Essay On The American Journey

The South vs. The South by William Freehling is a narrative that focuses on the civil war that affected a vast number of Southerners who opposed the Confederacy regardless of whether they were white or black. These ?anti-Confederates,? as termed by Freehling comprised Slaves and Boarder state whites who together formed half the southern population and were significant to the Union victory. By weakening the Confederacy military, contributing manpower and resources to the Union and dividing the southern home front, the anti-Confederates made a critical contribution to the Union war efforts that hastened the end of the war leading to the Union?s victory. The U.S was not the only house that was divided; Divisions between pro-and anti-Confederates, white and black, and the loyalty of both upper and lower states to slavery contributed a lot to the downfall of the confederates. ?Divisions within the South helped pave the path toward war. The same divisions behind army lines helped turn the war against the slaveholders.?(p.10). William Freehling argues that more than 450,000 Union troops from the South, especially southern blacks and border state whites, helped in the defeat of the confederates. Further, when the southern Border States rejected the Confederacy, more than a half of the South?s capacity swelled the North?s advantage.

In the modern day, we, Americans, face racism and inequality on a daily basis, whether it is by appreceiving or by being hectored with it. In Confederates in the Attic by Tony Horwitz, Horwitz peppers in the harsh reality of unequal conditions and the struggle of an everyday American that were caused by the Civil War. Horwitz claims the Civil War is unfinished because of the racial tension that is still present, removals of controversial Civil War objects, and superior thinking of both races.

The Civil War caused a shift in the ways that many Americans thought about slavery and race. Chandra Manning’s What this Cruel War Was Over helps readers understand how soldiers viewed slavery during the Civil War. The book is a narrative, which follows the life of Union soldier who is from Massachusetts. Chandra Manning used letters, diaries and regimental newspapers to gain an understanding of soldiers’ views of slavery. The main character, Charles Brewster has never encountered slaves. However, he believes that Negroes are inferior. He does not meet slaves until he enters the war in the southern states of Maryland and Virginia. Charles Brewster views the slaves first as contraband. He believes the slaves are a burden and should be sent back to their owners because of the fugitive slave laws. Union soldiers focus shifted before the end of the war. They believed slavery was cruel and inhumane, expressing strong desire to liberate the slaves. As the war progresses, soldiers view slaves and slavery in a different light. This paper, by referring to the themes and characters presented in Chandra Manning’s What this Cruel War Was Over, analyzes how the issue of slavery and race shifted in the eyes of white Union soldiers’ during Civil War times.

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,

The South vs. The South by William Freehling is a narrative that focuses on the civil war that affected a vast number of Southerners who opposed the Confederacy regardless of whether they were white or black. These “anti-Confederates,” as termed by Freehling comprised Slaves and Boarder state whites who together formed half the southern population and were significant to the Union victory. By weakening the Confederacy military, contributing manpower and resources to the Union and dividing the southern home front, the anti-Confederates made a critical contribution to the Union war efforts that hastened the end of the war leading to the Union’s victory. The U.S was not the only house that was divided; Divisions between pro-and anti-Confederates, white and black, and the loyalty of both upper and lower states to slavery contributed a lot to the downfall of the confederates. “Divisions within the South helped pave the path toward war. The same divisions behind army lines helped turn the war against the slaveholders.”(p.10). William Freehling argues that more than 450,000 Union troops from the South, especially southern blacks and border state whites, helped in the defeat of the confederates. Further, when the southern Border States rejected the Confederacy, more than a half of the South’s capacity swelled the North’s advantage.

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

As David Blight says in his novel, Race and Reunion, after the Civil War and emancipation, Americans were faced with the overwhelming task of trying to understand the relationship between “two profound ideas—healing and justice.” While he admits that both had to occur on some level, healing from the war was not the same “proposition” for many whites, especially veterans, as doing justice for the millions of emancipated slaves and their descendants (Blight 3). Blight claims that African Americans did not want an apology for slavery, but instead a helping hand. Thus, after the Civil War, two visions of Civil War memory arose and combined: the reconciliationist vison, which focused on the issue of dealing with the dead from the battlefields, hospitals, and prisons, and the emancipationist vision, which focused on African Americans’ remembrance of their own freedom and in conceptions of the war as the “liberation of [African Americans] to citizenship and Constitutional equality” (Blight 2).

