Skip to main content

How and when did the Republican Party begin?

The Republican Party was founded in 1854. It was an offshoot of the Whig Party, a group that espoused classic liberalism, a set of beliefs that emphasized the values of a free market economy and personal liberty in matters of religion and other forms of civic life. One important issue for the Whigs is that they had their origins in England, where there was a state church, the Church of England. It was not until 1854 that Dissenters (people not members of the Church of England) could attend Oxford University. Dissenters tended to support the Whig Party because of its emphasis on religious freedom. Evangelicals were especially opposed to slavery on religious grounds. Evangelicals also tended to support other radical ideas including temperance (prohibition of alcohol) and women's suffrage.


The key event that led to the formation of the Republican Party was opposition to the Kansas–Nebraska Act of 1854. This bill would have made slavery legal in new territories north of the 36th parallel. The party's main power base was New England and the midwest. As well as being anti-slavery, they were strongly pro-capitalist, arguing for the benefits of system of free labor and wealth earned by industry. The early Republican platform not only opposed slavery in western territories but supported developing banking and railroads and giving free land to pioneering small farmers in the newly acquired western territories. 


The party adopted the name Republican at a convention held on July 6, 1854 in Michigan. It held its first national convention on February 22, 1856 in Pittsburgh and nominated John C. Frémont as its first presidential candidate. 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Is there a word/phrase for "unperformant"?

As a software engineer, I need to sometimes describe a piece of code as something that lacks performance or was not written with performance in mind. Example: This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. Based on my Google searches, this isn't a real word. What is the correct way to describe this? EDIT My usage of "performance" here is in regard to speed and efficiency. For example, the better the performance of code the faster the application runs. My question and example target the negative definition, which is in reference to preventing inefficient coding practices. Answer This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. In my opinion, reads more easily as: This coding style leads to unmaintainable and poorly performing code. The key to well-written documentation and reports lies in ease of understanding. Adding poorly understood words such as performant decreases that ease. In addressing the use of such a poorly ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Is 'efficate' a word in English?

I routinely hear the word "efficate" being used. For example, "The most powerful way to efficate a change in the system is to participate." I do not find entries for this word in common English dictionaries, but I do not have an unabridged dictionary. I have checked the OED (I'm not sure if it is considered unabridged), and it has no entry for "efficate". It does have an entry for "efficiate", which is used in the same way. Wordnik has an entry for "efficate" with over 1800 hits, thus providing some evidence for the frequency of use. I personally like the word and find the meaning very clear and obvious when others use it. If it's not currently an "officially documented" word, perhaps its continued use will result in it being better documented.
Post a Comment
Read more