ktmeng/mec huggingface dataset:
Topic: civil-war

However, these wins did not translate into any military advancement. The Confederate would win many battles, especially in the first year, but they would be no nearer to winning the war. The Union however, were better prepared at winning and advancing in the sea and in the west. As it was the north that were trying to conquer the south and force them back to the Union, it meant that it took more for them to be victorious. The Confederates did not attempt as many invasions as the south. This left them to mainly be defending their territory. Whereas the Union had to win the battle and keep control of their win. So, although the Union had the power in the sea as an advantage and were fairly efficient at advancing forward, it did take time for them to achieve its goals.
Topic: civil-war

Jefferson did not present his candidacy for a third presidential period, but he helped elect the Democratic-Republican candidate from Virginia, James Madison, as president in 1808. Madison was the 4th president who also presided for two periods, from 1809 to 1817. During these years he had to confront serious problems. The worst of them was the continuous confrontations with Great Britain. Neither English nor French were in disposition to cede to American petitions. The United States wanted to have control over fur trade and other riches.
Topic: civil-war

The strongest opposition of was for the federalists took place in the reunion or Hartford convection in May of 1814. Here, Federalists attacked the war. Also, they proposed a series of amendments to the constitution, which limited the power of the congress and the president. To many citizens, this action was seen as disloyal. Once the war was over, they severely criticized the Federalists. As a result of this, the Federalists lost the election of 1816 by a great amount. This failure placed an end to the Federalist Party as the nation’s political power. After this they never presented a candidate to the presidency and soon the party had completely faded.
Topic: civil-war

The following years after the war were marked by a feeling of nationalism, a feeling of pride and national unity. The strong loyalty that Americans had felt towards the other states was being replaced for a loyalty toward the whole nation. The fall of the Federalists contributed to this spirit of nationalism. National pride helped Americans to unite to the Democratic-Republican Party. This party had taken many ideas from the Federalists, taken and claimed as theirs. This party reconstructed the army and constructed plans for the creation of roads and canals. Also, high tariffs and establishment of a second National Bank.
Topic: civil-war

Democratic-Republicans with James Monroe as president controlled the Federal Government from 1817 to 1825. There was no other political party that opposed them. Since this political party remained free from arguments, this period was called the “Era of good feelings”. The United States’ economy started to grow rapidly after the War of 1812. Industry and agriculture extended. Commerce prospered. A new swell of people went to the west where they were offered more land. This economic expansion contributed to the growth of the nationalism feeling.
Topic: civil-war

However, this new economic growth also created conflicts. The northeast, the south and the west prospered, but each for different reasons. In the North, economy was based on manufacture. In the West states, between the Appalachian and the Mississippi, economy was based on agriculture. The south was also based on agriculture, but the following years of after the war, there was a rapid growth in the importance of one of the products: cotton. Underneath this surface of the “Era of good feelings” there was a serious problem: regionalism or also known as sectionalism. The habitants of these three great regions started to place their interests over the nation’s interests. This fight between this different economic systems and way of life continued for 40 more years. In the end it brought the Civil War to the United States.
Topic: civil-war

Although the United states did expressed Nationalism in some ways, all this was forgotten when the country stated to divided it self into different sections with different believes. One of the great differences between these sections was tariffs. Hohn Randolph of congress said in 1816, “With my goodwill, sir, no one interest agriculturists bear the whole brunt of the was and taxation, and remain poor, while the others run in the ring of pleasure, and fatten upon them” (Document A). What he tried to say is that the high tariffs were unfair to many people. Other only wanted the best for them with out thinking of the rest of the population.
Topic: civil-war

Also, John C. Calhoun, also from the congress expressed himself in 1817 saying, “Let it not be forgotten, let it be forever kept in mind, that the extent of the republic exposes us to the greatest of calamities – disunion” (Document B). By saying this, he means that the Republic exposes them to the greatest calamity, which is disunion. To this people disunion is one of the worst thing that could happen to the US since during this time it was supposed to be a time were everybody though about the whole nation as one. This time was supposed to be a time were the US government and people thought about doing the right thing thinking only for the benefit of the country, but Calhoun demonstrates that this is only a lie that the US though of to cover this “great calamity”.
Topic: civil-war

