Even the London money market reflected these concerns, as bonds for southern railroads carried higher interest than those for northern roads.
American slavery had begun to threaten the very prosperity it produced, as the distinctive political economy of the cotton South collided with the incipient political economy of free labor and domestic industrialization of the North. In addition, the violent expansion of both these economies westward brought crisis after crisis to their nascent national institutions.
Read The Second American Revolution: The Building of an Empire book reviews & author details and more at leacounsubccon.tk Free delivery on qualified orders. As a child, Jerrick Ray Davis dreams, he delivers powerful speeches to the people. He also dreams he builds an Empire that spans across the North and South.
They, in time, sparked a second American revolution. Fearing for the security of their human property, southern slave owners struck out on their own, gambling that their European partners would intervene to preserve the world economy and with it their own exceptionally profitable role. Southern planters understood that their cotton kingdom rested not only on plentiful land and labor, but also upon their political ability to preserve the institution of slavery and to project it into the new cotton lands of the American West.
Continued territorial expansion of slavery was vital to secure both its economic, and even more so its political viability, threatened as never before by an alarmingly sectional Republican Party. The Civil War in the United States was an acid test for the entire industrial order: Could it adapt to the even temporary loss of its providential partner—the expansive, slave-powered antebellum United States—before social chaos and economic collapse brought their empire to ruins? The day of reckoning arrived on April 12, The outbreak of the Civil War severed in one stroke the global relationships that had underpinned the worldwide web of cotton production and global capitalism since the s.
In an effort to force British diplomatic recognition, the Confederate government banned all cotton exports. By the time the Confederacy realized this policy was doomed, a northern blockade effectively kept most cotton from leaving the South.
Consequently, exports to Europe fell from 3. A mad scramble to secure cotton for European industry ensued.
The effort was all the more desperate as no one could predict when the war would end and when, if ever, cotton production would revive in the American South. By deserting plantations, withdrawing their labor power, giving intelligence to federal troops, and eventually taking up arms as Union soldiers, American slaves pressed to make a sectional war into a war of emancipation. And they succeeded. Consequently, they worked zealously to find ways to reconstruct durably the worldwide web of cotton production, to transform the global countryside without resorting to slavery.
Already during the war itself, in articles and books, speeches and letters, they belabored the questions of if and where cotton could be grown without slave labor. Soon such treatises were informed by lessons drawn from the Civil War experiences.
Reason is an individual trait, and, according to Enlightenment thinkers, this justifies that power should be help Continue Reading. Politics of the Gilded Age As we all know there were many events that led to the American Revolution and many things changed over time. Chapter 1 Lives in the thirteen colonies In s, our country was not called. The doors to that market were being rapidly closed in the s, however, as Britain , France , Russia , and Japan carved out large so-called spheres of influence all the way from Manchuria to southern China.
The sudden turn to non-slave cotton during the Civil War years in Egypt, Brazil, and India as well as in Union-controlled zones of the American South represented, after all, a global experiment: What would a world with cotton but without slaves look like? Most important, they understood that labor, not land, constrained the production of cotton. When the guns fell silent on the North American continent in April , the greatest turmoil in the year history of a European-dominated cotton industry came to an end.
As former slaves throughout the United States celebrated their freedom, manufacturers and workers looked forward to factories running again at capacity, fueled by newly plentiful cotton supplies. Merchants, however, had little to celebrate. A few new settler colonies were also built up in Australia and New Zealand, and to a lesser extent in South Africa. Marshall in shows the consensus of scholars is clear, for since the concepts of the First British Empire have "held their ground in historians' usage without serious challenge. Historians have long identified certain developments in the late eighteenth century that undermined the fundamentals of the old Empire and were to bring about a new one.
These were the American Revolution and the industrial revolution. Historians, however, debate whether was a sharp line of demarcation between First and Second, or whether there was an overlap as argued by Vincent T. Harlow  or whether there was a "black hole between and the later birth of the Second Empire. Historian Denis Judd says the "black hole" is a fallacy and that there was continuity. Judd writes: It is commonplace to suppose that the successful revolt of the American colonies marked the end of the 'First British Empire'.
But this is only a half-truth. In there was still a substantial Empire left. Tucker and David Hendrickson, stresses the victorious initiative of the Americans. Theories about imperialism typically focus on the Second British Empire,  with side glances elsewhere. The term "Imperialism" was originally introduced into English in its present sense in the s by Liberal leader William Gladstone to ridicule the imperial policies of Prime Minister Benjamin Disraeli , which he denounced as aggressive and ostentatious and inspired by domestic motives. For some, imperialism designated a policy of idealism and philanthropy; others alleged that it was characterized by political self-interest, and a growing number associated it with capitalist greed.
John A. Hobson , a leading English Liberal, developed a highly influential economic exploitation model in Imperialism: A Study that expanded on his belief that free enterprise capitalism had a negative impact on the majority of the population. In Imperialism he argued that the financing of overseas empires drained money that was needed at home.
