In the antebellum era, there was an inextricable link between the issue of slavery, the demand for states' rights and the weakening of the federal platform. These rights reserved a set of powers for state governments that the federal government could not touch. The divisions caused by the slavery issue led the South to demand these rights, which the Founding Fathers had previously limited, in order to ratify a Constitution and ensure a united nation. The reason these two issues have become so closely intertwined can be seen in the federal response to growing economic and social tensions between the North and the South. Economically, the North developed industrially and commercially, while the South remained agrarian, heavily dependent on slavery. In the North, an economic system that saw no need for slavery, combined with disgust with the South's slave ideology, led to the development of an abolitionist fervor in the North that condemned its counterpart's way of life. It was political involvement in an attempt to appease a divided nation that intensified the struggle between Southern plantation masters and Northern industrialists for control of the federal government, ultimately triggering Southern calls for of states' rights. The South believed that such a method of self-government was the only way to protect the practice of slavery and, therefore, their livelihood, because the federal government was not prepared to give them what they wanted. Say no to plagiarism. Get a custom essay on "Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned"?Get the original essay The very different economies of the North and South helped increase the South's demand for states' rights. The South retained a cotton economy, the most prominent feature of which was the plantation system, a system dependent on slavery, while the North experienced rapid industrial and commercial expansion. During the initial phase of industrial expansion, the North saw the development of a textile industry, a factory system based on the intensive use of machinery and the employment of a large workforce. Developments were rapid; by mid-century, prosperous industrial states had nearly five hundred factories and employed nearly 100,000 workers. As was the case in the South, the need for slave labor was not apparent in the new Northern economy, with the emphasis being on skilled workers. The successes observed in the North have only worsened relations between the two poles of the United States, with the South denouncing the alternative work system practiced in the North. The relationship between the issue of slavery and states' rights truly becomes evident when examining the federal government's response to these new economic developments. The British had begun their industrial transition much earlier in the 1780s, meaning they were producing and exporting greater quantities of goods and, by the mid-19th century, were producing half of the world's textiles. In the United States, however, Southern cotton still accounted for nearly half the value of total exports in 1834. Therefore, to protect this growing industry from experienced British rivals, the federal government introduced a series of duties customs duties on exports, which resulted in the tariff of 1832, raising the tax on foreign goods to 50%. The South saw it as an “excessively high” protective tariff, encouraging the growth of anti-slavery colonies in the North. InIndeed, raw material exports to Britain fueled the Southern economy, but high taxes on exports to the United States meant that Britain had less money to buy cotton from the South . The result of this was a Southern determination to erect barriers against infringements of their rights, and the Nullification Crisis of November 1832 saw the first major call for states' rights in response to federal intervention. South Carolina declared the tariff void, threatening to secede if it was not removed. Given this extreme reaction, John Ashworth suggests that it was the federal government's "support" for an anti-slavery economy that caused many states' rights supporters to leave the Democratic Party. The South sincerely feared the subversion of its slave system, so the appeal to states' rights emerged as a solution. The question of states' rights arose not only because of economic differences, but also because of the extreme social tensions that were becoming apparent. As the North lost the necessity of slavery, many developed thoughts that resembled the early abolitionist mentality. Because of such economic difference, many Northerners felt compelled to limit the effects of slavery, and this was done through feverish speeches and writing. Early abolitionists focused on attacking Southern slavery ideology, with the most important text being Harriet Beecher's "Uncle Tom's Cabin," which sold 3,000 copies on its first day of its publication. Beecher's text infuriated Southerners, drawing attention to the cruelties of slavery while acclaiming the practice of abolitionist writing, highlighted by its popularity. Similarly, in 1816, Presbyterian minister George Bourne challenged slave owners by suggesting that whenever Southerners were challenged on the question of slavery, "they were quickly shocked, for they had a negro stuck in the throat ". So Northern abolitionists began attacking centuries-old practices with extreme criticism, often targeting the "ideological and spiritual" importance of slave owners, which infuriated the South. Not only had early abolitionists challenged Southern ideology, but they also began to infiltrate their way of life, influencing a violent slave revolt in Virginia in 1831. In a society concerned with defending the honor of deeply held beliefs , criticism from the North was not well received. , pushing Southerners further into the hands of those who had already called for the practice of states' rights. become the majority in the South. With tensions growing between the two halves of the country, we are not helped by the government's decision to call the Kansas Nebraska Act. The law allowed popular sovereignty in the states of Kansas and Nebraska on the issue of slavery, in the hopes that this would begin to appease the nation. However, due to a strong resolve to eradicate slavery, many Northerners flocked to both states to ensure a favorable outcome. This was apparently the tip of the iceberg for Southerners, who now feared, real and imagined, that a hostile Northern majority would overthrow their slave system. This law clearly stated the federal government's position on the issue of slavery. During the Nullification Crisis, the southern state of South Carolina was deemed a "traitor" by President Andrew Jackson, but Northerners who acted to change the intended outcome of popular sovereignty have.