Nationalism And Sectionalism During The Era Of Good Feelings

Nationalism and sectionalism were two powerful influences in the development of American policies and economy during the Era of Good Feelings. It is faulty to say that one was greater than the other because these two mindsets are symbiotic with one another. An increased sense of pride, nationalism, inevitably leads into developing a sense of sectionalism. The idea of nationalism, feeling that one’s country was superior to others, coincides soundly with the concept of sectionalism, where individuals view countries with an in-group and out-group mindset, or basically: “it’s us against them.” In many ways, nationalism and sectionalism are really one in the same due to the fact that during the Era of Good Feelings, Americans viewed their country

For example, in Henry Clay’s speech in congress on March 31, 1824, he shows how Americans allowed their patriotism to affect their policies. As the pride in their home country increased, Americans began to want to develop a policy that was its own. In this speech, the influence of American patriotism is obvious, with Clay saying that the only “remedy” to the impending decay of the country was through adopting a “genuine American system.” This “genuine system” was one where the influence of sectionalism/nationalism is plainly evident; the system called for enacting a tariff that promoted American industry by taxing foreign industry. While patriotism did help to improve American industry and make the country more self-sufficient, it certainly hindered foreign relations and the offshore economy. Long before Clay’s speech of 1824, American sectionalism was already a long-standing influence in politics. The table of the Tariff of 1816, a tax designed to favor American-manufactured goods over foreign ones, shows how the majority of Americans were in favor of patriotic policies, with 88 members in the house of reps being “for” the tariff against 54. It is quite evident that the common American favored their own industry opposed to foreign industry, and why wouldn’t they. Internal economy grew but consequentially, foreign trade strained, putting the economic aspect of patriotism in a sort of gray area in terms of how beneficial allowing patriotism to influence policy