Category: Emancipation Proclamation

Abraham Lincoln was a man of humble beginnings who, even though self-trained, rose to significance through the numerous initiative characteristics that he had. Quality attributes that Lincoln had were genuineness, uprightness and an incredible commitment towards the privileges of the individuals. It was most likely through his devastated childhood that he framed such a bond with basic people. Lincoln had the option to show the nation that a common individual, with solid character and trustworthiness, was fit for motivating others to enormity. His capacity to convey through unique addresses was helpful to a nation so gravely needing somebody to restore the nation to the solidarity that it had once had. He displayed incredible initiative characteristics, for example, trustworthiness, obligation, and benevolent help.

The Civil War was perhaps one of the absolute lowest points in America ever, yet winning this war was a significant key in prosperity as president. In spite of the fact that by choosing to battle this war Lincoln isolated the country, he additionally did his best to win and get the country back together as one. At the point when no one else had the confidence expected to win the war, Lincoln was there to tell everybody it was conceivable. By doing this he gave a genuine indication of authority and trustworthiness. Abraham Lincoln’s Emancipation Proclamation and his unequivocal activities as president during the Civil War prompted a triumph for the Union, which made a change that would always influence the United States of America. The Emancipation Proclamation is an update that we are altogether rising to and all merit a reasonable possibility for everything. Abraham Lincoln’s difficult work and heritage has appeared during the time considerably after his passing. The Preliminary Proclamation and the Emancipation Proclamation demonstrated that Lincoln needed to have an equivalent society where nobody’s privileges are mishandled. His heritage and initiative still appear as the sixteenth president who abrogated bondage to the man on the penny. Lincoln has buckled down from going through hours dealing with opportunity to driving the North to their victory.

He showed incredible authority characteristics, for example, honesty, obligation, and magnanimous assistance. A couple of his statements being, ‘Almost all men can stand difficulty, yet in the event that you need to test a man’s character, give him control.’ This citation is so significant in light of the fact that much after Lincoln picked up his capacity and notoriety, he remained a legitimate, reliable man, and he didn’t get control hungry like numerous presidents in the past have. A couple of a greater amount of Lincoln’s well-known citations are, ‘Most people are about as glad as they make up their brains to be,’ ‘And at last, it’s not the years throughout your life that tally. It’s the life in your years.’ These statements by Lincoln are so ground-breaking since they show that he needed everybody to live their lives without limit, and to be glad. They exhibit that he didn’t need the individuals of America, or himself to do anything incorrectly, he simply needed America to carry on with its life without limit and make the most of everything. Something else these citations show is, the thing that a solid head Lincoln was, and how he needed what was best for the individuals, which was a significant resource in him being the best president.

Abraham Lincoln’s Emancipation Proclamation and his conclusive activities as president during the Civil War prompted a triumph for the Union. His incredible driving aptitudes and accomplishments persuade us to be better and help us know regardless of whether we originate from nothing we can at present come up, be better, and make our America a superior spot. The spirit of America is about the various hardships Americans experience and how we overcome them and Abraham Lincoln encapsulates all hardships that we experience. Abraham Lincoln’s inheritance made a change that would everlastingly influence the United States of America.

Abolition in the United States is and was a movement. This movement began before and continued into the Civil War. This historical movement pressed on for the end of slavery and set slaves free. In the beginning the enlightenment group convicted slavery on human grounds. English Quakers and Evangelicals convicted slavery as un christian. Slavery in Georgia was put to an end originally in its territory in the colony. After that the first great awakening became part of the message of abolition. This is happening through the thirteen colonies in the 1730’s and 1740’s. The Enlightenment period provided rationalists that denounced slavery because of violating natural rights. James Edward Oglethorpe, a British parliamentarian, was one of the first to fluently understand slavery cases in the Enlightenment period. Men were all declared equal in the state of Massachusetts when the constitution was ratified. Slavery in the state came to an end when freedom suits challenged slavery on the principle. In these long years abolitionism and its movement were getting stronger in states in the North. Congress had the expansion of slavery regulated when the Union was admitting new states. African slaves were banned from importation in Britain colonies in 1807. In 1833 the British empire abolished slavery. In 1808 slave trade became an international crime by the United States. The American Civil War resulted in slavery being deemed unconstitutional in 1865. James M. McPherson defines an abolitionist ‘as one who before the Civil War had agitated for the immediate, unconditional, and total abolition of slavery in the United States.’ He does not include antislavery activists such as Abraham Lincoln or the Republican Party, which called for the gradual ending of slavery.

