People were, you know, there were people in the North who weren't fans of slavery, and people knew that at some point this would be an irreconcilable, or maybe they hoped it would be reconcilable, a difference, but they said, no, we gotta unify against Great Britain. And so they said, let's just become a country and do it. You know, even Thomas Jefferson, the author of the Declaration of Independence, he knew that slavery was a contradiction. He called the issue of having slavery like holding a wolf by the ears, right? You can't hold onto it, but you can't let it go, because so many of the wealthy elites who are going to end up in Congress in the South are slave owners, so they wanna. Including himself. Exactly, so they wanna protect their interests. | Slavery and Missouri Compromise in early 1800s US History Khan Academy (2).mp3 |
He called the issue of having slavery like holding a wolf by the ears, right? You can't hold onto it, but you can't let it go, because so many of the wealthy elites who are going to end up in Congress in the South are slave owners, so they wanna. Including himself. Exactly, so they wanna protect their interests. So we have that, you know, the issue is there from the moment that the country is founded, and then we get into the 1800s, which is really the run-up. You know, the Civil War doesn't start until we get into 1860 or shortly thereafter. What, or actually 1860. | Slavery and Missouri Compromise in early 1800s US History Khan Academy (2).mp3 |
Exactly, so they wanna protect their interests. So we have that, you know, the issue is there from the moment that the country is founded, and then we get into the 1800s, which is really the run-up. You know, the Civil War doesn't start until we get into 1860 or shortly thereafter. What, or actually 1860. What is, you know, what are the, what's the big picture that really leads up to it? Well, I think what we're looking at when we get into the issues that lead to the Civil War is really about how the US handles getting new territory, right? And the US was getting a lot of new territory. | Slavery and Missouri Compromise in early 1800s US History Khan Academy (2).mp3 |
What, or actually 1860. What is, you know, what are the, what's the big picture that really leads up to it? Well, I think what we're looking at when we get into the issues that lead to the Civil War is really about how the US handles getting new territory, right? And the US was getting a lot of new territory. We have a map here. I guess the first really big chunk is you have the Louisiana Purchase in 1803. And so you get all of, let's see, let me shade it in. | Slavery and Missouri Compromise in early 1800s US History Khan Academy (2).mp3 |
And the US was getting a lot of new territory. We have a map here. I guess the first really big chunk is you have the Louisiana Purchase in 1803. And so you get all of, let's see, let me shade it in. You get, you know, roughly all of this stuff right over here. So that's new areas that settlers can go, and it becomes officially part of the US. And what else happens? | Slavery and Missouri Compromise in early 1800s US History Khan Academy (2).mp3 |
And so you get all of, let's see, let me shade it in. You get, you know, roughly all of this stuff right over here. So that's new areas that settlers can go, and it becomes officially part of the US. And what else happens? So, you know, as we get these new territories, out of them you're gonna get new states. And when new states come into the Union, they're going to come in as either free states or slave states. So, you know, we've balanced the interests of the North and South up until this point, right, from the Revolutionary War, so that there's equal representation in Congress between free states and slave states. | Slavery and Missouri Compromise in early 1800s US History Khan Academy (2).mp3 |
And what else happens? So, you know, as we get these new territories, out of them you're gonna get new states. And when new states come into the Union, they're going to come in as either free states or slave states. So, you know, we've balanced the interests of the North and South up until this point, right, from the Revolutionary War, so that there's equal representation in Congress between free states and slave states. Well, why does someone care? If I'm, you know, if I'm someone in Massachusetts, why do I care whether the new state of Missouri is going to be a free state or a slave state? Well, I think there are two reasons why you might care. | Slavery and Missouri Compromise in early 1800s US History Khan Academy (2).mp3 |
