Before you read this read the bottom line.
Today in class we discussed many different events that led to the War of 1812. Many of these events didn't go well for America. The first bad event was the Embargo Act because it basically closed down any trade by ship. Most of trade if not all was by ship, therefore it basically slowed economic growth for a period of time before the act was changed to only restricting Britain and France as off-limits. However the Embargo Act did have a long term positive effect of making American manufacturers more self reliant. The second event was disbanding the standing militia, due to Jefferson's interpretation of the standing militia as evidence of dictatorship(correct me if I'm wrong about it being militia instead of army). Instead Jefferson believed in a navy because ships can't walk on land. However instead of building vast amounts of big ships he used precious money to build vast amounts of little, 1 gun, ships. Lastly, the United States trusted the French by only trading with them instead of Britain. Sadly in the end Britain saw this as a betrayal that eventually led to war and the French lied. Of course the United States didn't know Napoleon would throw away his word, but it still turned out to be a bad call. Now America was involved in Europe more then it wanted to be in the first place.
Which event highlighted in bold, had the worst effect on the United States to the start of the War of 1812?
Disbanding the militia isn't exactly provoking the the British, although it would be a disadvantage once the war actually begins.
ReplyDeleteI believe it is the fact that America waived the Embargo Act for the French that Britain felt the urge to wage war.
Yeah I understand your first sentence. I probably meant events that weakened the United States leading up to the war. Disbanding militia wouldn't have anything to do with Britain whatsoever, it only weakened the U.S.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI think the Embargo Act was probably the worst for the Americans, even though in the long run it led to increased productivity in manufacturing. The Embargo Act rallied Federalist opposition and immediately devastated the North and the South. And even though disbanding the army and building the Little Jeffs were bad calls, the Americans were still able to succeed on the Great Lakes. This was seen in the victories at Lake Erie and Lake Champlain.
ReplyDeleteI don't believe this had the worst effect on the start of the War of 1812, but I do find the 1 gun ships that Jefferson promoted somewhat useless. While it could be used as a helpful coastguard, beyond that they had no military strength whatsoever. America was getting into a second war with a country that at the time had the strongest navy in the world. On my opinion, trying to be thrifty was really just a waste of money. In the end, America was forced to build large naval ships as well. Anyways, I know this doesn't directly answer your prompt, but I feel like it is something interesting to ponder.
ReplyDeleteSam I totally agree. I think it's interesting that Jefferson was so opposed to having a standing militia, but he only ended up harming the military even more with his little Jeffs. But I think the Embargo Act had a more profound effect, because by the time it was put into place, the Americans had already failed to avoid the British threat. I think the Embargo Act just dug them deeper, especially because the American economy was already so unstable at the time.
ReplyDelete