The Emancipation Proclamation demonstrated that this period of time was an extremely delicate time for the nation. Neither sides of the conversation was moving on their position yet one needed to give. What’s more, no one technically won. Both sides were willing to fight and fight. The way that the nation endured such huge numbers of loss over this issue could have been chosen legitimately is appalling. Be that as it may, individuals are exceptionally stubborn in what they say and feel is correct. Additionally, this demonstrates the central government truly dreaded putting excessive control over the states. On the off chance that the government had settled on the choice themselves, the choice would have happened speedier without the same number of lives lost.

President Abraham Lincoln was a minority president, having been elected in 1860 with only 40 percent of the popular vote. He inherited a country divided by secession and at the brink of war, and an opposing foe in Confederate President Jefferson Davis. Lincoln had many challenges to overcome to make his mark in history. Lincoln had never accepted the legality of secession, and during his inauguration he vowed to preserve the Union and uphold the Constitution. However, his initial acts as President reflected his belief that, at least temporarily, one vow must be broken to uphold the other. Lincoln believed that bending the Constitution was necessary to preserve the Union—and even the Constitution itself. The Constitution states in Article I, Section VIII, paragraph 12 that only Congress can increase the size of the Federal Army, but with a declaration Lincoln did just that. Several of the nation’s military institutions were located in the south, giving them a significant military advantage with better trained and organized forces. Lincoln felt his only chance would be to overwhelm the forces of the south by outnumbering them. Unfortunately, Congress was not in session, so Lincoln took it upon himself to enlarge the army by 75,000 men. Congress later approved the measure in a display of solidarity, but a few feathers had been ruffled over the expropriation of power. Lincoln also revoked some civil liberties during his tenure without the prior approval of Congress. The writ of habeas corpus was, and is, one of the basic tenets of American civil liberties. It allows the examination of the circumstances of a person’s arrest and imprisonment to determine if that individual should be detained. The purpose of habeas corpus is to prevent unjust or illegal imprisonment. Lincoln negated the writ for the purpose of summarily arresting anti-Unionists. This act was in open defiance of the Supreme Court and Chief Justice Roger B. Taney’s ruling in the 1861 case of Ex Parte Merryman, which stated that the suspension of habeas corpus was unconstitutional without an act of Congress. In addition, Lincoln violated other constitutional liberties during his Presidency. These violations include the suspension of several newspapers and the arrest of their editors on grounds that they were obstructing the war effort. He also instituted supervised voting in the border states, making voters march between two lines of armed troops. Many voters were intimidated by this process, especially since it was the norm to provide ballots on paper colored to identify a voter’s party affiliation, but Lincoln believed these actions were necessary for the good of the Union.