The US was divided in three parts, the South, the West and the Northeast. More of the population living in the United States lived in the North (Document E). This was because people could find a better opportunity without high tariffs and with less problems of slavery. Slavery was a big issue during this time. Jefferson wrote to John Randolph in April 22 of 1820: “A geographical line, coinciding with a marked principle, moral and political, once conceived and held upon to the angry passions of men, will never be obliterated; and every new irritation will mark it deeper and deeper” (Document F). In other words, Jefferson admits that the country is separated and being divided by a “geographical line”. This was due to slavery believes, moral and political issues.
Topic: civil-war

As I mention before, slavery was one of the principle facts that led the Nation to divide. Probably, it was the biggest issues that cause the effect of sectionalism between the nation. This not only affected the slaves and slave owners but also the rest of the population. Anna Hayes in South Carolina wrote to her cousin in North Carolina. “I suppose that by this time you are anxious to hear more about the unhappy business” (Document G). She refers to this slavery as “the unhappy business” because it has cause controversy between all. Also, as I mention before due to these great differences the nation became separated. The government had much responsibility of this (Document I).
Topic: civil-war

Because of the climates and geography in these two regions, they developed different economies. Economy in the North was based on many different industries such as shipping, textile, and mining. Because of coal and waterpower, manufacturing in the North developed quickly. Unlike the North’s, the South’s economy was based on agriculture. Crops such as cotton and tobacco made huge profits. Southern farmers had to use large amounts of slave labor for their plantations, so slavery was necessary to the prosperity of the Southern economy.
Topic: civil-war

Northerners and Southerners developed individual cultures. Cities had an important role in determining the North’s culture. New businesses brought new ideas to the North. The Northern emphasis on public education led to many schools and churches. The life in the South was really different than the North’s. The South’s agricultural system was controlled by wealthy planters who lived like the country gentlemen of England. The South had few schools or churches. Rich planters would usually hire private tutors to teach their children until they were sent to private schools.
Topic: civil-war

Wendell Phillips’s speech delivered in 1861 near the beginning of the Civil War claims that African Americans ought to be given the right to serve in the military, for different contemporary generals were not of a European background yet brought America prominent success that significantly affected the course of American history. Although African Americans in the past were subjugated by the Americans on a regular basis, a couple of excellent triumphes by African descendant generals clearly proved that African Americans need to be, in truth, enabled to serve in the military as the rightful soldiers of America.
Topic: civil-war

Because of Phillips’s usage of hyperbole to overemphasize the credibility of each nationwide hero, the audience expects to hear the exact same type of appraisal for the African American hero, basic Toussaint Louverture; however, in following part of the passage, Phillips explains him as a male who was degraded by the scanty traces of composed pieces that plainly represented Briton and French belittlement and abhorrence– a noticeably contrasting illustration.
Topic: civil-war

By presenting two distinct ways of depicting the national heroes, Phillips reprimands the American views towards African American success; whereas the French and American heroes earned the prestigious titles through their work, Louverture was rather degraded as a negro and a slave who was fortunate in the battles. Phillips’s use of hyperbole appeals to the audience’s logos, because the readers are compelled to believe that American’s disapproval of African American military enlistment is unreasonable, since even men like Louverture was barred from the honor he should have received simply because of his status as a negro and a slave.
Topic: civil-war

The English Civil War took place in 1642 when Charles I raised his royal standard in Nottingham. The split between Charles and Parliament was such that neither side was willing to back down over the principles that they held and war was inevitable as a way in which all problems could be solved. The country split into those who supported the king and those who supported Parliament. Some historians say that Charles is totally to blame for this war, while some say that parliament is totally to blame for it.
Topic: civil-war

This made him very unpopular. Another reason for why the king was to blame was the way he had handled with religion. As he was the king, he had thought that he had the power to make the Scots use English prayer books. The scots were so furious that they decided to fight Charles I instead. This also made him unpopular to the scots as well as the people of England. When the scots had defeated him Charles had to pay lots of tax money which he couldn’t afford. So, Charles had to recall parliament, as only tax voted by parliament got rid of the scots.
Topic: civil-war

