Wednesday, November 13, 2013

Unit 2 Essay: An "Era of Good Feelings"


 Dustin Messner
          The period after the War of 1812 is historically labeled as the “Era of Good Feelings”, and, while this label was accurate culturally, it proved to be false in the economic and social aspects of American life; furthermore, the politics of 1815 to 1825 initially resembled an “Era of Good of Feelings” but, as time progressed, this label became inaccurate. Therefore, the “Era of Good Feelings” only applies to the rise of cultural nationalism and not the political, social, and economic realities of 1815 to 1825. The period from 1815 to 1825 consisted of a stark rise in nationalism and pride in the American identity, but also of the continual growth of social, economic, and political sectional issues. Nationalism, with its emphasis on pride in the country and federal government, supported the label of an “Era of Good Feelings” however, sectionalism displayed differences in interests based on regions and thereby dismissed the label.
            The rapid growth of cultural nationalism supported the idea that the period after the War of 1812 was an “Era of Good Feelings”. Some of the events of the War of 1812 helped spur Nationalism. For example, in the Battle of New Orleans, American troops overwhelmingly defeated the British troops who had been victorious against Napoleon at Waterloo. This victory helped form the image to the public that the United States had a strong military and an influential position in global affairs; thereby, fostering cultural nationalism. Other examples of cultural nationalism can be found in literature. The circulation of the works of Daniel Webster like his American Spelling Book created an association amongst the population with a unique American identity and culture. Nationalism was also present in works of art, such as John Krimmel’s depiction of a Fourth of July celebration. Krimmel utilizes the symbols of George Washington and the American flag to exemplify American patriotism and unity (C). James Monroe’s Goodwill Tour in 1816 also helped develop a sense of cultural unity and actually earned the label of an “era of good feelings” by the Columbian Centinel, a once Federalist newspaper. Thus, culturally, it was an “Era of Good Feelings” as illustrated in the development of nationalism in works of art and language and a sense of unity amongst the American people. Economically, the “Era of Good Feelings” was largely an inaccurate label.
            The Economic strife and debate from 1815 to 1825 emphasized sectionalism. John Randolph argued that Congress was unfairly levying taxes on the agricultural regions of the West and South, while favoring the industrial Northeast. Randolph is specifically referring to the protective tariff of 1816 meant to protect the textile industry of the Northeast and promote the market for American goods. Because John Randolph was arguing that the people of a certain section (farmers of the West and South) were being taxed unfairly, his argument illustrates economic sectionalism and emphasizes that the economic opportunities were much more abundant in the Northeast than in the West and South (A). Although there were some efforts to unite the economic affairs of the country, such as John C. Calhoun’s effort to unite the country through transportation, they were largely unsuccessful. For example, President James Madison vetoed John C. Calhoun’s Internal Improvements Bill, designed to promote a national transportation system, in 1817, emphasizing the lack of national agreement on the issue of improvements in transportation (B). Economic sectionalism dismissed the label of an “Era of Good Feelings” and was accompanied by social sectionalism.
            Social unrest was a prodigious sectionalist factor from 1815 to 1825. The Density of Population in 1820 illustrated that the North was tremendously more densely populated than the rural South, showing the potential conflict between the urban centers of the Northeast and the agrarian rural society of the South and emphasizing sectionalist differences between the Northeast and the South (E). Thomas Jefferson in a letter to John Randolph noted his fears that the issue of slavery would eventually divide the Union. Furthermore, Jefferson wrote his letter in 1820, at the same time as the Missouri Compromise, suggesting that Jefferson believed that the Missouri Compromise was only a temporary fix to the enormous social issue of slavery and the sectional issues it fostered (F).  Politically, there was initial nationalism followed by a large degree of sectionalism.
            The label of an “Era of Good Feelings” was initially an accurate label, but, as time progressed, the label became inaccurate. The decision in the case of McCulloch v. Maryland in 1819 stated that the federal government had the right to charter a bank, increasing the authority of the national government and emphasizing political nationalism (D). In the Election of 1820, James Monroe won by a landslide and the Federalist party had been destroyed by the Hartford Convention; thus, there was only one political party, leading to a great amount of political nationalism. The Density of Population in 1820 showed that the Northeast had a higher population than the South, meaning that the North controlled the House of Representatives. So, while there was only the Republican party in politics in 1820, there was a large amount of sectional tension between the North and South that would emerge over time (E). Still, in 1823, these tensions had not surfaced yet as John Quincy Adams in a letter emphasized the need for a strong stance against Britain, Spain, Russia, and Prussia--The Holy Alliance. Quincy’s letter stressed an influential role in global affairs and coincided with the Monroe Doctrine—both assertions of political nationalism (H). The presidential elections of 1820 and 1824 illuminated the change over time in nationalism and sectionalism in American politics. In 1820, an overwhelming majority elected James Monroe president, showing an absence of sectionalism; however, in 1824, each candidate received votes based on their section of the country and no candidate received a large majority of the votes. The Election of 1824 also saw the reemergence of the party system and the sectional issues that were present in the legislative, but not executive branch, of 1820 (I). The supporters of Andrew Jackson also proclaimed the election of 1824 a “corrupt bargain” reiterating the sectionalism of the voters and ending the political “Era of Good Feelings.”

            The “Era of Good Feelings” was an accurate label in the cultural aspects of American society; however in economic and social matters the label was largely inaccurate. American politics was initially an “Era of Good Feelings” but saw the emergence of sectionalism and proved the label of an “Era of Good Feelings” inaccurate.
.







No comments:

Post a Comment