The Civil War: Repressible or Irrepressible?

Although some historians would argue that the Civil War was repressible, it was mostly irrepressible due to the differences between the North and the South on the issue of slavery, the economic diversity between the two regions, and the threats that each region posed. Because the North was aimed at industrialism while the South was largely agricultural, each region grew apart from each other, and political intentions during the Jacksonian Period, especially with the controversy of the Tariff of 1828, were large roots in the introduction of the idea of Southern secession. In addition, the Missouri Compromise of 1820 shifted the political balance of power, which potentially was seen as a detrimental blow to the plantation aristocracy of the South. Eventually, the issue of slavery that tore the North and the South apart was a result of the threat slavery posed to Northerners, also in relation to their economic differences. As a result, the Free Soil and abolitionist movements were sparked to oppose slavery, which was thought of as either immoral or unwanted in the ever-growing U.S. territory, in the South. Overall, the factors of economic diversity, split decisions on slavery, and the potential threat of each region built up to the irrepressible Civil War.