Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Liberal elite, [1] also referred to as the metropolitan elite or progressive elite, [2] [3] [4] is a term used to describe politically liberal people whose education has traditionally opened the doors to affluence, wealth and power and who form a managerial elite.
Southern leaders said the Republican policy of blocking the expansion of slavery into the West made them second-class citizens, and challenged their autonomy. With the 1860 presidential victory of Abraham Lincoln , seven Deep South states whose economy was based on cotton and slavery decided to secede and form a new nation.
"The dominant elite in the South before the Civil War were the wealthy landowners who held people in slavery, the so-called "planter class". Their influence in politics before the war can best be illustrated by highlighting that of the 15 presidents before Abraham Lincoln, eight held people as slaves while in office."
American Slavery, American Freedom: The Ordeal of Colonial Virginia is a 1975 history text [1] by American historian Edmund Morgan. [2] The work was first published in September 1975 through W W Norton & Co Inc and is considered to be one of Morgan's seminal works.
Some of you are for reviving the foreign slave trade; some for a Congressional Slave-Code for the Territories; some for Congress forbidding the Territories to prohibit Slavery within their limits; some for maintaining Slavery in the Territories through the judiciary; some for the "gur-reat pur-rinciple" that "if one man would enslave another ...
In researching the genealogies of America’s political elite, a Reuters examination found that a fifth of the nation’s congressmen, living presidents, Supreme Court justices and governors are ...
American statesman John C. Calhoun was one of the most prominent advocates of the "slavery as a positive good" viewpoint.. Slavery as a positive good in the United States was the prevailing view of Southern politicians and intellectuals just before the American Civil War, as opposed to seeing it as a crime against humanity or a necessary evil.
Writing in The New York Times Book Review Eric Foner concluded the book's underlying argument was persuasive even though some of its elements were "not entirely pulled together," [5] and Kirkus Reviews found it to be a "dense, myth-busting work" that presents "a complicated story involving staggering scholarship that adds greatly to our understanding of the history of the United States. [6]