It was invested abroad because lower wages paid the workers overseas made for higher profits and higher rates of return, compared to domestic wages. So although domestic wages remained higher, they did not grow nearly as fast as they might have otherwise. Exporting capital, he concluded, put a lid on the growth of domestic wages in the domestic standard of living. By the s, historians such as David K. Fieldhouse  and Oren Hale could argue that the, "Hobsonian foundation has been almost completely demolished.
However, European Socialists picked up Hobson's ideas and made it into their own theory of imperialism, most notably in Lenin's Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism Lenin portrayed Imperialism as the closure of the world market and the end of capitalist free-competition that arose from the need for capitalist economies to constantly expand investment, material resources and manpower in such a way that necessitated colonial expansion. Later Marxist theoreticians echo this conception of imperialism as a structural feature of capitalism, which explained the World War as the battle between imperialists for control of external markets.
Lenin's treatise became a standard textbook that flourished until the collapse of communism in — As the application of the term "imperialism" has expanded, its meaning has shifted along five axes: the moral, the economic, the systemic, the cultural, and the temporal. Those changes reflect a growing unease, even squeamishness, with the fact of power, specifically, Western power.
The relationships among capitalism, imperialism, exploitation, social reform and economic development has long been debated among historians and political theorists. Much of the debate was pioneered by such theorists as John A. While these non-Marxist writers were at their most prolific before World War I, they remained active in the interwar years.
Their combined work informed the study of imperialism's impact on Europe, as well as contributed to reflections on the rise of the military-political complex in the United States from the s. Hobson argued that domestic social reforms could cure the international disease of imperialism by removing its economic foundation.
Hobson theorized that state intervention through taxation could boost broader consumption, create wealth, and encourage a peaceful multilateral world order. Conversely, should the state not intervene, rentiers people who earn income from property or securities would generate socially negative wealth that fostered imperialism and protectionism. Hobson for years was widely influential in liberal circles, especially the British Liberal Party. Fieldhouse , for example, argues that they used superficial arguments.
Fieldhouse says that the "obvious driving force of British expansion since " came from explorers, missionaries, engineers, and empire-minded politicians. They had little interest in financial investments. Hobson's answer was to say that faceless financiers manipulated everyone else, so that "The final determination rests with the financial power.
They were no longer dynamic and sought to maintain profits by even more intensive exploitation of protected markets. Fieldhouse rejects these arguments as unfounded speculation.
Historians agree that in the s, Britain adopted a free-trade policy, meaning open markets and no tariffs throughout the empire. The article helped launch the Cambridge School of historiography. Gallagher and Robinson used the British experience to construct a framework for understanding European imperialism that swept away the all-or-nothing thinking of previous historians. Much more important was informal influence in independent areas. According to Wm.
Roger Louis, "In their view, historians have been mesmerized by formal empire and maps of the world with regions colored red. The bulk of British emigration, trade, and capital went to areas outside the formal British Empire. Key to their thinking is the idea of empire 'informally if possible and formally if necessary. Cabinet decisions to annex or not to annex were made, usually on the basis of political or geopolitical considerations.
Reviewing the debate from the end of the 20th century, historian Martin Lynn argues that Gallagher and Robinson exaggerated the impact. He says that Britain achieved its goal of increasing its economic interests in many areas, "but the broader goal of 'regenerating' societies and thereby creating regions tied as 'tributaries' to British economic interests was not attained. Local economies and local regimes proved adept at restricting the reach of British trade and investment. Local impediments to foreign inroads, the inhabitants' low purchasing power, the resilience of local manufacturing, and the capabilities of local entrepreneurs meant that these areas effectively resisted British economic penetration.
The idea that free-trade imperial states use informal controls to secure their expanding economic influence has attracted Marxists trying to avoid the problems of earlier Marxist interpretations of capitalism. The approach is most often applied to American policies. Historians have begun to explore some of the ramifications of British free-trade policy, especially the effect of American and German high tariff policies.
Canada adopted a "national policy" of high tariffs in the late 19th century, in sharp distinction to the mother country. The goal was to protect its infant manufacturing industries from low-cost imports from the United States and Britain. Economic historians have debated at length the impact of these tariff changes on economic growth. Gentlemanly capitalism is a theory of New Imperialism first put forward by P. Cain and A.
Hopkins in the s before being fully developed in their work, British Imperialism. It encourages a shift of emphasis away from seeing provincial manufacturers and geopolitical strategy as important influences, and towards seeing the expansion of empire as emanating from London and the financial sector. Kevin Grant shows that numerous historians in the 21st century have explored relationships between the Empire, international government and human rights.
They have focused on British conceptions of imperial world order from the late 19th century to the Cold War. The notion of "benevolence" was developed in the — era by idealists whose moralistic prescriptions annoyed efficiency-oriented colonial administrators and profit-oriented merchants.
The most successful development came in the abolition of slavery led by William Wilberforce and the Evangelicals,  and the expansion of Christian missionary work. The Treaty of Waitangi , initially designed to protect Maori rights, has become the bedrock of Aotearoa—New Zealand biculturalism.