Although President Lincoln had a reputation for being an abolitionist, his political record indicated this label was not completely accurate. Lincoln focused his political stance regarding slavery on the prevention of its spread into the territories. After becoming president he initially resisted laws by the federal government called the Confiscation Acts that pushed the Union toward abolition. The first of these acts, the Confiscation Act of 1861, approved on August 6, 1861, granted freedom for all slaves who had served in the Confederate military. It also allowed for Union seizure of all rebel property. This act was only enforced in areas where the Union Army had a presence. President Lincoln resisted this act because he feared the effect it would have on the political climate. He worried this act might influence the border states—so critical to the Northern cause—toward secession to protect their slavery system. In an attempt to curb the emancipation, he ordered Union commanders to refuse escaped and liberated slaves admittance to their military units. However, Congress pushed forward toward emancipation with a second Confiscation Act on July 17, 1862. This act was more direct, declaring freedom for the slaves of civilian and military Confederate officials. Although a vital step toward complete emancipation, this act also was only enforced in areas with a Union military presence. Lincoln continued to refrain from offering full-fledged support of abolition, believing that the political climate was not ready to support it. The abolitionists grew impatient, but Lincoln believed that such a revolutionary change should only follow a significant victory on the battlefield. His opportunity came following the battle of Antietam. Antietam Creek, Maryland, was the site of a showdown between the Confederate General Robert E. Lee and the Union General George McClellan on September 17, 1862. It proved to be the bloodiest single day of fighting of the entire Civil War. The battle had no clear winner, but the Union demonstrated surprising strength, giving Lincoln the positive political climate he sought for his proclamation. The preliminary proclamation came on September 23, 1862, immediately following Antietam. In this address, Lincoln outlined the terms of freedom for slaves in states that were still in rebellion. It also indicated that Lincoln’s final Emancipation Proclamation would be issued January 1, 1863. Despite its title, the Emancipation Proclamation did not immediately free any slaves since it could not be enforced in those states it targeted. Although the Proclamation foreshadowed the end of slavery, those expecting an immediate effect were sorely disappointed. Lincoln’s purpose for the Proclamation was not the immediate freedom of all slaves. Rather, he hoped the declaration would weaken the moral cause of the South, while strengthening the Union’s moral cause. He felt that with the Proclamation the Civil War now had a “higher purpose,” which Lincoln sought to leverage for the Union. Reaction to the Proclamation was varied. Some questioned the constitutionality of the decree, while others ignored it completely. Border states were not affected by the Proclamation but they continued to watch Lincoln’s actions with a wary eye. Northerners—particularly those in the northwest—took a harsher view, believing that Lincoln had again acted with too-heavy a hand, while abolitionists approved of the measure and sought stricter enforcement. Meanwhile, Southerners continued to fear an insurrection by their slaves. Since most slaves were illiterate, news of the Emancipation Proclamation reached them largely by word of mouth. About 800,000 slaves should have been freed by the declaration, but none gained immediate freedom. Slave owners did not voluntarily free their slaves, but many blacks took advantage of the declaration to leave their owners and join the Union Army to support those who had upheld their freedom. Nearly 200,000 black soldiers played an important role in the Civil War, with 16 eventually earning Medals of Honor, the nation’s highest honor for valor. However, they faced great challenges throughout the war, even from the people who were employing them to fight. Black Union soldiers received a net monthly pay of $7, while their white counterparts received almost double that amount. Black soldiers also faced the threat of torture and death if they were captured by the Confederacy. President Lincoln declared that the Union would retaliate if black Union Prisoners of War were tortured by their Confederate captors, but this declaration was largely ignored. In light of these threats, it is noteworthy that former slaves accepted the risks of military service over slavery and the risks of trying to integrate into civilian society. These former slaves filled a void created by increasing desertions of Union soldiers. The deserters were unhappy with the shift in the purpose of the war. Many men felt that the only true purpose should be the fight for unity of the North and the South, and they were unhappy that the cause had shifted to include abolitionism. The Emancipation Proclamation also had a profound effect on the congressional election of 1862. Northerners spoke with their votes, letting the administration know that they were not happy with the current political tide. Although it was not a presidential election year, Congressional elections saw several changes from the previous election. Republicans fared poorly in New York, Pennsylvania, Ohio, and even Republican President Lincoln’s home state of Illinois, although the Democrats still did not have the numbers to take control of Congress. Another important political effect of the Proclamation was the changing sentiment in Europe. During the Battle of Antietam, the British and French governments had been on the verge of rushing in to provide mediation, but that urgency cooled with General Lee’s retreat across the Potomac. When the Emancipation Proclamation was declared, European working classes sympathized with the measure and the Union won its favor. With this action, Europe no longer felt intervention was necessary.

The effect of the Emancipation Proclamation on slaves was more emotional than physical. Many slaves were free in theory but had been convinced to remain working for their former owners out of loyalty or a lack of alternatives. Many simply did not believe that the Emancipation Proclamation guaranteed their freedom, and those who did understand the Proclamation realized that it did not guarantee their safety if they left their masters. Those doubts would finally be laid to rest after the war’s conclusion with the Thirteenth Amendment to the Constitution. With these words, “Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the U.S. or any place subject to their jurisdiction,” Congress completely and finally abolished slavery. The Amendment was approved in December of 1865 with a two-thirds vote in Congress, and went in effect fully when three-fourths of the states ratified it. Although Lincoln’s proclamation had put abolition in motion, he was not able to see it through to completion. Attending Ford’s Theater in Washington on Good Friday, April 14, 1865, less than a week after General Lee’s surrender, he was shot in the head by John Wilkes Booth, a radical pro-Southern actor. Lincoln’s assassination actually served to improve his reputation as a powerful historical figure. Despite his numerous positive attributes, Lincoln, a product of the most divisive period in U.S. history, made many political enemies and garnered limited popular support. However, his sudden and dramatic death blurred the edges of his shortcomings from the memories of his detractors and promoted him to legendary status. He is remembered for his vision of a nation where all people “are created equal,” as he stated in his Gettysburg Address delivered during the Civil War near Gettysburg, Pennsylvania on November 19, 1863. Lincoln’s Vice President, Andrew Johnson, was never quite comfortable filling Lincoln’s shoes. Nonetheless, Johnson attempted to follow Lincoln’s plan for abolition and urged the ratification of the Thirteenth Amendment. Undoubtedly, both men had a hand in ending slavery but ultimately, victory on the battlefield was the true emancipator.

