Summary Of Storm Over Texas

674 Words3 Pages

Texas, which is home of the Republican party now, has been viewed as the state that influenced the civil war. At least this is what Joel Silbey author of Storm over Texas argues. I would have to agree with him after reading this book. He gives examples to back up his work and I think that it makes sense. It has got me thinking if the United States should have brought Texas in at all because Joel has this question too. Joel has questioned in his book on whether or not Texas should have joined the United States. Texas at the time was causing issues because their political views were not on the same page as others. So, this caused political parties to split up. It led to sectionalism to arise more because Texas was firm on their political views. With just these instances, Texas added fuel to the fire when it came to the Civil War. However, I am sure that if Texas was not involved in anyway that the war would have still happened. …show more content…

Texas only saw this as a positive. Sense this was in the mind set of the state at the time Texas had a lot of influence over others. This caused sectionalism to happen even more. Sectionalism was always a problem back then but it would tend to go away until Texas came into the situation. Joel states in his book that “Slavery was deeply embedded in the national experience and at the center of these sectional rumblings.” (Pg. 20) This quote proves that slavery was used for the nations gains. It also proves that this made sectionalism more of a thing and that Texas helped made it happen because they believed in it so

More about Summary Of Storm Over Texas

Open Document