Charles believed in divine rights that God had chosen him to be king so he and Archbishop Laud started to decorate the church which he said that if the church is decorated, you will be closer to God. He also married a catholic princess from France which was very unpopular. Oliver Cromwell and Parliament still wanted more power and no return to the Catholic religion. To make things worse for Charles the Catholics in Ireland killed 100,000 Protestants. Also another reason why parliament is to blame is because the king and parliament always used to argue about who controls the army and parliament made the king angry by taking over them without his permission.
Topic: civil-war

Constructivism is a normative global relations theory that looks for to understand the value of society’s actions and theorize its meaning (Adler, 1997, pp. 319-320). According to constructivism, any actor can have xan company in international relations such as states, institutions and individuals and is different to realism and liberalism where instead of the presumption that states are self-centered and logical, it accepts that these actor’s interests and rationality are socially built and are constitutive of and by its identity (Bozdaglioglu, 2007, pp.
Topic: civil-war

Constructivism is the finest theory for comprehending the occasions in Syria because it reveals how social identities and an actors’ interests and preferences are socially constructed and can prompt conflict. Due to the numerous groups motivated in this conflict numerous social identities exist which are incompatible. Ultimately, the Syrian Civil War is an identity dispute with each identity including their own beliefs that each discover special. As identities and interests are constitutive, the interests of a group function as a propellant for social action (Bozdaglioglu, 2007, pp. 131-132). For that reason these constructed interests motivate the social identities of the groups and require to be redefined in order for trust to be developed. A social identity can be defined as a socially built set of meanings that one credits to oneself (Bozdaglioglu, 2007, p. 132). It is developed predominately through the political options and the actor’s interactions, assumptions, analysis and cumulative meanings and serves a core function in the Syrian dispute (Adler, 1997, p. 324).
Topic: civil-war

The presence of multiple different social identities with numerous beliefs in the Syrian conflict is incompatible and result in societal ‘friction’. Al-Assad’s regime does not represent the general public, in the sense that it favours the Shia minority and suppresses all other identities (Vallely, 2014). This is a conflict of cultural identity where all groups hold different interests in which each find exclusive. Constructivism is the only theory in which acknowledges this identity crisis between the parties involved in the Syrian civil war. Trust and peace need to be fortified and in order to do so a common identity needs to be worked towards and founded by all reasonable parties. As President Barack Obama states in relation to Syria: “Peace can be achieved by allowing opposing parties to freely express and discuss their respective opinions which would ideally result in peaceful resolutions based on views held in common by these parties” (Obama, 2013) To do so, the structure of norms in which develops behaviour and interests must be deconstructed and changed (Checkel, 1998, p. 328).
Topic: civil-war

An actor’s behaviour is complex to understand as identities are not fixed and known, and therefore it cannot be deduced from the character that is assumed a state represents (Palan, 2004, p. 14). Looking through a constructivist lens, norms are collective understandings that motivate actors and therefore effect the identity and interest (Checkel, 1998, pp. 327-328). A dominant conflict in which sparked and fuels the Syrian civil war is that of the sectarian tension between the Sunni and Shia branches of Islam (Hinnebusch, 2008, pp. 263-265). Deeply embedded in the Syrian civil war is that of a religious uproar between sects (Vallely, 2014). The uprising in Syria consists of sectarian religious overtones in which resulted in a domestic clash between Shia and Sunni sects. With a government predominately Shia and 75% of the population Sunni (United States Central Intelligence Agency, 2014) a domestic clash between Shia government and Sunni population must be resolved in order for a common identity of the state to be formed and trust established.
Topic: civil-war

The al-Assad regime’s Shia representation clashes with the general Sunni public and in order for this struggle to be resolved, an impartial and independent government identity must be formed. Constructivism is the only theory in which recognises these relations and its authoritative role in the civil war. It shows how the Sunni-Shia relations are an important sector of the social structure of Syria in which the actions of actors with certain identities and interests are possible (Wendt, 1995). Constructivism distinguishes two core assumptions of realism and liberalism in which allow for a more advanced understanding of the social structure of Syria. Firstly, that institutions and structures only inhibit behaviour of states with fixed interests and secondly, that the identity of a state is perceived only through physical capabilities (Checkel, 1998). Relaxing these assumptions allows social structures to become important and allows the formation of identities and interests to be defined by more than just behavioural constraints (Checkel, 1998).
Topic: civil-war