James Baldwin was an American novelist, social critic, and a well-respected African-American who identified as homosexual until his late death on December 1st,1987 in Saint-Paul-De-Vence, France. During his life span, homosexuality was in its first stages where many did not understand what homosexuality was, or why one would identify as homosexual. By whites attempting to oppress blacks by deeming it to be wrong to like someone of the same sex. Although, the Emancipation Proclamation was an act signed by President Abraham Lincoln that shifted the legal status of over 3.5 million black slaves in 1863 (January 1st,1863); it was another method used to oppress blacks mentally. The act only freed slaves in certain areas in the southern political region of the United States of 1863. Baldwin’s work connects to Abraham Lincolns Emancipation Proclamation and how it led to the misconception of human rights, where blacks at the time believed that they were inferior to whites based on their uneducated interpretation of the Emancipation Proclamation. Also, the subjugation of black men under the process of having them receive a decent education helps to subjugate blacks under the Emancipation Proclamation by means of previous mental oppression. Receiving an adequate education can help gain knowledge of inalienable rights no matter the social class, color of skin, or anything else that makes people different from one-another.

James Baldwins work showcases how he thought about the words, phrases, or terms invented by whites when they were enslaving blacks to do labor pre-1890’s. In present day, the racial slur ‘nigger’ has been transformed by its people to be utilized as a term of endearment. Instead of using the ‘er’ at the end of the word, it is now used with a ‘ga’; spelled ‘nigga’. The term is highly popular in hip-hop/pop culture today. The slur ‘nigger’ is reviewed and broken down through the mind of James Baldwin throughout a video that showcases Baldwins ideology. Balwin thought that the term ‘nigger’ was made to classify all black people into one demoralized group. The video shows that the term ‘nigger’ was invented in attempt to oppress blacks due to whites being scared of the education acquired quickly by African-Americans. Blacks knew the term ‘nigger’ as a demoralizing term and Baldwin believes that whites were in fear of an educated black man so they try to make black men illiterate. Abraham Lincoln on the other hand did not directly call black men ‘niggers’ and use other racial slurs to indoctrinate black men. Lincoln used the system of education and equal government to oppress the black race. When using the power of inadequate education to indoctrinate blacks into forced labor having enslaved them and bringing them through the Middle Passage to the Americas and other countries in the western hemisphere. African-American men did not have the ability to exercise their “rights” given to them through the Emancipation Proclamation. Although rights are not given, due to everyone having a natural set of rights that should be respected by all people.

A case that showcases Baldwin’s thoughts on the oppression on the African-American race in America is one of the most known cases in history, famously known as Brown v. Board of Education. The case was an important turning point in the United States history in 1954 where it reversed the ruling of a previous judicial case called Plessy v. Ferguson. Plessy v. Ferguson was a case that established ‘separate but equal’ for blacks. In terms of in whatever an African-American may do, they must do it in a separate place than whites. In example of this case, blacks were allowed to go to school, just not with whites. In this period of time ‘separate but equal’ was powered by a set of laws known as the Jim Crow laws. Jim Crow laws are laws that made it ‘just’ to segregate blacks and whites. Acts such as this is what James Baldwin is implying when speaking about how whites use the government and its powers to subjugate black men through education. Although blacks were given an education, it was not up to par with how white students were taught. This was to keep blacks under the scale of adequate education which led to the verso of the ideology ‘separate but equal’ in the case of Brown v. Board of Education due to The Warren Court’s unanimous ruling that ‘separate but equal’ was wrong. They ruled against it because they believed that the ‘separate but equal’ dogma voided the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment. At the end of the case they put an end to the attempt of educational indoctrination on blacks by terminating legally mandated race-segregated schools all over.

The Emancipation Proclamation and thirteenth Amendment achieved by the Standard War were fundamental achievements in the long game-plan of end genuine oppression in the US. About from the most strong starting time of his affiliation, abolitionists and radical Republicans obliged Abraham Lincoln to give an Emancipation Proclamation. Despite the way wherein that Lincoln as time goes on detested subjugation, he felt bound by his set up control as president to challenge oppression also as for gigantic war measures. He in like way stressed over the responses of those in the strong edges states where abuse was so far honest to goodness. Lincoln is said to have hardened the centrality of keeping the fringe states in the Relationship by saying ‘I should have God on my side, at any rate I should have Kentucky.’