So, you know, we've balanced the interests of the North and South up until this point, right, from the Revolutionary War, so that there's equal representation in Congress between free states and slave states. Well, why does someone care? If I'm, you know, if I'm someone in Massachusetts, why do I care whether the new state of Missouri is going to be a free state or a slave state? Well, I think there are two reasons why you might care. First, you know, if you're an abolitionist, and these are the people who we know very well, like Frederick Douglass or William Lloyd Garrison, who was the editor of the newspaper, The Liberator, these are the people who feel that, correctly, slavery is morally wrong. You know, slavery is a corruption of the essential principles on which the country was founded. It's something that, you know, destroys lives, destroys families. | Slavery and Missouri Compromise in early 1800s US History Khan Academy (2).mp3 |
Well, I think there are two reasons why you might care. First, you know, if you're an abolitionist, and these are the people who we know very well, like Frederick Douglass or William Lloyd Garrison, who was the editor of the newspaper, The Liberator, these are the people who feel that, correctly, slavery is morally wrong. You know, slavery is a corruption of the essential principles on which the country was founded. It's something that, you know, destroys lives, destroys families. But another reason, if you're, say, in Massachusetts or Pennsylvania, why you might care whether a new state is a slave state is you're worried about opportunities for yourself out in the West. You know, we know that Horace Greeley, this famous newspaper editor, he says, now, what do you do if you're a young man in New York, a young white man who doesn't know how to get ahead? He says, go West, young man. | Slavery and Missouri Compromise in early 1800s US History Khan Academy (2).mp3 |
It's something that, you know, destroys lives, destroys families. But another reason, if you're, say, in Massachusetts or Pennsylvania, why you might care whether a new state is a slave state is you're worried about opportunities for yourself out in the West. You know, we know that Horace Greeley, this famous newspaper editor, he says, now, what do you do if you're a young man in New York, a young white man who doesn't know how to get ahead? He says, go West, young man. You know, you can go out there, you can get some land, you can start a farm, but if you go out there and you find that all of the land has been bought up by rich slaveholders from the South, you might not be able to get any land and you certainly might not be able to, for example, sell your corn at a rate low enough that you could beat somebody who has free labor. So there was a, you know, a lot of times, there's a lot of focus on the moral argument, which is a very strong argument. But there's also this interesting economic argument, which you just talked about, which is it's hard to compete with slavery. | Slavery and Missouri Compromise in early 1800s US History Khan Academy (2).mp3 |
He says, go West, young man. You know, you can go out there, you can get some land, you can start a farm, but if you go out there and you find that all of the land has been bought up by rich slaveholders from the South, you might not be able to get any land and you certainly might not be able to, for example, sell your corn at a rate low enough that you could beat somebody who has free labor. So there was a, you know, a lot of times, there's a lot of focus on the moral argument, which is a very strong argument. But there's also this interesting economic argument, which you just talked about, which is it's hard to compete with slavery. I mean, you're literally talking about labor that does not need traditional wages. That is literally slave labor. And so if you are having your own farm and you don't own slaves, how are you going to compete with that? | Slavery and Missouri Compromise in early 1800s US History Khan Academy (2).mp3 |
But there's also this interesting economic argument, which you just talked about, which is it's hard to compete with slavery. I mean, you're literally talking about labor that does not need traditional wages. That is literally slave labor. And so if you are having your own farm and you don't own slaves, how are you going to compete with that? And so that was the reason some folks in the North on economic argument. Now, would these people be considered abolitionists? No, the way that we think about those, we call them anti-slavery. | Slavery and Missouri Compromise in early 1800s US History Khan Academy (2).mp3 |
And so if you are having your own farm and you don't own slaves, how are you going to compete with that? And so that was the reason some folks in the North on economic argument. Now, would these people be considered abolitionists? No, the way that we think about those, we call them anti-slavery. So anti-slavery advocates, they don't think that they can get rid of slavery in the South, even if they don't like slavery in the South. They don't even see how it would be possible to get rid of it. But they do think that as these new states are coming into the Union, they could prevent them from becoming slave states so that it's possible for the Western lands to remain free. | Slavery and Missouri Compromise in early 1800s US History Khan Academy (2).mp3 |
