Northerners and southerners became more angry with each other.
the loss of life
Not to be confused with the Vietnam War, because that was not a civil war (two separate nations fought that war). The US Civil War involved strictly Americans (Northerners vs Southerners); was Congress to pay both adversaries, both Northerners & Southerners? When the Southerners were actually committing treason by attacking their own US Government? Thus the official name of the American Civil War..."The War of the Rebellion" (Rebellion against the US Government). Thus, the US Congress had to either pay just the Northerners (Federal, Union, Yankee Armies, US Army, US Navy, etc.) or both...THEY WERE BOTH AMERICANS. This may have caused "a problem" for the US treasury department.
the Anaconda Plan and Sherman's march both starved, not only soldiers, but also women and children to death. This had a dramatic psychological affect on southerners. It made them become even more furious and increased their urge for revenge and perhaps a future war, in order to get back at the Northerners.
At the beginning of the Civil War, young men from both the north and the south were very enthusiastic about fighting in the war. Northerners wanted to thrash the rebels and bring the southern states back into the Union, southerners wanted to destroy the Union army and force them to acknowledge the Confederacy as an independent nation.
With the slavery issue based on popular sovereignty, the territories would become slave or free depending on which side had more votes. Both antislavery Northerners and proslavery Southerners scrambled to settle Kansas. One fierce slavery opponent, John Brown, killed five proslavery people in a raid and started a small civil war that killed some 200 people from both sides.
the loss of life
the loss of life
Loss of life
The immediate effect of the war felt by both Northerners and Southerners was the widespread loss of life and the devastation of communities. Families were torn apart as soldiers were sent to fight, leading to grief and uncertainty. Additionally, economic disruption occurred as resources became scarce, and infrastructure was damaged, impacting daily life in both regions. The war also intensified divisions and animosities, shaping the social and political landscape for years to come.
The immediate effect of the war on both northerners and southerners was the profound loss of life and the devastation of communities. Soldiers from both sides faced brutal combat, resulting in high casualty rates that left families grieving and communities disrupted. Additionally, the war led to economic strain, with shortages of goods and inflation affecting daily life in both regions. The conflict also intensified social divisions, as families and friends were often pitted against one another.
Toughness cannot be generalized based on geography or region. It varies from person to person and is influenced by various factors such as upbringing, experiences, and personal traits. Both southerners and northerners can exhibit toughness in different ways.
While both Northerners and Southerners believed they fought against tyranny and oppression, Northerners focused on the oppression of slaves while Southerners defended their own right to self-government.
Northerners were Billy Yanks; Southerners were Johnny Rebs.
In the US, I don't believe the whole of Northerners is friendlier than the whole of Southerners and vice versa. There are regions of both parts of the US whereas the people tend to be friendlier, but there are mean and off putting attitudes all over the country.
Both were fought between communist northerners and non-communist (free world) southerners.
Both colonies had an Aliance towards Mother England, had some sort of Slavery, and ... (still need more)
Both Northerners and Southerners rejected John Crittenden's compromise because it failed to adequately address the deep-seated divisions over slavery. Northerners opposed the extension of slavery into new territories, while many Southerners felt the compromise did not go far enough in protecting their rights to slavery. Additionally, the political climate was highly polarized, and both sides were unwilling to make concessions, leading to a lack of support for the proposal. Ultimately, the compromise could not bridge the growing chasm between the two regions.