The Cause-and-Effect Relationship Between Slavery and the Civil War

Slavery and the American Civil War are two terms that share a cause-and-effect
relationship, inconceivably shaping America’s political, social, and economic realms. Many
historians agree that the failure of earlier pacts like the Missouri Compromise to amicably
resolve the row between the Southern (pro-slavery) and Northern (anti-slavery) states about the
emancipation of slaves and abolition of slavery precipitated the civil war witnessed between
April 12, 1861, and May 26, 1865. While other factors like states’ rights (the South insisting that
individual states were justified to secede from the Union and the federal government’s power
was limited), economic differences (the North relying on industries and the South on
agriculture), and political differences (President’s Lincoln election) are believed to have
premediated the American Civil War, strong evidence suggests that the dispute between the
Confederacy (the South) and the Union (the North) over the disbarment of slavery created bad
blood between the North and the South (Izecksohn, 2020). Therefore, the row between
abolishing slavery, which directly resulted from economic interests between the North and the
South, historical practices, racism, and colonization, along with political and economic drivers,
arguably played a major role in the civil unrest witnessed in the country between 1861 and 1865;
these unrests resulted in the emancipation of the slave, America’s Reconstruction, and other
political, economic, and social shifts.
Before delving into the impacts of slavery, including the 1860-1861 unrest between the
North and the South, it is paramount to dig into the history of slavery in the US. According to
Beckert & Rockman (2016), the European conquistadores introduced a system of slavery into the
US and the western hemisphere in the 1500s, long before the nation’s founding. Unable to locate
and hire cheap labor from the Americas and Europe, the white settlers opted to import slaves

3
from Africa. By the late 1600s and early 1700s, slavery implied African slavery. In the rich soils
of the Southern states, White landowners specifically deployed slaves to work in their vast
plantations of rice, tobacco, cotton, indigo, and forest products. Typically, the Southern
economies revolved around agriculture and slave labor. At the same time, businessmen in the
Northern states profited either directly by selling slaves to the Southern farm owners or by
exporting the products shipped from the South (Izecksohn, 2020).
Although slavery was prominent in all thirteen colonies at the onset of the American
Revolution around 1775, several Americans (particularly of African American descent) were
dissatisfied with the Declaration of Independence, especially its failure to abolish slavery and
create equality, including the right to vote for Blacks. In reacting to these inconsistencies, the
Northern states opted to abolish slavery after the Revolution. The Southern states also debated
about ending slavery, although implementation was problematic. However, when the US
constitution was ratified in 1787, the welfare and interests of slaveholders (plantation owners)
and those that profited from slavery were considered. Although the Constitution denied slaves
voting rights, the Southerners debated that slave labor significantly contributed to the federal
government’s GDP. By considering their arguments, the Constitution awarded them
representation in the electoral college and Congress for three-fifths of every slave. Although the
Constitution did many things right, its failure to comprehensively and forthrightly address
slavery guaranteed conflicts in the future over the issue.
These unresolved issues of slavery precipitated the decades-long unrest leading to 1861
when the American Civil War openly broke out. In the preceding years, Northerners vehemently
supported the right of workers (slaves) and farmers to benefit from vast agricultural lands, a
majority of which interestingly were located in the South. Slavery did not resonate with this new

4
perspective. Most Northern states opposed its existence in their territories. The proposed
induction of Missouri (a Confederate state) into slavery in 1820 ignited a countrywide debate
about slavery. The Missouri Compromise was organized in 1820 to address the issue; this led to
Missouri being admitted as a slave state and Maine as a free state, maintaining the balance
between free and slave territories. Congress also banned slavery in western territories/regions
lying above Missouri’s southern boundary. The 1850 Compromise that sought to admit
California as a slave state also sparked controversy. The 1854 Kansas-Nebraska Act to repeal the
Missouri Compromise turned into bloody disputes between anti- and pro-slavery groups.
The Republican Party was subsequently formed in the North to oppose slavery and
directly oppose the Democratic Party that was dominant in the South. Abraham Lincoln stormed
into the White House in 1861 after flooring the Southern Democratic candidates. President
Lincoln rode on the promise of opposing the expansion of slavery, especially the inclusion of
Western states, and creating equal rights for all Americans. Therefore, the conflicts (Civil War)
between the Northern (Union) and the Southern (Confederacy) states that erupted immediately
after Lincoln’s election was linked to disagreements over whether or not slavery would be
expanded to the western territories, creating more slave states. Following Lincoln’s one-sided
win, the Southern states also pushed for secession from the Union, arguing that the Constitution
gave the federal government limited power.
Although slavery was the main recipe that sparked the American Civil War, most experts
would agree that the ramifications of this cause-and-effect correlation were wide-reaching. It was
essentially responsible for emancipating slaves. According to Blackmon (2012), the Civil War
played a central role in the banishment/abolishment. The passing of the 13 th Amendment by both
the Senate and Congress in 1864 and 1865, respectively, granted freedom to millions of slaves.

5
President Lincoln in his Emancipation Proclamation announced on January 1, 1963, that all
Confederate-controlled states and territories were free. Besides emancipating slaves, the post-
Civil War error was immediately followed by a period of Reconstruction (Izecksohn, 2020).
After the war ended, America started rebuilding the ravaged South and this included establishing
state governments from scratch and granting slaves freedom and civil rights. The victory also
strengthened the country economically, socially, and culturally (Valelly, 2014).
In a nutshell, it can be argued that the American Civil War was a battle between pro-
slavery Southern states (Confederacy) and the anti-slavery Northern states (Union) over whether
or not to expand slavery into other states and territories, especially the newly acquired territories
in the West. Most events before 1861 centered on reaching a compromise between inducting a
state newly acquired territories as free or slave states. These disagreements, compounded by the
election of President Lincoln in 1861, escalated in 1861, leading to war. Although Americans
lost their lives in the Civil War, it did manage to end slavery and transform the fortunes of the
US. America emerged as a more united, freer, and more socioeconomically and politically strong
country.

6

References

Beckert, S., & Rockman, S. (2016). Slavery’s capitalism: A new history of American economic
development. The University of Pennsylvania Press.
Blackmon, D. A. (2012). Slavery by another name: The re-enslavement of Black Americans from
the Civil War to World War Two. Icon Books.
Izecksohn, V. (2020). Slavery and war in the Americas: Race, citizenship, and state building in
the United States and Brazil, 1861-1870. The University of Virginia Press.
Valelly, R. (2014). Review: Slavery, emancipation, and the Civil War transformation of the US
state. Perspectives on Politics, 12(1), 145-152.