This is exemplified by the role religious institutions have in the Syria. As the Shia minority came into power, the protests become stronger and the demonstrations from the Sunni population are seen by the al-Assad regime as terroristic. This lead to a redefining of the parties’ identities, conclusively leading to each side identifying the other as terrorists or criminal gangs. The identity and interests of the state are therefore constitutive of and by the other parties and not only through physical capabilities. Social structures such as norms and culture, have a profound effect on agents, being characteristic of each parties’ identities and therefore interests (Checkel, 1998).
Topic: civil-war

In conclusion, constructivism is the best theory to explain what is happening in Syria. By analysing the central determinants of state behaviour, identity and interests, the current dissatisfaction of the status quo can be deconstructed and changed to form one common identity. Only social interaction and meaningful dialogue can guide the agents in identifying interests that is shared by the general public. Only when one common identity is defined, will trust and peace, as well as domestic, social and legal norms be established.
Topic: civil-war

Adler, E. (1997). Seizing the Middle Ground: Constructivism in World Politics. European Journal of Internation Relations, 3(3), 319 – 363. Bozdaglioglu, Y. (2007). Constructivism and Identity Formation: An Interactive Approach. Uluslararasi Hukuk ve Politika, 3(11), 121-144. Checkel, J. T. (1998). The Constructivist Turn in International Relations Theory. World Politics, 50, 324-348. Hinnebusch, R. (2008). Modern Syria Politics. History Compass, 6(1), 263-285. Obama, B. (2013). U.N General Assembly Speech. United Nations. New York: United Nations General Assembly. Palan, R. (2004). Constructivism and Globalisation: From Units to Encounters in International Affairs. Cambridge Review of International Affairs, 17(1), 11-23. Risse-Kappen, T. (1995). Democratic Peace – Warlike Democracies? A
Topic: civil-war

In 1861, when the Civil War broke out, the Confederacy and the Union both had numerous advantages and disadvantages and there were multiple women and slaves that contributed to the war. To begin with, the Confederacy had its significant advantages that helped it push through the war, one of which was its strong leaders. Many believed “Stonewall” Jackson and Robert E. Lee were some of the best officers even before the war. Also, they had the advantage of fighting on their own soil.
Topic: civil-war

The Confederacy also had minimal factory production and industry. At the beginning of the war, the Confederacy had only one-ninth the industrial capacity of the Union. But that statistic was misleading. In 1860, the North manufactured 97 percent of the country’s firearms, 96 percent of its railroad locomotives, 94 percent of its cloth, 93 percent of its pig iron, and over 90 percent of its boots and shoes. There was not even one rifleworks in the entire South.
Topic: civil-war

Due to the large amounts of manufacturing businesses and the railroad system to move the products, the Union, unlike the Confederacy, could produce and ship weapons, clothing, and food at a much more efficient rate than their counterparts. Also, because they were a newly founded “sovereign state”, the Confederacy did not have a professional, organized standing army and navy. The army and navy of the Federal United States were already organized and ready for war. Since, The Union had a naval advantage and the confederacy had Long Coastlines that were hard to defend,the union could block the Confederate’s ports for supplies. Furthermore, the economy of the Confederacy was destroyed by the Union.
Topic: civil-war

Second, the Union also had its many advantages as well as some disadvantages. One of the North’s significant advantages in fighting the war was that the industrial, urbanized Northern states held a significant edge in the population and manpower. The North had over twenty-two million people whereas the South had just over nine million (three and a half million of whom were blacks). Additionally, the Union had already an more experienced government since it was around for some years, when on the contrary, the Confederate government was fresh and new. Also, as mentioned before the Union was far more industrialized with its vast networks of factories, railroads, and ships which exceed any amount of industrialization in the south.
Topic: civil-war