No, the way that we think about those, we call them anti-slavery. So anti-slavery advocates, they don't think that they can get rid of slavery in the South, even if they don't like slavery in the South. They don't even see how it would be possible to get rid of it. But they do think that as these new states are coming into the Union, they could prevent them from becoming slave states so that it's possible for the Western lands to remain free. You know, Abraham Lincoln, I think, is a really good poster child for this. And I think we'll talk about him a little bit more later. But Lincoln is born in Kentucky, one of these new Western states. | Slavery and Missouri Compromise in early 1800s US History Khan Academy (2).mp3 |
But they do think that as these new states are coming into the Union, they could prevent them from becoming slave states so that it's possible for the Western lands to remain free. You know, Abraham Lincoln, I think, is a really good poster child for this. And I think we'll talk about him a little bit more later. But Lincoln is born in Kentucky, one of these new Western states. His father is a small white farmer. And slave owners move into Kentucky, later becomes a slave state, and his father can't find work. His father can't find land. | Slavery and Missouri Compromise in early 1800s US History Khan Academy (2).mp3 |
But Lincoln is born in Kentucky, one of these new Western states. His father is a small white farmer. And slave owners move into Kentucky, later becomes a slave state, and his father can't find work. His father can't find land. So he ends up first having to move to Indiana, then moving to Illinois. So this is literally a case of one of these poor white farmers who just can't compete with slavery, which is one reason why Lincoln himself is later gonna come out so strongly in favor of making sure there's no slavery in the West. So abolitionists want, slavery is amoral, it needs to be removed from definitely the United States, possibly the world. | Slavery and Missouri Compromise in early 1800s US History Khan Academy (2).mp3 |
His father can't find land. So he ends up first having to move to Indiana, then moving to Illinois. So this is literally a case of one of these poor white farmers who just can't compete with slavery, which is one reason why Lincoln himself is later gonna come out so strongly in favor of making sure there's no slavery in the West. So abolitionists want, slavery is amoral, it needs to be removed from definitely the United States, possibly the world. Yeah, absolutely. Anti-slavery, they also think slavery's bad, they don't like it. Right. | Slavery and Missouri Compromise in early 1800s US History Khan Academy (2).mp3 |
So abolitionists want, slavery is amoral, it needs to be removed from definitely the United States, possibly the world. Yeah, absolutely. Anti-slavery, they also think slavery's bad, they don't like it. Right. They think it's, well, but I'm not gonna fight that fight to remove it. Maybe that's hard to do or impossible. But it shouldn't spread, it's not fair, it's the reason my dad wasn't able to run his farm. | Slavery and Missouri Compromise in early 1800s US History Khan Academy (2).mp3 |
Right. They think it's, well, but I'm not gonna fight that fight to remove it. Maybe that's hard to do or impossible. But it shouldn't spread, it's not fair, it's the reason my dad wasn't able to run his farm. Absolutely. And so when we get it, so that's, you know, you have the Louisiana Purchase, and you know in other videos we talk, it's famously Napoleon sold it for quite cheap because frankly he couldn't defend it because he was fighting these wars in Europe. That's the first chunk of land, so you have all of these states, and they need to figure out whether they're slave states or free states. | Slavery and Missouri Compromise in early 1800s US History Khan Academy (2).mp3 |
But it shouldn't spread, it's not fair, it's the reason my dad wasn't able to run his farm. Absolutely. And so when we get it, so that's, you know, you have the Louisiana Purchase, and you know in other videos we talk, it's famously Napoleon sold it for quite cheap because frankly he couldn't defend it because he was fighting these wars in Europe. That's the first chunk of land, so you have all of these states, and they need to figure out whether they're slave states or free states. But why would, I mean, I talked about why would a northerner care whether a slave or a free state? Why would a southerner care? Why would, if I'm a slave owner, I own a plantation in South Carolina or Georgia, why do I care if Missouri is a slave state or a free state? | Slavery and Missouri Compromise in early 1800s US History Khan Academy (2).mp3 |
