African Americans and Southern Racism During Reconstruction Essay Example for Free

African Americans and Southern Racism During Reconstruction Essay Introduction At the end of the Civil War, America faced the difficult task of uniting not only two separated territories of the United States, but also two races long separated by racism and culture. Devastated and embittered by the damage of the war, the South had a long way to go in order to achieve true equality between the former slave owners and former slaves. The majority of the South remained set in racist behavior, finding post-Civil War legal loopholes to diminish African American rights (Tindall Shi, 2010, pp. 757-758). Southerners continued to marginalize Blacks in their behavior toward ex-slaves and the later African American generation, continuing the escalation of racial tensions through white terror and discriminatory attitudes (Tindall Shi, 2010, p. 759). Most subversively, southern newspapers propagated stereotypes against African Americans in their coverage and descriptions of constitutional conventions (Logue, 1979, p. 342). Although Radical Reconstruction offered some progress toward social equality after the Civil War, its success was short-lived as African Americans suffered vast disenfranchisement through racist rulings, attitudes, and media representation in the South at the turn of the century. Rulings against African Americans After the Civil War had come to an end, African Americans in the South quickly made use of their new-found political and social rights, employing their right to vote from the Fifteenth Amendment and serving as prominent political figures (Tindall Shi, 2010, p. 722). However, the formerly fervent commitment to Radical Reconstruction soon dwindled (Tindall Shi, 2010, p. 739). Many of the advances toward civil equality were soon erased: In 1883, the Supreme Court declared the Civil Rights Laws of 1875 unconstitutional, and the political power Blacks had gained, especially in the South where 90% of Blacks lived, was completely undone. Black voter  participation dropped from 96% to 26% in South Carolina in just 12 years (1876-1888); in those same 12 years, voter participation of Blacks dropped from 53% to 18% in Georgia (Burris-Kitchen Burris, 2011, p. 5). Even while African Americans enjoyed an uninhibited freedom to voting rights, many still suffered disenfranchisement at the hands of rampant racial discrimination in the South. Although discontent Southerners could not impede the Black right to vote, they found ulterior methods to marginalize African Americans. â€Å"Since the Fifteenth Amendment made it impossible simply to deny African Americans the right to vote, disenfranchisement was accomplished indirectly, through such devices as poll taxes (or head taxes) and literacy tests† (Tindall Shi, 2010, p. 757). â€Å"Jim Crow† laws mandated racial segregation in public areas in the South and were often accompanied by physical abuse and terror to African Americans (Tindall Shi, 2010, pp. 756-759). These underhand activities in the South demonstrated that while African Americans were technically free, they continually suffered from unjust rulings and actions. These sprang from the rampantly racist attitudes in the South: Although great strides were made toward political and economic freedom for Blacks following the Civil War, the progress made was quickly squashed by political movements and rhetoric, which implied that Blacks could not handle their newly-found freedom and that the White working class was threatened by Blacks who were trying to take their jobs, their property, and their government away from them (Burris-Kitchen Burris, 2011, p. 5). Racist Attitudes Many Southerners continued to believe and propagate these ideas that African Americans had a subversive agenda to the White working class. These ideas culminated in deep-seated attitudes against African Americans in the South: â€Å"During the 1890s the attitudes that had permitted moderation in race relations evaporated. A violent ‘Negrophobia’ swept across the South and much of the nation at the end of the century† (Tindall Shi, 2010, p. 756). However, African Americans at the turn of the century had become weary of disenfranchisement and were ready to stand up against these attitudes: â€Å"This generation was more assertive and less patient than their parents. ‘We are not the Negro from who the chains of slavery fell a quarter century ago, most assuredly not,’ a black editor announced† (Tindall   Shi, 2010, p. 756). Unfortunately, this may have simply increased a White agenda of racial discrimination, as â€Å"a growing number of young white adults, however, were equally determined to keep ‘Negroes in their place’† (Tindall Shi, 2010, p. 756). Whether Southerners felt that African Americans imposed a threat to their jobs, their safety, or their rights, the overarching attitude of the South clearly displayed a strong desire to maintain racial dominance of the pre-Civil War era. Part of this attitude motivated a desire to limit education for African Americans: To keep Blacks uneducated meant Whites could boast of their superior intellect; this had been in the arsenal of Whites for hundreds of years prior to Reconstruction and continues to be used over 130 years after Reconstruction. Denial of education for Blacks existed through Reconstruction as a form of White racism and a justification for their inferior political and economic status (Burris-Kitchen Burris, 2011, p. 6). Any kind of advantage Whites could claim in the South became ammunition in their discriminatory attitudes. These ideas and attitudes fed the propagation of racist stereotypes and bias in southern newspapers. Prejudiced Media in the South Perhaps the most subtle yet shocking form of racism in the South during Reconstruction was the biased reporting of many southern newspapers. Whether the ideas and attitudes of many southern Whites influenced these published stereotypes or vice versa, it is clear that southern publications often encouraged and promoted racist attitudes at the end of the century. A publication in Charleston, South Carolina displayed this racist subtext: â€Å"While promising its readers ‘truth,’ the Charleston Mercury mocked journalistic license by actually printing racist ridicule. A favorite method was to scorn African-Americans in the convention as a race, exploiting racist attitudes saved by white readers from slavery† (Logue, 1979, p. 339). Covering the constitutional convention in Columbia in 1867, white journalists used racist stereotypes in describing the black delegates’ involvement: â€Å"Reporters emphasized how blacks would chuckle and grin, thereby exploiting th e racist assumption of many whites that blacks were mere fun-loving, animal-like creatures who had to be protected from themselves† (Logue, 1979, p. 341). The Charleston paper encouraged racist  attitudes through the ridicule of black speech and pronunciation, mocking ex-slave â€Å"ignorance† rather than reporting important issues discussed at the convention: When blacks debated the issue of ‘changing the title of districts to counties,’ for example, the only thing the reporters heard was the very awkward sound of deestrict as district is pronounced by some of the delegates. Because of their preoccupation with such factors, reporters seldom informed their readers about issues that were discussed, such as public education, relief from debts, taxes, and so on (Logue, 1979, p. 342). In this manner, the South remained entrapped in a media-fueled suspicion and fear of African Americans, feeding the continued presence of racism and discrimination during the post-Civil War reconstruction. Conclusion In conclusion, the progress of Radical Reconstruction largely failed to reform the disenfranchisement of African Americans in the South on a long-term scale. The attitudes of the Southern whites continued to influence the freedom of former slaves as they faced discriminating rulings, racist attitudes, and biased media. While some African Americans from further generations were largely unwilling to bow subserviently to the effects of white terror and discrimination, civil rights equality had a long and arduous path to completion in the South. While many of the racist attitudes of the post-Civil War South seem shocking to a modern-day reader, the influence of the actions and attitudes of white Southerners serves as a reminder of the power of repeated falsehoods, particularly within media subtext and bias. The disenfranchisement of African Americans during reconstruction displays the extent of deep-seated racial prejudice based on fear, stubbornness, and ignorance. As Burris-Kitchen and Burris point out: Throughout American history, Blacks have been demonized and criminalized, and this history has led us to where we are today. Until we can change the perceptions of Blacks through the media, political and economic arenas they will continue to pay the price for an inherently racist political, economic, educational, and criminal justice system (Burris-Kitchen Burris, 2011, p. 14). References Burris-Kitchen, D., Burris, P. (2011). From slavery to prisons: A historical delineation of the criminalization African Americans. Journal of Global Intelligence Policy, 4 (5), 1-16. Retrieved from http://0-web.ebscohost.com.library.regent.edu/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=adef70d4-c4d9-4d2b-b5c9-3b1efa487879%40sessionmgr14vid=2hid=127# Logue, C. M. (March 1979). Racist reporting during reconstruction. Journal of Black Studies, 9 (3), 335-349. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/2784304 Tindall, G. B.; Shi, D. E. (2010). America: A narrative history (8th ed.). New York: W.W. Norton Company.