This aspect gave the Union of being able to transport supplies and equipment faster and finance the war much better than the Confederacy. Finally, as it was also mentioned previously, the Union did have a large navy that allowed them to block major southern ports. During the horrible four years of the Civil War, women who did not own property, did not have the right to vote, or did not have many civil liberties came together in support of the war efforts. Women were so eager to help that they hid their identity by dressing as men, taking up masculine names, and took up arms of their own. They cared for sick and dying soldiers, risked their lives to gather information as spies, cooked, cleaned and care for children. The tenacity and love with which these women served their country was astounding, and yet often overlooked.
Topic: civil-war

About 3,000 women served as Union army nurses. Dorthea Dix was one women who was acknowledged for being the Nation’s first superintendent of women nurses. Clara Barton was recognized for being the first women to work in the U.S. Patent Office and was given the name “Angel of the Battlefield.” Sally Tompkins was a Confederate army nurse commissioned as captain because she performed her hospital duties so heroically. Finally, Belle Boyd was honored for being a brave Confederate nurse and spy.
Topic: civil-war

Soon other regiments were being formed, and in May 1863 the War Department established the Bureau of Colored Troops. Black recruiters, many of them abolitionists such as Frederick Douglass, Henry Highland Garnet, and Mary Ann Shadd Cary, brought in troops from throughout the North. Douglass proclaimed, “I urge you to fly to arms and smite with death the power that would bury the government and your liberty in the same hopeless grave.”
Topic: civil-war

Others, such as Harriet Tubman, recruited in the South. On March 6, 1863, the Secretary of War was informed that “seven hundred and fifty blacks who were waiting for an opportunity to join the Union Army had been rescued from slavery under the leadership of Harriet Ross Tubman….” By the end of the war more than 186,000 black soldiers had joined the Union army; 93,000 from the Confederate states, 40,000 from the border slave states, and 53,000 from the free states.
Topic: civil-war

They participated in about 500 Civil War battles and skirmishes. Although they were treated unequally they continued to volunteer. For example, white privates in the Union army were paid $13 monthly with and extra $3.50 clothes allowance, while black privates in the Union were only paid $10 monthly WITHOUT an extra clothes allowance. It wasn’t until 1864 that Congress equalized the pay for the black and white soldiers. Also, the mortality rate of blacks were higher than that of whites due to the fact that they were assigned to labor duty in the germ-ridden garrisons where they were likely to ctach typhoid, pneumonia, malaria, or other diseases.
Topic: civil-war

Therefore the federal government has no right to abolish slavery in every state against their will. But then again the federal government has to maintain the authority so they can overrule the state laws, so they can make sure that everyone is treated equally. As the historians Sean Wilentz and John Ashworth describe, the North’s commitment to capitalism and modernisation it was the context for abolitionism and for the free labour ideology of Abrahams Lincoln’s Republican Party. And the South’s commitment to essential production of goods and slave labour was reflected in the region0s distinctive cult of honour, and its defence of social inequality.
Topic: civil-war

There was a lot of tension between the North and South and this emphasised the separation of the nation’s political parties. The two major parties within the nation, the Whigs and Democrats started to disagree with each other and slowly started to divide. The northerners favoured the Whigs, who became the Republicans. The Republicans were anti-slavery, and they really wanted to focus on education and industrialising the nation. However, the southerners disliked the Republican Party and saw it as a “divisive element and one that could lead to conflict.”
Topic: civil-war

As soon as Abraham Lincoln became president, South Carolina seceded. This showed that the state didn’t feel part of the Union because it believed that the president was going to want to abolish slavery and South Carolina was reliant on slavery. So, because they seceded more states after them, Mississippi, Florida, Alabama, Georgia, Louisiana, Texas, Virginia, Arkansas, North Carolina and Tennessee. Already before the war it was clear that the United States were dividing into the North and South. Historian Arthur Cole wrote, ” Lincoln was pictured in many quarters not only as a black Republican but as an Abolitionist, a fanatic of the John Brown type.” Fundamentally, this means that the South saw Lincoln as a “black Republican” who is definitely going to break up the Union, and so this is what it led to, the secession of 11 states. The southerners believed that Lincoln was an Abolitionist because of the John Brown raid, who was from the North. He was against slavery, and was extremely violent compared to the other Abolitionists. Him and 18 other men attempted to raid the government armoury at Harper’s Ferry. He was captured and hung. This just shows the hatred that there was towards the northerners, and that because of this, it helped build up the tension between the North and South and then lead to the secession of the southern states. As the historian Walter Edgar says, that when Lincoln did come to power, it was a shock for the southerners, and that they because of this the nation began dividing and causing war.
Topic: civil-war

