Judge my DBQ Introduction?

Jordan

Jordan

Member
Joined
May 22, 2008
Messages
813
Reaction score
0
Points
16
Prompt: In the early nineteenth century, Americans sought to resolve their political disputes through compromise, yet by 1860 this no longer seemed possible. Analyze the reasons for this change.

Throughout history, the United States has generally gotten through political differences via a smooth and sure compromise and agreement. However, the Civil War was one of the major periods where that had seemed inevitably impossible. The question of slavery had resulted to the point of inhumane violence. The impossibility of political compromise occurred during the middle of the nineteenth century due to the severity of the people’s ferocious attitudes and beliefs towards both the opposing sides of the nation, former examples of dividing slavery such as the Missouri Compromise and Kansas-Nebraska act, and the consistency of succession attempts by the southern states.
 
1. "Throughout history, the United States has generally gotten through political differences via a smooth and sure compromise and agreement."

"a smooth and sure" - wrong adjectives. Madison & Jefferson v. Hamilton, Nullification Crisis, territorial expansion, Missouri Compromise, Bleeding Kansas... none of the political responses were the least bit "smooth and sure." Typically, the compromise happened in the most crude and vague ways that let opposing sides save face while kicking the real problem (i.e., slavery) down the road. However, you could write a whole thesis paper on the number of political problems "solved" through excessive drinking and threats of duels as well.

2. "generally gotten through" - colloquial and wrong verb tense. Use formal description and present verb tense.

3. "However, the Civil War was one of the major periods where that had seemed inevitably impossible." -- there was nothing inevitable about the Civil War according to Dr. Harry Jaffa of the Claremont Institute. At the same time in history, Czar Alexander II emancipated 20-40 million Russian serfs from the institution of serfdom without firing a single shot. Ron Paul asks "why didn't the federal government use the power of eminent domain and forcibly buy the slaves from the Southern slave owners." It would have been cheaper than fighting the Civil War.

4. The question of slavery had resulted to the point of inhumane violence. "The question of slavery" didn't result in inhumane violence (unless you consider the caning beat down of an abolitionist in Congress by a Southern Democrat, and John Brown's raid on Harpers' Ferry). It is the institution of slavery that sanctioned the commission of inhumane violence.

5. "The impossibility of political compromise occurred during the middle of the nineteenth century due to the severity of the people’s ferocious attitudes and beliefs towards both the opposing sides of the nation, former examples of dividing slavery such as the Missouri Compromise and Kansas-Nebraska act, and the consistency of succession attempts by the southern states."

This is a major run on sentence. Break it up into five or six simple and logical sentences. "former examples of dividing slavery" this phrase is meaningless; fix it. So is "the consistency of succession attempts by the southern states". What exactly are you trying to say. Say it simply and clearly.

What about the role of "King Cotton" to the Southern states in particular and the overall U.S. economy? See Dr. David Blight, Yale University for an extensive discussion about the overwhelming importance of cotton to the U.S. economy.
 
That is a fine introduction. I'm proud of you. Nice job.
 
Back
Top