That's the first chunk of land, so you have all of these states, and they need to figure out whether they're slave states or free states. But why would, I mean, I talked about why would a northerner care whether a slave or a free state? Why would a southerner care? Why would, if I'm a slave owner, I own a plantation in South Carolina or Georgia, why do I care if Missouri is a slave state or a free state? Well, I think, you know, just as their political interests are tied up in slavery, all of their money is tied up in slavery. You know, in 1860, the most valuable thing that anyone owns in the United States is slaves, right? You can't compete with that kind of money. | Slavery and Missouri Compromise in early 1800s US History Khan Academy (2).mp3 |
Why would, if I'm a slave owner, I own a plantation in South Carolina or Georgia, why do I care if Missouri is a slave state or a free state? Well, I think, you know, just as their political interests are tied up in slavery, all of their money is tied up in slavery. You know, in 1860, the most valuable thing that anyone owns in the United States is slaves, right? You can't compete with that kind of money. So they wanna make sure that if a new state comes into the union, that state isn't a free state because then the free states might have more representation in Congress, and then they can vote to outlaw slavery. So if your whole fortune is built on slavery, if you're a white slave owner, they outlaw that, then you're left with nothing. I see. | Slavery and Missouri Compromise in early 1800s US History Khan Academy (2).mp3 |
You can't compete with that kind of money. So they wanna make sure that if a new state comes into the union, that state isn't a free state because then the free states might have more representation in Congress, and then they can vote to outlaw slavery. So if your whole fortune is built on slavery, if you're a white slave owner, they outlaw that, then you're left with nothing. I see. So in the North, there's the moral argument, there's the economic argument, slavery's hard to compete with and the South, hey, if we have too many of these free states at some point, they're gonna have a majority, you know, enough of a voting power in the government to maybe abolish slavery one day, which would completely undermine, if I'm a slave owner, my economics of my reality. Right, I mean, and they are sort of essentially amoral. Even, you know, someone like Jefferson, who knows that slavery is wrong, his whole wealth, his whole fortune, his whole political dynasty is built on the fortune of owning slaves. | Slavery and Missouri Compromise in early 1800s US History Khan Academy (2).mp3 |
I see. So in the North, there's the moral argument, there's the economic argument, slavery's hard to compete with and the South, hey, if we have too many of these free states at some point, they're gonna have a majority, you know, enough of a voting power in the government to maybe abolish slavery one day, which would completely undermine, if I'm a slave owner, my economics of my reality. Right, I mean, and they are sort of essentially amoral. Even, you know, someone like Jefferson, who knows that slavery is wrong, his whole wealth, his whole fortune, his whole political dynasty is built on the fortune of owning slaves. And, you know, one of the first points where this really gets balanced, this issue is, you know, we have the Louisiana Purchase in 1803, then starting to carve out the Louisiana Purchase, you have states like Missouri, they get to their critical mass of people, of population, so that they can become a state. And so what was the Missouri Compromise all about in 1820? So the Missouri Compromise is when, you know, we have enough people living in Missouri, you know, these are white people, generally coming, who have come from the eastern states, and they apply for statehood. | Slavery and Missouri Compromise in early 1800s US History Khan Academy (2).mp3 |
Even, you know, someone like Jefferson, who knows that slavery is wrong, his whole wealth, his whole fortune, his whole political dynasty is built on the fortune of owning slaves. And, you know, one of the first points where this really gets balanced, this issue is, you know, we have the Louisiana Purchase in 1803, then starting to carve out the Louisiana Purchase, you have states like Missouri, they get to their critical mass of people, of population, so that they can become a state. And so what was the Missouri Compromise all about in 1820? So the Missouri Compromise is when, you know, we have enough people living in Missouri, you know, these are white people, generally coming, who have come from the eastern states, and they apply for statehood. You've got an equal number of slave states and free states already in Congress. So if Missouri comes in and they wanna be a slave state, they're going to upset the apple cart, they're gonna upset the balance. So there'll be more representatives for the south than there will be for north. | Slavery and Missouri Compromise in early 1800s US History Khan Academy (2).mp3 |