Although some people do believe that it was the main cause of the civil war. However, it had not been, because before the civil war broke out, some events occurred that led to the civil war. All the events that happened before built tension with the nation which made it extremely hard for everyone to work together and sort the problems out. When Fort Sumter was attacked, there were strikes within the South so that the commander that was stationed at Sumter would surrender. And so troops were sent down to sort things out and causing the civil war to begin. In order for the civil war to break out all the North and South needed was that last straw to be pulled. Some historians suggest that the North and South deprecated war, and that either the South or the North would cause the war or accept it. Additionally, because the states seceded, they created their own Union, which intensified the situation because Abraham Lincoln wanted to maintain the Union and keep all the states in one whole nation so they could work together and have a strong economy.
Topic: civil-war

Overall, most historians suggest that slavery was a cause for the civil war, but it is clear that it was not the main cause, even though it all fell back on slavery, for example the economic differences, the South relied heavily on slavery. Also the issue of slavery was important, because the South feared that Abraham Lincoln was going to abolish slavery, so that is why they seceded as he did not appeal to the southerners. In addition, the state governments believed that they had the right to decide whether to abolish slavery or not within their state. This was because they depended on slavery and it was their way of life, and it was clear that it was not up to the federal government to abolish it. It was also due to the fact that the Tenth Amendment stated that the states have the power to make new laws in the Constitution as they wish. According to Dubois, the civil war was not only a war of the economic systems of the North and South but also a war of ideas and ideologies.
Topic: civil-war

Among all the historical events that have taken place in the history of the United States, the civil is ranked as the most important. From the day when the first gun shot was fired at Fort Sumter in 1861, the civil war changed the history of the United States forever. A lot of books have been written on this important topic with different authors giving different opinions (Guelzo, 2012). Based on this, there has never been consensus among Americans on whether the civil war was inevitable or not.
Topic: civil-war

For a long time, the main economic activity in the southern states was agriculture. The demand for increased cotton production came in1793 after when Eli Whitney discovered the first mechanical gin. Although there were slaves in the united even before the eruption of the civil war, the number of slaves in the country grew by large proportions after the gin was discovered. On their part, the northern states were not agricultural and very few of them had slaves. These states were opposed to slavery and were pushing for abolition (Wagner et al, 2002).
Topic: civil-war

As noted earlier, there were major ideological differences between the northern and southern states on a number of issues. Although sectionalism had existed in the country for a long time, it reached dangerous heights between 1800 and 1860. The northern states that were more industrialized than the southern ones became more economically powerful and built better cities. This made the southern states whose economy was agriculture based envious (Wagner et al, 2002). However, the fortunes of the southern states changed after the discovery of gin which created more demand for cotton. As abolition gained widespread attention, the southern states were living in constant fear of revolts by the slaves. In support of their stand, the southerners argued that they were preserving the culture passed down to them from the founding fathers of the country many of whom owned slaves. These differences caused a major rift in the largest denominations in the country namely Baptist, Presbyterian and Methodists. In addition, it resulted in a mass movement of whites from the south to the north making the south adopt a hard-line political position.
Topic: civil-war

As noted earlier, there were huge economic differences between the northern and southern states. Whereas agriculture was the main economic activity in the southern states, the economy of the northern states was based on industries. Despite the increasing campaign against slavery in the northern states, the southern states were not ready to abolish. This was because the slaves offered cheap labor therefore eliminating any need to incur costs on mechanization. In addition, the southerners did not see any need for industrialization and were comfortable with buying manufactured products from other parts of the country instead of building industries (Guelzo, 2012). Although the economy of the northern states was doing well, their industries were faced increased completion from the full fledged European industries. More importantly, this made it hard for them to compete for cotton with Europeans who were offering very high prices for cotton from the south. Based on this, the northern states were in favor of trade tariffs and protectionism while the southerners were opposed to it. On their part, the southerners were in favor of free trade. These differences created negative competition between the two sides culminating in the civil war (Fuller, 2008).