How Manifest Destiny and Slavery Helped Divide the Country

How Manifest Destiny and Slavery Helped Divide the Country
The Manifest Destiny was the belief or view that the United States’ expansion to other areas and continents was inevitable and that it was approved by God. According to the doctrine, the United States had power over all other countries and had been ordained by God to spread civilization to these states. The defeat of Mexico led to the acquisition of a huge piece of land to the southwest. There was also significant extension towards the north. The acquisition of the new territories, however, sparked a heated debate regarding their status as either free labor states or slave states. The country was fractured along sectional and partisan lines as different leaders had different opinions regarding the decisions to take regarding these states. A conflict was inevitable, and the country had to take one direction regarding slavery. It had to be either an entirely free labor country or a total slave labor country as the two systems were incompatible. “They can never exist together in one country.” (Foner269)
The conflict regarding slavery and free labor was threatening to wreck the country into two; with the north advocating for free labor while the south was pro-slave labor. Abolitionist northerners believed that slavery was an evil that should not expand into the new territories. They claimed that the North was the home of opportunity, progress, and freedom.” (Foner 267) It was around this time that the Republican Party was formed.

The party, together with other liberal-minded people advocated for a slavery-free nation; one in which everyone had access to equal opportunities, rights, and freedoms. According to William Seward, there is freedom in the pursuit of happiness. The slave system took away this happiness through the chaining, abuse, and degradation of the slaves. The slaves were treated as merchandise to be sold and passed on from one owner to the other (Foner 268). According to John Calhoun, the Southerners were becoming a distant minority due to the alienation resulting from the conflict between the two sides. He argued that every major interest needed to be consulted so that they may be involved in making the decision that would shape their community and country. This would lead to better participatory leadership as opposed to the involvement of a simple numeric number (Foner 196).
Those who were pro free labor argued that free labor systems conform to the divine law of equality that is part of every man’s conscience. Free labor leads to contentment and happiness as there is an education for all, one can work anywhere that they want and with an equal pay as that of the other person. States that practice free labor would therefore soon become a democracy (Foner 269).
Politicians in the country tried as much as possible to prevent this debate or answer in response to it as both the Democrats and the Republicans depended on the support of both the north and the south that held opposing views. To win the congress or presidency, candidates would either sit on the fence or avoid responding to the issue altogether (Gobat 981-984). This carefree attitude worsened the already worse situation. As Henry Seward describes, the country was a theater that showed two different political systems (268). The two systems were entirely incompatible and couldn’t exist in the country. Unless actions were taken, the country would have been totally divided. America had, therefore, to decide to be either a free labor state or an entire slave hold nation.
Works Cited
Foner, Eric. Voices Of Freedom. 1st ed. New York: W.W. Norton, 2005. Print.
Gobat, Michel. “Rethinking Manifest Destiny Expansionism”. Diplomatic History 32.5 (2008): 981-984. Web.