So the Missouri Compromise is when, you know, we have enough people living in Missouri, you know, these are white people, generally coming, who have come from the eastern states, and they apply for statehood. You've got an equal number of slave states and free states already in Congress. So if Missouri comes in and they wanna be a slave state, they're going to upset the apple cart, they're gonna upset the balance. So there'll be more representatives for the south than there will be for north. And everything they've done so far has been predicated on this sort of tenuous balance between free states and slave states. So, you know, they debate this in Congress just for months. And eventually what they do is say, all right, well, we can't decide. | Slavery and Missouri Compromise in early 1800s US History Khan Academy (2).mp3 |
So there'll be more representatives for the south than there will be for north. And everything they've done so far has been predicated on this sort of tenuous balance between free states and slave states. So, you know, they debate this in Congress just for months. And eventually what they do is say, all right, well, we can't decide. So what we're going to do is admit the state of Maine at the same time. And admit it, I mean, Maine, the territory of Maine, was already part of the United States. I mean, how is it not already a state? | Slavery and Missouri Compromise in early 1800s US History Khan Academy (2).mp3 |
And eventually what they do is say, all right, well, we can't decide. So what we're going to do is admit the state of Maine at the same time. And admit it, I mean, Maine, the territory of Maine, was already part of the United States. I mean, how is it not already a state? It was part of Massachusetts, but as you can see, you know, it's really only tenuously connected to Massachusetts. So they divide this territory up so that it can have its own representation in Congress. So they say, all right, well, we can't solve this problem of the balance of power between free states and slave states right now. | Slavery and Missouri Compromise in early 1800s US History Khan Academy (2).mp3 |
I mean, how is it not already a state? It was part of Massachusetts, but as you can see, you know, it's really only tenuously connected to Massachusetts. So they divide this territory up so that it can have its own representation in Congress. So they say, all right, well, we can't solve this problem of the balance of power between free states and slave states right now. So what we're going to do is just kind of extend our balance. We're going to keep this compromise going to make sure that there are the same number of free and slave states. So we'll let Missouri in as a slave state at the same time we let Maine in as a free state. | Slavery and Missouri Compromise in early 1800s US History Khan Academy (2).mp3 |
So they say, all right, well, we can't solve this problem of the balance of power between free states and slave states right now. So what we're going to do is just kind of extend our balance. We're going to keep this compromise going to make sure that there are the same number of free and slave states. So we'll let Missouri in as a slave state at the same time we let Maine in as a free state. Fascinating. So I think, I mean, I see where this is going, that you have these very tenuous compromises while more and more territory is being added. It's exciting to see where all of this goes. | Slavery and Missouri Compromise in early 1800s US History Khan Academy (2).mp3 |
Now those property requirements had allowed free people of color and women to vote in some states, and when voting became associated with white male citizens, those little loopholes ended up getting closed. But this expansion of voting rights to all white male citizens really represents a shift in how the average American thought about who deserved to have a voice in the political process of the United States. They stopped placing so much value on this sort of aristocratic Republican citizenship of the early days of the United States, where someone like George Washington would never run for office, he would stand for office. You wouldn't promote yourself, that would be vulgar. Instead, you would have men of well-known character promote you. But by the 1820s, very few Americans believed in the idea that there could be such a thing as too much democracy, that you would have to avoid the mob rule. Instead, they wanted the mob rule, they wanted a great expansion of democracy, and that was, to them, the real character of the United States. | Jacksonian Democracy part 2 (2).mp3 |