Liberating the slaves would engage the Relationship to win the war by obstructing the association from guaranteeing work and giving the Collusion military extra work. Oppression was a brutal structure wherein African Americans were treated as property; the war changed into a chance to end subjection. The Emancipation Proclamation was applied strikingly to those slaves under Confederate control, legitimized the nullification of subjugation on military not on mind boggling grounds. The 45,000 slaves in the dependable Visitor Passes on, the 275,000 slaves in Association recalled Tennessee and the vast slaves for regions constrained by the Coalition Prepared power in Louisiana and Virginia were not freed by The Emancipation Proclamation.

In any case, many fight that the proclamation didn’t as a last resort free any slaves or pound the foundation of abuse itself. it still essentially applied to states in one of a kind resistance, not to the slave-holding visitor states or to revolt domains enough under Collusion control. If all else fails, it essentially liberated Partnership prepared power specialists from returning runaway detainees to their proprietors under the national Criminal Slave Show of 1850. Any got away slaves who sees how to get behind the lines of the moving Association military and any who lived in spaces thusly got by those military never again ought to be returned, in the presentations of the proclamation, they were ‘thenceforward, and everlastingly free.’

Lincoln gave the Emancipation Proclamation by and large as a war measure. Possibly its most crucial quick impact was that it, it completely put the U.S. government against the ‘remarkable establishment’ of Subjection, as such setting a detestation between the South and its solicitation by European countries that had restricted oppression. The South had since a long time earlier depended on help from Britain and France. A few articles inside the Confederate States’ Constitution unequivocally certified abuse inside the Plan, yet a few articles of the U.S. Constitution in like way checked enslavement, the Emancipation Proclamation drew an altogether progressively clear package between the two.

Abraham Lincoln today is recognized by many as being the “Great Emancipator” who had memorably freed the slaves and saved the Union. However, Lincoln’s actions might not truly be as whole-hearted and heroic as many people are misinformed to believe. Lincoln’s only purpose from the very beginning was to preserve the Union, regardless of whether slaves in the end were freed or kept enslaved. Lincoln, undoubtedly, contributed much towards uniting the country in a time of bloodshed and divisive conflict, but towards the subject of ending slavery, he is not quite deemed the hero with modern sensibilities that people often assume. Although Abraham Lincoln certainly contributed a lot to save the Union and in name only, can be considered to have freed the slaves; however, in a more physical aspect, Lincoln’s initial intentions in freeing them were not as pure as many believed to be but was instead a political and strategical move in bringing the Union back together and ending the Civil War.

There is no doubt in Lincoln’s mind that preserving the Union was his priority, but his true motives in freeing the slaves are questionable. In Lincoln’s famous letter to Horace Greeley, he wrote “my paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and it is not either to save or destroy slavery, if I could save the Union without freeing any slave, I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves, I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that” (Lincoln). His statement to Greeley ultimately shows his true intentions and his stance on slavery. Although some can argue that Lincoln opposed slavery; however, his true intentions were not necessarily to free slaves and therefore, does not necessarily deem him worthy of being recognized as the “Great Emancipator” (Lecture 20). In fact, his actions in eventually declaring them free was merely a political move against the Confederacy. Lincoln freed the slaves for interests that had more to do with military and economic power for preserving the Union rather than for morals or ethics.

As the Civil War was reaching its peak, slavery in the South started to become an even bigger problem for the North as slaves were the major source of labor in the South and were an important asset especially during a time of war (Lecture 19). The South’s main source of economy was through slavery which gave them a huge benefit in the war effort (LEP 15.6). When the North began to lose, Lincoln decided to take initiative against slavery in order to weaken the labor force of the South. Lincoln’s main goal was to save the Union and freeing the slaves was the only way to do it; he would not have paid much attention to the topic so much if it had not been so important to save the nation. The Emancipation Proclamation freed the slaves only on paper, and it was considered more of a war tactic than a moral move. Freeing the slaves was just a means to an end towards Lincoln’s true goal.

