How Parchman Reflects The Intertwined Themes Of Reform And Race

In “Apostles of Disunion: Southern Secession Commissioners and the Causes of the Civil War,” Charles B. Dew analyzes the public letters and speeches of white, southern commissioners in order to prove that the Civil War was fought over slavery. By analyzing the public letters and speeches of the commissioners, Dew offers a compelling argument proving that slavery along with the ideology of white supremacy were primary causes of the Civil War. Dew is not only the Ephraim Williams Professor of American History at Williams College, but he is also a successful author who has received various awards including the Elloit Rudwick Prize and the Fletcher Pratt Award. In fact, two of Dew’s books, Tredegar Iron Works and Apostles of Disunion and Ironmaker to the Confederacy: Joseph R. Anderson, received the Fletcher Pratt Award for the best nonfiction book regarding the American Civil War. In his analysis, Dew argues that the fear of eliminating slavery along with the fear of racial equality were both crucial factors regarding the outbreak of the Civil War. By tracing the speeches and public letters of state-appointed commissioners, Dew effectively argues that the white, southern commissioners led the southern states into a Civil War in order to preserve the institution of slavery as well as the ideology of white supremacy.

Imagine a historian, author of an award-winning dissertation and several books. He is an experienced lecturer and respected scholar; he is at the forefront of his field. His research methodology sets the bar for other academicians. He is so highly esteemed, in fact, that an article he has prepared is to be presented to and discussed by the United States’ oldest and largest society of professional historians. These are precisely the circumstances in which Ulrich B. Phillips wrote his 1928 essay, “The Central Theme of Southern History.” In this treatise he set forth a thesis which on its face is not revolutionary: that the cause behind which the South stood unified was not slavery, as such, but white supremacy. Over the course of

After the Civil War, the South was in a state of political turmoil, social chaos, and economic decline. Contrary to popular belief, Northerners did not subject Southerners to unethical or inhumane punishment. The time post Civil War was filled with efforts toward reconstructing the South, yet there is the strong question if there even is a New South. Yes, there was somewhat of a New South economically. No, there was not a New South regarding race relations and social hierarchy. In the 1870’s, the South realized the world still looked at them as the ones who wanted slavery. There was a need to project a new image to the world and to stimulate

In “Reconstruction Revisited”, Eric Foner reexamines the political, social, and economic experiences of black and white Americans in the aftermath of the Civil War. With the help of many historian works, Foner gives equal representation to both sides of the Reconstruction argument.

The Civil War is something almost everyone has a general idea about. It is more than a huge part of America’s history and is the central event in America 's historical consciousness. This war, unlike the American Revolution which created the first American states, determined what kind of nation it would be. Though there are many reasons for the cause of the American Civil War, one of the main reasons is the different attitudes the North and the South had toward slavery. In January of 1863, The Emancipation Proclamation was

The first segment is about the "old" South and the plantations, slavery, supported by law, church, schools, and press. The second is the new order of Reconstruction, occupation and a changed federal Constitution. The third one is the third regime, following Reconstruction, which was the longest, characterized by the regime of "Jim Crow.” The last segment is the newest phase, comprising the demise of Jim Crow and the renewed intense devotion of the federal government and civil rights leaders to establish racial equality. This segments of Southern history has been involved to the relationship between the white and black race, specifically the legal and social status of blacks, and this work is essentially a study of the third segment - the rise and entrenchment of Jim

The book Masters Without Slaves by James L. Roark is about what happens before, during, and after the civil war that pertains to slavery. It starts off with how slavery was in jeopardy with President Abraham Lincoln getting elected into office. When he got elected the rumor of secession was getting tossed around and would eventually come true. “The secession debate embroiled planters in the issues of sectionalism and nationalism, race and class, and slavery and freedom.”(1, 1) Many people were divided on if the south should secede from the rest of the United States and if it didn’t then there was a chance that slavery would end. There were Unionist planters that were calling for the separation of the south and United States. “Southern Unionist mounted the stump once more to put down the demands for independence.”(2, 2) “Secession not only threatened slavery, but endangered all property, and the prosperity of the 1850’s as well.” (3, 4) As it went on the south succeed and the civil war had started. The slaves had been freed but many stayed because they were able to stay and work with their old plantation owners. The slave owners were very opposed to losing their slaves and tyranny had broken out. The South had to reform and learn how to farm without their slaves. Many people had found it hard to live without their slaves but one woman argued with her husband saying, “That he must learn to live under the new order of things.” (4, 183) The book is based about how southern

