Warning: Undefined variable $num in /home/shroutdo/public_html/courses/wp-content/plugins/single-categories/single_categories.php on line 126
Warning: Undefined variable $posts_num in /home/shroutdo/public_html/courses/wp-content/plugins/single-categories/single_categories.php on line 127
In chapter 24 of Wilentz, further analyses the contradicting views of the North and South in terms of Slavery. The pro-slavery southern Democrats, and the strongly emerging anti-slavery Republican party in the North held their ground as to the path that was best fit for the future of America. As the abolition movement grew stronger, and the Southern states felt more and more threatened, the possibility of secession and a civil war become very imminent.
Wilentz outlines the conflict between the abolitionists and the Southern Democrats very clearly, and the made a point of recognizing how abolitions “confronted anew their dedication to nonviolence”(421). This effort was made a response to Bleeding Kansas. Yet many abolitionists refused to accept this dedication, and were committed to bringing an end to slavery by force. Wilentz describes the actions and consequences of the colorful figure of John Brown and his attempt to bring abolition by way of slave revolution.
Once again, Wilentz did a very good job in this chapter of providing information beyond what is commonly known and taught in American history classes. When Wilentz described the planning that went into his raid on Harpers Ferry was very interesting. I always assumed that John Brown just marched into Virginia and attacked the first thing that he saw. However, Wilentz discusses that a year of planning went into their planned attack of the southern slave holders, and that he planned to do various hit and run attacks across the south. i especially found interesting how Wilentz mentions how Brown spoke to free slaves in Canada. This really caught my eye as an example of how Brown sought to do adequate research in perpetration for his attack.
Ironically, even though Brown attempted to take the proper time and prepare for his invasion of the south, Wilentz points out how Brown “had made no previous contact with those neighboring slaves to prepare them; he had planned no escape route out of Harpers Ferry”(423). Brown lacked some simple but major details, that in large part doomed his abolition attempt. His entire plan was based around the slaves joining his revolution, yet he did not make prior contact with these slaves to gauge their interest.
Although his revolution was quickly put down and he was due to hang, Wilentz also points out how he still benefitted the cause while behind bars. He spoke about how he was content giving blood to free the slaves and rid the country of this horrible injustice. While Wilentz acknowledges Browns mistakes and overly extreme tactics, he humanizes him by expressing Browns relationship to God, and his intentions to do right. This could play into the slight Northern bias of Wilentz that my classmate points out in “The Powder Keg of the Civil War”, but I like to think that Brown did what he did with good intentions at heart, and genuinely cared about well being and justice of the enslaved people.