You wouldn't promote yourself, that would be vulgar. Instead, you would have men of well-known character promote you. But by the 1820s, very few Americans believed in the idea that there could be such a thing as too much democracy, that you would have to avoid the mob rule. Instead, they wanted the mob rule, they wanted a great expansion of democracy, and that was, to them, the real character of the United States. Now I should also mention that this expansion of democracy was part of a larger international expansion of democracy. Similar laws that eliminated property restrictions on voting were also being passed in England and France at this time period, so there's kind of an international wave to broaden the franchise, but the extension of voting in Europe is nothing like the extension of voting in the United States. There are nearly twice as many eligible voters in the United States in the 1830s as there are in Britain, with a population that's half the size. | Jacksonian Democracy part 2 (2).mp3 |
Instead, they wanted the mob rule, they wanted a great expansion of democracy, and that was, to them, the real character of the United States. Now I should also mention that this expansion of democracy was part of a larger international expansion of democracy. Similar laws that eliminated property restrictions on voting were also being passed in England and France at this time period, so there's kind of an international wave to broaden the franchise, but the extension of voting in Europe is nothing like the extension of voting in the United States. There are nearly twice as many eligible voters in the United States in the 1830s as there are in Britain, with a population that's half the size. So while European nations are taking small steps toward expanding the franchise, the United States is taking huge steps in this time period. So the first election where we start to see the influence of this new wave of voters is in the election of 1824. And let me give us a little bit more space to talk about this. | Jacksonian Democracy part 2 (2).mp3 |
There are nearly twice as many eligible voters in the United States in the 1830s as there are in Britain, with a population that's half the size. So while European nations are taking small steps toward expanding the franchise, the United States is taking huge steps in this time period. So the first election where we start to see the influence of this new wave of voters is in the election of 1824. And let me give us a little bit more space to talk about this. So the election of 1824 was a contest between John Quincy Adams, son of American founder John Adams, Andrew Jackson, famous war hero from the War of 1812, the victor of the Battle of New Orleans, and Henry Clay, who would become known as the Great Compromiser for having pretty much spent his entire political career either running for president or putting together some kind of compromise. Now John Quincy Adams, I think, kind of epitomized the older school of American democracy. He was reticent to campaign on his own behalf. | Jacksonian Democracy part 2 (2).mp3 |
And let me give us a little bit more space to talk about this. So the election of 1824 was a contest between John Quincy Adams, son of American founder John Adams, Andrew Jackson, famous war hero from the War of 1812, the victor of the Battle of New Orleans, and Henry Clay, who would become known as the Great Compromiser for having pretty much spent his entire political career either running for president or putting together some kind of compromise. Now John Quincy Adams, I think, kind of epitomized the older school of American democracy. He was reticent to campaign on his own behalf. He was very interested in academics and internal improvements. He didn't really see himself as being part of a particular political party. In fact, all three of these men were actually running as Republicans, because in the era of good feelings, there's only the Republican Party. | Jacksonian Democracy part 2 (2).mp3 |
He was reticent to campaign on his own behalf. He was very interested in academics and internal improvements. He didn't really see himself as being part of a particular political party. In fact, all three of these men were actually running as Republicans, because in the era of good feelings, there's only the Republican Party. So you can see how confusing this might have been as a voter to have three different candidates from the same party, and they're supposed to be different than each other. So in this election, Andrew Jackson wins the popular vote, and John Quincy Adams wins the electoral vote, and Henry Clay wins neither. Now in a situation like this, who got to be president was decided by the House of Representatives. | Jacksonian Democracy part 2 (2).mp3 |
In fact, all three of these men were actually running as Republicans, because in the era of good feelings, there's only the Republican Party. So you can see how confusing this might have been as a voter to have three different candidates from the same party, and they're supposed to be different than each other. So in this election, Andrew Jackson wins the popular vote, and John Quincy Adams wins the electoral vote, and Henry Clay wins neither. Now in a situation like this, who got to be president was decided by the House of Representatives. Well, guess who was Speaker of the House? Henry Clay. So he's out of the running himself, but he is in a position to make quite an impact on who wins the presidency. | Jacksonian Democracy part 2 (2).mp3 |