In the article “The Central Theme of Southern Slavery” Ulrich B. Phillips asserts that among several other motives that served as a drive for white Southerners to support slavery, the predominant one was their desire to preserve white supremacy in the South. He claims that all of the states in the US are similar except for the opinion about slavery. Phillips emphasizes that the idea of slavery in the South was important and perceived by southerners as heritage and a tradition. He also claims that the institution wasn’t merely economic, but also a system of social order. In addition, the white southerners saw abolition as a major threat to their economic freedom. According to Phillips, some Southerners saw deportation of african-american citizens as another solution to the slavery crisis in the United States. However,

In his conclusion, McPherson answer what may lead one to ask if the American Civil War was indeed an extraordinary revolution, one whose likes the world had ever seen. The answer lies in the exact opposite of revolution. Counterrevolution occurred at first chance which in so many ways blanketed the revolutionary characteristics to the best of its applicability. From 1865 to 1866, immediately after the war, black codes began to surface. The purpose of these codes were to keep black labor in a state of dependence and subjection as close to slavery as possible. These codes appeared in the forms of vagrancy laws, contract labor laws the subjected freedmen to peonage and sharecropping, and violence. This code also makes for the final piece of evidence toward support of McPherson’s goal in categorizing the American Civil War as a revolution. Southern redeemers, after the withdrawal of northern Republican interest, went through great lengths to counter evolve them. Why would that be? In order to

The Reconstruction of the United States was an experiment in interracial democracy. The Civil War victory by the North brought to a close the establishment of slavery but, in turn, opened Pandora's box. The questions and answers pertaining to economical, political, and social equality for freedmen had yet to be addressed on a practical level. The Southern states, still bitter from defeat and economic stresses, strongly rejected the societal transformations thrust upon them. The Northern states' focal point remained on the necessary political powers by which to enact constitutional amendments, therefore empowering the federal government with the capabilities to enforce the principles of equal rights. On paper, slavery was abolished, but in reality, African-Americans were once again enslaved on a ship without the security or knowledge of what the next port held for them. The Civil War had not truly ended. It was still active under the guise of Reconstruction, but now coats and flags of many colors existed, and battles were merely fought on alternate battlefields. A war of ideas lacking in substantial practicality resulted in repetitious battles being won and loss. The motivating forces that set Reconstruction into motion were for the most part the North's quest for unification among states', and the emancipation of slaves. However, the primary objective of Reconstruction was to grant political, economical, and social opportunities for the freedmen. The

The era of Reconstruction was a fourteen-year period following the Civil War filled with political and constitutional strife, extreme suffering, grand political ambitions and huge turns in race relations and human rights (Blight 32). During this period, many Americans realized that remembering the war “became, with time, easier than struggling over the enduring ideas for which those battles had been fought” (Blight 31). To people such as Frederick Douglass, a reborn United States could not

During the time of Reconstruction, the federal government did little to help the people of America as a whole, they concentrated on bettering African American lives and “reconstructing” the South. The focus during this time period was to protect the rights of African Americans, which had long and hard been fought for. The federal government made it their priority to ensure equal rights among all black people. Also, the readmission of the Confederate states was essential to the federal

When the slaves were freed problems arose either the North or South who was to blame? Reconstruction either to rebuild the infrastructures in the south and what to do with the now free slaves, many had to deal with this situation. For one where would the slaves go now that they’re free. Then what will happen with the south after is has gone through a tough war. The North and South needed to cooperate as they help each other out with their businesses. South worked on agriculture and North worked on manufacturing, they needed each other for a win-win situation. North and South they both killed reconstruction, the south killed it by having angry outbursts and killing, the north killed it by later not caring and ignoring that reconstruction was a thing.

As a country, America has gone though many political changes throughout its lifetime. Leaders have come and gone, and all of them have had their own objectives and plans for the future. As history has taken its course, though, almost all of these “revolutionary movements” have come to an end. One such movement was Reconstruction. Reconstruction was a violent period that defined the defeated South’s status in the Union and the meaning of freedom for ex-slaves. Though, like many things in life, it did come to an end, and the resulting outcome has been labeled both a success and a failure.

One main argument that came from Stephens ' speech was the affirmation that African American slavery, or the peculiar institution, was the direct cause of the Confederacy’s secession. He states, “The new constitution has put at rest, forever, all the agitating questions relating to our peculiar institution African slavery as it exists amongst us the proper status of the Negro in our form of civilization. This was the immediate cause of the late rupture and present revolution (Stephens)”. Slavery defined the South and it caused many problems between the slave states and the free states. Because of slavery, the new government for the South change immensely. Stephens said that the new government was based on the reality of natural inequality.