Many people associate the Emancipation Proclamation as an executive order that ended slavery; however, the proclamation did not necessarily free the slaves directly. The Emancipation Proclamation was more of a propaganda that Lincoln used on the Confederates to bring the Union back together. Towards the issue of freeing slaves, Lincoln’s motives and strategies are similar to that of a politician than that of a “Great Emancipator.” At the time, Lincoln was not ready to abolish slavery in the South, nor was he ready to take too extreme of a measure on the subject of slavery. Like any good politician, they rarely ever lean-to extreme measures on a controversial issue for fear of losing popularity on the other side; for Lincoln, he remained neutral on the topic which was the clever political move on his part. A presidential attack on slavery would cause controversy in the north over war goals, create further want for secession in the South, and force the South to turn against him even more, making restoration of the Union harder for Lincoln to achieve. (LEP 16.1). In the political aspect, Lincoln’s choice of not taking a side on slavery was a smart political move that most good politicians would have made. The Emancipation Proclamation was used as a military policy to undermine the South while providing a new workforce of freed slaves for the North. Because of the proclamation, it would give more power to the North while leaving the South in a vulnerable economic position since their economy was primarily based on exports produced by slave labor. Lincoln knew this was the best strategy in recapturing and forcing the South to rejoin the Union. In addition, the passing of the 13th amendment was more of a power move that further forced the nation together rather than a strategy to free the slaves.

In name only, Lincoln could be considered to have freed the slaves; however, looking at it in a more physical stance, it was the slaves that really emancipated themselves for it was slaves themselves that ran away from the South seeking protection from the Union army (LEP 16-3). It can even be questioned if the Emancipation Proclamation actually free the slaves as the declaration was merely propaganda in getting the South to rejoin the Union. In fact, the document only freed slaves in the regions where the federal government had no power or control over. In addition, the proclamation did not apply to the border states who had remained loyal to the Union or in the areas of the Confederacy that were under Union control. Lincoln’s proclamation was merely a justification of taking property from the enemy, to what’s deemed as “contraband, if the South refused to surrender by January 1, 1863 (Lincoln). In this sense, it can be considered that it was the slaves who emancipated themselves. There has been a long history of self-emancipation such as Harriet Tubman who is a prime example of escaping slavery herself as well as helping lead many others escape to their freedom (LEP 13-4). Frederick Douglass was another instance in which a slave had emancipated themselves. His book the Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass showcases his story in which he escaped the brutality of slavery and found a life for himself as well as becoming a prominent activist and public speaker who sought to put an end to the practice of slavery (Douglass). Moreover, Lincoln promised to enforce all laws upholding slavery including the Fugitive Slave Act, desperate to appease slaveholders, Lincoln even supported a thirteenth amendment to the Constitution, the Corwin Amendment, which would have guaranteed slavery forever.

It was the enslaved men and women who escaped towards Union lines seeking refuge and their boldness of refusing to go back into captivity that truly ended slavery. The actions of those many self-emancipated refugees were what eventually “forced Lincoln and Congress to modify their war aims and formulate a policy that reflected a slave-imitated reality” (Williams 415). Lincoln had merely saw the self-emancipated refugees as an advantage of stripping the South’s main resource and took advantage of the situation. Therefore, Lincoln on paper did help free the slaves; however crediting him as the Great Emancipator is misunderstanding and inaccurate as he would not be deemed the “Great Emancipator” if not for the slaves themselves who ran towards Union army for their freedom, which prompted him to take advantage of the situation.

There is no doubt that Lincoln has contributed much to bringing the nation together to what it is today. However, his true intentions in freeing the slaves and being deemed as the “Great Emancipator” is questionable and inaccurate. It is not a question of whether Lincoln was Lincoln was a great President but rather if he specifically freed the slaves from slavery that many people are misunderstood to believe. Lincoln sacrificed and contributed much toward preserving the Union and in name only through the Emancipation Proclamation, he can be considered to have freed the slaves on paper; however in a more physical aspect, it was the slaves themselves who had bravely ran away from the South seeking freedom was what prompted Lincoln to take initiative of the situation. His title of being the “Great Emancipator” has misled many generations into believing that Lincoln had ended slavery when in actuality, his true intentions was merely to preserve the Union, whether slaves in the process were kept enslaved or freed.

In the text, Behind the scenes, A narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass, an American Slave, and “ The Great Escape From Slavery of Ellen and William Craft, several points are made about the cruelty of slavery and how freedom is important to the main characters. Two of these text, A narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass, an American Slave, and “ The Great Escape From Slavery of Ellen and William Craft, are all about how people attempt and succeed to escape from slavery. Behind the scenes includes a character that wants to fight for her sons freedom since his father is a white man. She would rather do it the legal way than run away. Keckley, Douglass, and the Crafts emancitpation stories were similar because they all wanted freedom, but different in their stories of slavery and how they recieved their emancipation.

