the first weekly article

The early years after the civil war was a period known as the reconstruction period. It was the time to help rebuild the union and the damages caused by the civil war. During the period blacks or any former slave’s where given freedom from the chains of servitude and were given rights by the U.S government including the right to vote. However many of the former confederate states where against this and passed a law known simply as the black codes which limited the rights of blacks in certain states.  Despite this even the north or union and the former confederate states had large areas and locations segregated including schools. Hard to believe the U.S government supported it. At this time the blacks were being disgraced and discouraged by the racism even though the amendments said all men were created equal. They were not treated equal they simply separated the inferior from the superior.  In the end even though, they were free, they still were paid much less than a white worker for the same job. In the south they were restricted from voting for political candidates, even running for small offices was not allowed due to the black codes. The former slaves were also treated unfairly during an agreement called “share cropping” which occurs after the civil war. Which I believe was actually worse than slavery, having a majority of the victims having almost no profit margin, if any at all. The reason was that the white landowners loaned them their equipment and had to give 50% of the crops grown to the land owner. Above all else the white land owners also controlled their life. They told what to do and when to do it. For instance they told them when to eat. Something that I found that was quite offensive was that for a small percentage actually had them pay the land owner for not feeding them selves or their families.

Similar to the 1960’s civil rights movement, the fact that blacks were restricted to black schools and so on except in the military when the barracks became desegregated. The civil movement started when blacks realized their true potential and ability which actually occurred during the Second World War with things such as the Tuskegee airmen with one of the best kill to death ratio of the entire European theatre. When the black population realized they could do things just as well as the white population. Which lead them to demand more freedom and a better life, which was difficult because the universal belief that the blacks were inferior to the white race and the segregation was in effect just like in the post civil war times. The key thing is that in both time periods blacks were treated poorly and unfairly, although the situation was worse during the reconstruction after the civil war because of the widespread poverty and segregation they lived in.  However in the late 1800’s segregation was accepted by the black community because they had not realized their potential or were not educated enough until the 1950’s- 1960’s.    During the time they gained a greater desire to receive an adequate education like the majority of the white population.

While both time periods where similar in many ways for example, the segregation of the people and the treatment of blacks as the inferior race. Even though they had freedoms those freedoms were limited at best and usually like the bus incident in the 1960’s their rights would have to second to what the white population had wanted, like not giving up seat on the bus. While before in the 1800’s it was tolerated by a majority of the community, when the supposedly inferior race would do nothing. Until they evolved to resist and strive for civil freedom.  

the slave's life better or worse?

During a period after the civil war know as the reconstruction era former slaves of the southern states were given new rights, including the ability to own private property and vote in some elections. To the best efforts of the southern states that had tried to prevent the blacks from voting, created something known as the black codes which limited the blacks in many ways.  however they could also continue living on the land they once slaved on, since the it was all they knew at the time. Those plantations where still  owned by white landlords but with only a few minor differences, like paying rent to the land owner for tools and land to farm and live on, in the end they were almost treated worse during the share cropping  time paying for everything to the land owner, and just like before had told them how to run their lives. In some cases the former slaves would have to pay the landlord for not feeding their family, which by all means is ridiculous, along with the fact that most of them could hold only a few jobs if they are not on a plantation, although they get paid they end up just using to pay the loans they have and like most of the time they  were mostly in debt. The ones on  the outside meaning they are not working on a plantation because of the reconstruction were able to run for low level offices and hold some jobs but they were still limited in part to segregation
 

paying the south for their loss?

     I believe that it granting the south amnesty was  the right way to go, because if the union  had actually instead punished them it would have made the country as a whole weaker. Possibly setting the spark for 2nd civil war due to unfair treatment, but that depend's on the severity of the punishment. Take for example what happened to Germany after ww1 and the Treaty of Versailles,  which was  the igniter for the for the takeover of Germany by the Nazi party and eventually starting World War 2. Which was the affect of harsh conditions of which they had to follow.  However the amnesty idea also helps regain the trust of some of the people of the south and allowing them to return to the union. It also served as a way to be sure that the confederate polictions would stay loyal to the union and not choose break away again.

Why so Sterotypical?

I believe humanity as a whole likes or naturally points out physical characteristics even personality traits and habits.Society likes to create international stereotypes to classify the different races such as Asians then substerotypes such as Vietnamese, Korean etc... Becuase people use it to base a judgment on that person by the way they look when in fact they may be the complete opposite of what you think. Humanity likes to take the easy way, so they separate from each other. A difference which can  often lead to  to conflict  such as the Holocaust in Uganda, and Hilters Holocaust which they targeted certain traits of the race ex. large noses= Jew in the Nazi eye's, the event also spawned a stereotype that if your German your a Nazi.

lincoln not so honost?

I believe that Lincoln was focused on preserving the union becuase the signs of succession were nearing. That if he lost the south they may face serious food shortages along with a great loss in his leadership ability which leads to doubt. The north would also lose a large portion of the work force along with public support.  However it was also just to keep the states uninited under one flag. Even though he is known for being the one who freed the slaves and the signer of the emacnation proclamation what he actually wanted to do was keep the country unified at all costs. However he actually thought of the slave race as inferior as well as the south, I feel that he used the proclamation as a means to encourage slaves from the south to head north which would bolster numbers.

Who would want to forget about history?

I believe that  history no matter how bad it was, or how badly it would hurt the countries reputation, it should never be forgotten. For example the U.S surrender of the Philippines to the Japanese and the largest single capture of U.S forces in history along with the Bataan death march. It is comparable to denying that the soldiers that had surrendered had never existed and the men who were killed in duty and for survival, died without recognition.  Even in the country that had experienced such a tragedy should show the way they improved themselves to overcome that error and prevent it from occurring again.

why do we study history

The subject of history has long been debated as something that does not apply to some students.
While most do not see the true importance of history,  without the past we would lose many  cultures and traditions. On the other hand it allows us to analyze the past  so that previous mistakes such as the sneak attack at pearl harbor and world war 2 will never happen again. It even teaches us lessons of our past leaders and tragic events like the Kennedy assassination and 9/11. allows us to improve society by looking to the past. as some say, "to see the future you must look to the past".