Bleeding Kansas
The major turning point leading inevitably to the Civil War
Background
An 1856 political cartoon about Bleeding Kansas
"About Wyandotte County." Unified Government of Wyandotte County Kansas City Kansas. Unified Government of Wyandotte County Kansas City Kansas, 2014. Web. 16 Nov. 2015. <https://wycokck.org/InternetDept.aspx?id=23084&menu_id=1358>.
"The Civil War in Missouri." Kansas-Nebraska Act: Bleeding Kansas. Missouri History Museum, 2011. Web. 16 Nov. 2015. <http://www.civilwarmo.org/educators/resources/info-sheets/kansas-nebraska-act-bleeding-kansas>.
Thesis
Holt, Karen. "Bleeding Kansas Served as a Prelude to the American Civil War." Examiner.com. Examiner, n.d. Web. 16 Nov. 2015. <http://www.examiner.com/article/bleeding-kansas-served-as-a-prelude-to-the-american-civil-war>.
Armed Resistance
Though the death toll was not particularly high, especially when compared with that of a normal war, it represented the first tangible example of "a house divided" on the issue of slavery with "brother [fighting] against brother." As a result, Bleeding Kansas served as the ultimate step that determined that the fate of the debate over slavery would be dissent, division, and, eventually, violence.
McClymer, John. "Bleeding Kansas: A Narrative Guide to the Sources."Bleeding Kansas: A Narrative Guide to the Sources. Assumption College, n.d. Web. 16 Nov. 2015. <http://www1.assumption.edu/ahc/Kansas/>.
"The Civil War in Missouri." Kansas-Nebraska Act: Bleeding Kansas. Missouri History Museum, 2011. Web. 16 Nov. 2015. <http://www.civilwarmo.org/educators/resources/info-sheets/kansas-nebraska-act-bleeding-kansas>.
"The Outbreak in Virginia." The African-American Experience. Woodbridge, CT: Primary Source Media, 1999. American Journey. Gale U.S. History in Context. Web. 16 Nov. 2015. <http://ic.galegroup.com/ic/uhic/PrimarySourcesDetailsPage/PrimarySourcesDetailsWindow?failOverType=&query=&prodId=UHIC&windowstate=normal&contentModules=&display-query=&mode=view&displayGroupName=PrimarySources&limiter=&currPage=&disableHighlighting=false&displayGroups=&sortBy=&search_within_results=&p=UHIC%3AWHIC&action=e&catId=&activityType=&scanId=&documentId=GALE%7CEJ2152000379&source=Bookmark&u=tlc209178764&jsid=724ef8951ffaf05161b46f28743d2db5>.
"'Bleeding Kansas' and the Pottawatomie Massacre, 1856." The Gilder Lehrman Institute of American History. The Gilder Lehran Institute, 2009. Web. 16 Nov. 2015. <https://www.gilderlehrman.org/history-by-era/failure-compromise/resources/%E2%80%9Cbleeding-kansas%E2%80%9D-and-pottawatomie-massacre-1856>.
"Bleeding Kansas and Civil War Battles of Kansas." Bleeding Kansas and Civil War Battles of Kansas. Legends of Kansas, 2009. Web. 16 Nov. 2015. <http://www.legendsofkansas.com/civilwarbattles.html>.
"Kansas-Nebraska Act." Conservapedia. Conservapedia, 22 Mar. 2010. Web. 16 Nov. 2015. <http://www.conservapedia.com/Kansas-Nebraska_Act>.
"Bleeding Kansas and Civil War Battles of Kansas." Bleeding Kansas and Civil War Battles of Kansas. Legends of Kansas, 2009. Web. 16 Nov. 2015. <http://www.legendsofkansas.com/civilwarbattles.html>.
Political divisions
Moreover, President Franklin Pierce's actions marked the onset of secession by the South. Pierce actively supported the pro-slavery government established in Kansas in 1855, even after congressional investigations revealed that the elections were rigged due to the voting of non-settlers and concluded that if only Kansas settlers had voted, the government would have been primarily anti-slavery. Pierce's subsequent response (to ignore this investigation's findings and to continue supporting the pro-slavery government) was widely referred to as the Bogus Legislature because it demonstrated the absurdity to which political figures were going to defend their respective sides. Pierce's later decisions to send troops into the region to support the pro-slavery government only further communicated this point. Furthermore, President James Buchanan's support of fraudulent election interpretations angered Republicans and further divided the two major parties and regions of the country.
Ultimately, the breakdown of politic convention, communication, and compromise to violence, partisanship, and mutual animosity showed the degree to which the political divide grew due to the Bleeding Kansas incident. Democrats realized that Republicans would not stop until slavery was abolished throughout the nation, and Republicans realized that Democrats would only be content upon slavery throughout the Union. No hope of compromise existed. As Ralph Waldo Emerson put it, "We must get rid of slavery, or we must get rid of freedom."
McClymer, John. "Bleeding Kansas: A Narrative Guide to the Sources."Bleeding Kansas: A Narrative Guide to the Sources. Assumption College, n.d. Web. 16 Nov. 2015. <http://www1.assumption.edu/ahc/Kansas/>.
Fuller, A. James. "Bleeding Kansas, Bleeding Missouri: The Long Civil War on the Border." Journal Of Southern History no. 1 (2015): 197. Academic OneFile, EBSCOhost (accessed November 16, 2015).
"Bleeding Kansas." Wikipedia. Wikimedia, n.d. Web. 16 Nov. 2015. <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bleeding_Kansas#/media/File:Southern_Chivalry.jpg>.
"The Gathering Storm Exhibit for the Classroom." Council on Foreign Relations. Council on Foreign Relations, n.d. Web. 16 Nov. 2015. <http://www.civilwar.org/education/teachers/lesson-plans/the-gathering-storm/the-gathering-storm-for.html?referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com%2F>.
An 1860 presidential election map that suggests the political divisions that escalated in the years leading up to 1860
Counterargument: that the Kansas-Nebraska Act was the root cause of the Civil War
What sets Bleeding Kansas apart is that it was no compromise: armed resistance and irreversible divisions defined the incident. These same aspects defined the period from 1861 to 1865, and debate and compromise did not have a place in the Civil War. Moreover, what really triggered Bleeding Kansas was not the Kansas-Nebraska Act; rather, it was the movement of border ruffians from Missouri to Kansas to vote in favor of a pro-slavery government and the executive's subsequent support of the pro-slavery legislature. If the elections had been better regulated or managed, major outbreaks of violence would have been avoided, even with the passage of the Kansas-Nebraska Act. This contention is further supported by the words of Thomas H. Gladstone, whose account of the sack of Lawrence, Kansas by Missouri border ruffians demonstrates that escalation of the conflict was largely a result of the actions of the border ruffians.
Finally, even with dissent over the Kansas-Nebraska Act, the Union would not have come much closer to division and civil conflict without the violence instigated by Bleeding Kansas. The political, social, and cultural passions that the incident aroused in northerners and southerners, Republicans and Democrats alike marked the unique formation of a divide that could not be subsequently cured by any sense of compromise or discussion; the only possible outcome would be war.
Gladstone, Thomas H. "The Sack of Lawrence, Kansas, 1856." EyeWitness to History. 1857. 16 Nov. 2015. <http://www.eyewitnesstohistory.com/lawrencesack.htm>.
The Congressional Globe. "Nebraska and Kansas." Washington D.C.: U.S. Congress, May 26, 1854. From Library of Congress. http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ampage?collId=llcg&fileName=034/llcg034.db&recNum=612 (accessed Nov. 17, 2015).