Elizabeth Keckly’s emancipation story talks about the fight for her freedom, and doing it the right way. Her slavery story gives details and shows the reader that she wants freedom because she cares about her son. This story includes a part of her talking to her master. Her master tells her to run away but unlike the other texts she wants to buy herself and do it legally. Keckly stated in chapter three, “I can cross the river any day, as you well know, and frequently done so, but will never leave you in such a manner.” Keckly wants her freedom for her boy since he has white/freemans blood in him, but she doesn’t want to leave the way the master wants her to leave. She believes it isn’t fair that her son can’t be free so she keeps fighting for her freedom until she gets it. Another example from Behind the scenes is, “… ; that I deserve my freedom and that he would take one thousand two hundred for myself and boy.” After begging nonstop the master finally gives her a deal so that she could be free. When she said that she was going to go to New York and get the money, a friend talked her out of it. A few days later some other friends started saving up money for her to get out of freedom. She successfully made it out of there a couple years later. Keckly’s love for her son gave her and her son a gift of freedom.

Like Keckly, Fredrick Dougless dislikes slaver. Instead of forgetting the future like his master told him to, he is planning to run away. This story is different from the others because there is barely any detail. This story has a difference from other text because this is written from a first person point of view. Also the other text shows who they worked with, but Douglass didn’t give that kind of detail. Based on the text, A narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass,” …If I would be happy, i must not lay out no plans for the future.” Fredricks boss didn’t want him to worry about the future because his boss didn’t want him to leave. He wanted Douglas to be happy where they were. HIs boss didn’t want him to run away. Fredrick Douglas also stated, “He said, if I behaved myself properly he would take care of me.”If Douglass would have not run away, his boss would have rewarded him. Douldess was so eager to not be a slave he left family and friends for his freedom. He left everything just so he could be free. Overall Fredrick Dougless would rather his freedom over an advantage in slavery.

The Crafts had a clever plan unlike Keckly and Dougless, changing a pale black girl into a white man with “his” servent, her husband, and tricking many people so they could get their freedom. Their plan fools many people leading them to their freedom. This story gives every little detail about the process. This story is also told in third person. One example from the text, “The Great Escape From Slavery of Ellen and William Craft,”is , “ One of the most ingenious escapes was that of a maried couple from Georgia, Ellen and William Crafts, who traveled in first class trains, dined with a steam boat captain and stayed in the best hotels during their escape to philadelphia and freedom in 1848.” One of the greatest planned out escapes took so many risks. Ellen and William were so eager to be free they had to make a plan that would work, a clever plan. Another example is, Pondering various plans, William, knowing that slave holders could take their slave to any state, slave or free, hit upon the ideas of a fair complexioned Ellen passing herself off as his master…” Their successful and clever plan led them to their freedom. They had help from people that didn’t even know they were helping. Now they are welcome anywhere but their homelands. In conclusion this clever plan led William and Ellen to a life of joy.

These three texts show how the people prove a point. There were slaves that failed to escape, but the ones that did escape were either clever or very convincing. Keckley, Douglass, and the Crafts emancitpation stories were similar because they all wanted freedom, but different in their stories of slavery and how they recieved their emancipation.

Imperialism is somewhat slavery under another name.

On January 1, 1863, President Abraham Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation after no Confederate states accepted his preliminary proclamation. The Emancipation Proclamation declared “that all persons held as slaves” within the rebellious states “are, and henceforward shall be free.” However, the Emancipation Proclamation did not free all slaves in the United States. Rather, it declared free only those living in Confederate states. The Proclamation allowed black soldiers to fight for the Union—soldiers who were vital for Union victory. It also tied the issue of slavery directly to the war. Therefore, it is partially responsible for the New Age of Imperialism.

Imperialism refers to the practice of domination of one country by another in order to expand territory, power and influence. There are a multitude of reasons for imperialism, including, but not limited to the Emancipation Proclamation, such as reasons, military and political reasons, and humanitarian and religious reasons. By 1870, it became necessary for industrialised nations to expand their markets globally in order to sell products that they could not sell domestically on the continent. The need for cheap labour and a steady supply of raw materials, such as oil, rubber, and manganese for steel, required that the industrial nations maintain firm control over these unexplored areas. The imperialists believed that the industrial economy could only work effectively by directly controlling these regions, which meant setting up colonies under their direct control. Leading nations felt that colonies were crucial to military power, national security, and nationalism. Colonies guaranteed the growing British and American navies safe harbours and coaling stations, which they needed in times of war. Many Westerners believed that world powers should civilise ‘their little brothers’ beyond the seas. Non-whites would receive the blessings of Western civilisation, including medicine, law, and Christianity. This was true for the African country, Egypt, and the Asian country, the Philippines. Britain and America both wanted cheap labour and raw materials, which ultimately led to the mistreatment of people within colonies, and the political and economic manipulation of Egypt, Sudan, Japan, and the Philippines. Therefore, it is clear that imperialism is/ is somewhat/ is not slavery under another name.