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.

Following, on May 4, 1961, a mixed group of 13 African Americans and white civil rights activist led the Freedom Rides (Freedom Rides?). Similar, to the Montgomery Bus Boycott, the Freedom Rides traveled to various cities in the south to protest against segregation of the bus terminals. History.com staff concurs “the Freedom Rides, a series of bus trips through the American South to protest segregation in interstate bus terminals.” The purpose of the freedom riders was to openly disobey the Jim Crow laws in the south in a nonviolent fashion. This was a dangerous journey, many of these people were beaten, arrested, and even the buses were destroyed. Yet, they persevered (“Freedom Riders: The Nashville Connection”). History.com staff, adds “The Freedom Riders, were recruited by the Congress of Racial Equality (CORE), a U.S. civil rights group, they departed from Washington D.C., and attempted to integrate facilities at bus terminals along the way in the Deep South.” African Americans would try to use the “whites only” bathrooms and counters, which attracted attention and violence (Freedom Rides). According to the history.com staff due to the efforts of the Freedom Rides, “in September 1961, the interstate Commerce Commission issued regulations prohibiting segregation in bus and train nationwide.” The

The theme of race and reunion had become a competition for memories with vastly different aspirations between the north and the south. Striving for a reunion, a majority of American white communities close obscure the civil war racial narrative would only fade. In race and reunion: The Civil War in American memory, by David Blight, represents how Americans chose to remember the Civil War conflict, from the beginning of the turning point of the war. The two major themes race and reunion, demonstrate how white Americans adjusted and altered the causes and outcomes of the Civil War to reflect their particular ideas regarding this catastrophic conflict between Northerners and Southerners era. Blight, addresses how these differences in cultures collided in the visions that they saw America becoming when reunited as a union after the Civil War, reconciliationists, White supremacy and emancipationist. Blight does an excellent job of showing the arguments between all three versions of the Civil War. As the emancipationist image kept a firm hold amongst ex-slaves, it lost much of its white support and political power. Reconciliation became more about healing, allowing racial injustice of the supremacist movement to seep into the landscape of national healing. why do Union veterans allow the real cause of the war, slavery, to disappear from the memory of the war – Blight strives to answer. Through a culture of remembrance, veterans looked back at their experience with a sort of

The South fought the American Civil War as a movement to separate themselves from the Union and establish its own national citizenship. As a result of their resounding loss, Southerners chose to focus their energies on maintaining their individual ethnic group which sets them apart from the rest of the nation. According to John Shelton Reed, author of The Enduring South, “The three functional characteristics of an ethnic group are that: It serves psychologically as a source of group identification; it provides a pattern network of groups; and it refracts the national cultural patterns of behavior and values through the prism of its own cultural heritage.” Reed allows his readers to grasp the intensity in which Southerners met, and still meet today, all three of the functional characteristics of an ethnic group. Throughout his book, Reed purposes to enlighten the reader that Southern-ness is attained by three different measures: birth, achievement, or unwilling thrust (such as the African Americans who were brought to America under duress). The Enduring South exposes the element of Southern identity as pride in its heritage, culture, customs, and ideals.

My past two summers have primarily consisted of volunteering at my local hospital, visiting family, spending time with friends, learning to drive and school work but the highlight of my vacations have been traveling.

Life is about making choices, but some of them can even change our life. Two years ago I decided to come to America for my higher studies in Western Kentucky University. Although I knew it was really a challenge to me, this significant decision that I’ve made was going to change everything about my life and me. There are many things in life that can change the course of a person’s life. It can either make a positive impact or a negative impact on a person’s life. It’s always best to have the positive impact though. For me I have had a positive experience that has changed my life forever and that is coming to a different land and culture.

The early Americans believed that they had a right to expand their territory and take wants was supposedly theirs. And with this idea came a big cost, the lives of many Native Americans and their homes.

up the phone and rang my Tom’s father to thank him, and for me and Tom