Now in a situation like this, who got to be president was decided by the House of Representatives. Well, guess who was Speaker of the House? Henry Clay. So he's out of the running himself, but he is in a position to make quite an impact on who wins the presidency. Well, John Quincy Adams and Henry Clay didn't have a whole lot in common, but they sure both hated Andrew Jackson. So Clay and Adams meet, and Henry Clay says, yeah, John Q., I'll see if I can get the House to vote for you. And that's what happens. | Jacksonian Democracy part 2 (2).mp3 |
So he's out of the running himself, but he is in a position to make quite an impact on who wins the presidency. Well, John Quincy Adams and Henry Clay didn't have a whole lot in common, but they sure both hated Andrew Jackson. So Clay and Adams meet, and Henry Clay says, yeah, John Q., I'll see if I can get the House to vote for you. And that's what happens. So the House elects John Quincy Adams president, and then just a couple days later, John Quincy Adams says that Henry Clay will get to be his Secretary of State, which was quite a plum of a political position. And Andrew Jackson and his supporters go ballistic. They say that this was a corrupt bargain behind closed doors in which John Quincy Adams bribed Henry Clay to give him the presidency in exchange for this political position. | Jacksonian Democracy part 2 (2).mp3 |
And that's what happens. So the House elects John Quincy Adams president, and then just a couple days later, John Quincy Adams says that Henry Clay will get to be his Secretary of State, which was quite a plum of a political position. And Andrew Jackson and his supporters go ballistic. They say that this was a corrupt bargain behind closed doors in which John Quincy Adams bribed Henry Clay to give him the presidency in exchange for this political position. Now, there's no evidence that this actual corrupt bargain really happened, but even if it did, it was totally in line with the earlier playbook of American democracy, a you scratch my back, I'll scratch yours kind of situation where the better sort of men, the higher men of character, made a deal between themselves of who would lead this nation. And the outrage over this possible collusion between Adams and Clay really signaled that the old days of a couple of people making decisions about American politics were over, that this kind of deal between statesmen was now seen as undemocratic or crooked or something that was done behind closed doors and that was against the American character. And Andrew Jackson is really going to ride his wave of popular discontent over someone winning the popular vote but losing the electoral vote due to, in his mind, a corrupt bargain right into the presidency in the election of 1828. | Jacksonian Democracy part 2 (2).mp3 |
Hey, David. So, let's talk about the lost colony at Roanoke. So, this is something I've been learning a lot about lately and I think is really interesting. You know, we often think about this just in terms of the spookiness of there's this colony and it disappeared and we still don't know what happened to it. But actually, I think it has a lot to say about the process of colonization in the New World and the many political and weather and economic factors that went into making a colony successful or not successful. So, set this up for me. What is going on during the period of this early settlement of what they called Virginia but actually turned out to be where, Kim? | The Lost Colony of Roanoke - background and first attempts.mp3 |
You know, we often think about this just in terms of the spookiness of there's this colony and it disappeared and we still don't know what happened to it. But actually, I think it has a lot to say about the process of colonization in the New World and the many political and weather and economic factors that went into making a colony successful or not successful. So, set this up for me. What is going on during the period of this early settlement of what they called Virginia but actually turned out to be where, Kim? North Carolina. So, this is on the Outer Banks and it's today still Roanoke Island, but one of the sort of barrier islands off the coast of North Carolina. So, great place to put a ship? | The Lost Colony of Roanoke - background and first attempts.mp3 |
What is going on during the period of this early settlement of what they called Virginia but actually turned out to be where, Kim? North Carolina. So, this is on the Outer Banks and it's today still Roanoke Island, but one of the sort of barrier islands off the coast of North Carolina. So, great place to put a ship? Actually, what they call this area is the Graveyard of the Atlantic. So, I'm hearing not so much. Right, so this is an area where there are a lot of shoals, lots of ships run aground there. | The Lost Colony of Roanoke - background and first attempts.mp3 |