British imperialism in Egypt and Sudan, and American imperialism in Japan and the Philippines are prominent when researching these two world powers’ involvements in imperialism.

Egypt experienced extreme hardship and a loss of freedom while under British imperialism, which began in 1882. The British military took control of existing political structures and economies after Egypt had borrowed money to the point of bankruptcy. A debt repayment agency called the ‘Caisse de la Dette’ was established, with British and French controllers monitoring Egypt’s revenue and expenditures. The British reduced the size of the Egyptian army and placed British officers in command. They appointed British ministers to control all parts of the Egyptian government and imposed new laws on the Egyptian people. Anti-British, nationalist independence parties were created due to the increased spirit of nationalism among the Egyptians, which was fuelled by the increasing presence and power of the British in Egypt. Egypt’s Prime Minister in 1954, Colonel Gamal Abdel Nasser dispelled British influence in the country permanently, and they formally withdrew the last of their troops from the Suez Canal by signing the Anglo-Egyptian Agreement. While the British did take away the freedom of the Egyptians and controlled all aspects of Egyptian life, politics and economy the evidence presented does not explicitly state that the British treated the Egyptian people like slaves. Essentially, the British took control of, but didn’t ‘own’ the Egyptians, thus, this type of imperialism isn’t slavery, however it is exploitation of Egypt’s freedom, politics and economy.

The United States’ motivation for Imperialism in the Philippines can be classified as economic, ideological, religious, political, and strategic motivation. The economic motivation was opening new markets and trade possibilities, they wanted favorable balance of trade, they needed to make exports exceed imports, and they sought to expand foreign markets. The ideological motivation was the belief that they were racially superior to others, and there was a strong sense of nationalism during the era known as the Race of empire. The religious motivation was they sought to spread Christianity. And the political motivation was the urge to fulfill their destiny as a world power by colonising and looking for fresh land to conquer. After its defeat in the Spanish-American War of 1898, Spain ceded its longstanding colony of the Philippines to the United States in the Treaty of Paris. The United States helped the Philippines win independence from Spain, however, they then annexed the Philippines, resulting in feelings of betrayal and bitterness among the revolutionaries. Filipinos were forced to live in designated areas where many died. On February 4, 1899, just two days before the U.S. Senate ratified the treaty, fighting broke out between American forces and Filipino nationalists led by Emilio Aguinaldo who sought independence rather than being given to another country for imperialist rule. The Americans felt that the Filipinos were too uncivilised to govern themselves, the U.S. kept them under their control. This led to the Philippine-American War which lasted three years and resulted in the death of over 4,200 American and over 20,000 Filipino combatants. As many as 200,000 Filipino civilians died from violence, famine, and disease. The Philippine bourgeoise prospered under forty years of American rule, while the peasants and workers lived in starvation, illness, and oppression. Claude Buss, a former ranking member of the U.S. Commission in the Philippines, says in the December 1944 Fortune, “At the outbreak of the war the very rich in the Philippines lived on the scale of aristocrats in Spain or in the United States. They had fabulous homes, automobiles, racing stables, fantastic parties, and the virtues and vices of luxury… At the opposite end of the Social scale were the Taos or peasants. They lived in one or two room huts and ate fish and rice. They worked in fields for 30 or 40 cents a day and paid over a good share of their wages to the landlord or usurer.” This shows the difference between the rich and the poor, and how they were treated by those above them. The wealthy Philippine ruling class were protected to aid U.S. domination, and the lowest class lived in squalor and poverty-stricken areas. Photos taken show the mistreatment and misbehaviour of the Filipino people caused by the American troops. They were forced to take photos for ‘exotic entertainment’ while in a distressing situation of chaos, war, and colonisation, which they just got over with the Spanish and now find themselves going through it again under the Americans.

Imperialism in the Philippines was not the same slavery as seen in America during the 1900s. Rather, it was a different type of slavery that was characterised by the restriction of free movement, forced labour, and the exploitation of the poor.