Differences Between Men and Women Essay -- Compare Contrast Gender Ess

Anytime anyone is about to have a baby the first question is "Is it a boy or a girl?" People ask this question because there is a difference between the two genders. Several are curious to know whether the baby will turn out to be a sweet young lady or a strong young man. Even as children, the distinctions are obvious and stand apart. A young girl may ask a boy "What's that?" A young boy may ask a girl "Where's yours?" This is their first step towards self discovery. Everyone knows there is a difference but no one ever stops to see how many there truly are. There are numerous reasons why someone has become the gender they are, which is why the two appear different. Various people have been in the fight for equality over the years, they argue that even though we are all so different we can all be treated in the same way. In spite of the need for equality among men and women, there are still many differences, such as, body image, mate selection, sexuality, and ste reotypes. In selecting a mate, women look at different attractions than a man would. According to Rachel Herz, women are greatly attracted to the way a man smells and is typically one of the first things a woman looks for when selecting a mate. As a first impression, women want to be put into a daze or mesmerized by the individual they have come into contact with. Gender is not the only factor that a woman looks for when selecting a mate. Many women go deeper and search for things, such as, race, ethnicity, age, and good providers (Our Bodies 186). These affect many women by the importance they bring to a relationship. Typically women are looking for someone that they can spend their lives with, therefore they look for the qualit... ...each gender; it all depends on how those viewpoints are used that determine the kind of person that is developed. Works Cited Eagly, Alice H. Social Role Theory of Sex Differences and Similarities. San Diego, California: London, 2001. Herz, Rachel. "Sex Differences in Response to Physical and Social Factors Involved in Human Mate Selection: The Importance of Smell for Women." Evolution and Human Behavior 23 (2002): 359-64. <http://ucolk2.olk.uc.edu/search/i10905138/i1090+5138/1,1,2,B/frameset&FF=i1090+ 5138&1,,2>. Our Bodies, Ourselves for the New Century: A Book by and for Women. New York: Simon and Shuster, 1998. Sherman, Julia A. Ph.D. On the Psychology of Women: A Survey of Empirical Studies. Springfield, Illinois: Thomas, 1971. Williams, Juanita H. Psychology of Women: Behavior in a Biosocial Context. New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 1974.

Edward Zwick’s Glory Essay

Edward Zwick’s Glory was powerful film history that popularized a story of the Civil War which was largely unknown. Primarily, this film gave credit to the story of African-American 54th Massachusetts Volunteer Infantry from Robert Gould Shaw’s perspective who was a son of Boston abolitionist. This Hollywood movie depicts the participation of African American soldiers during the American Civil War which gives us some perspective about our history. Synopsis The film was all about the historical views of the Civil war took place in America (IMDb 1990 -2001). Glory† has been entitled to this film because it was a celebration of the African soldiers who courageously stood every challenge although it was not recognized by history due to racism. The heroes who belonged to the 54th Regiment of the Massachusetts Volunteer Infantry were all African-American soldiers. The regiments were headed by the son of an abolitionist named Col. Robert Gould Shaw who took the responsibility of preparing these soldiers for battle. Their race had been a hindrance and this was the reason why these soldiers were denied of every privilege and were given the hardest task although they fought in behalf of their white counterparts. When the day finally arrived to attack Ft. Wagner on July 18, 1863, the Confederates secretly and safely slipped away. Shaw led the 54th to fight for honor in a mission which was led to certain death while carrying the regiments into battle and fight for the honor of the country. This film was a depiction of Northern racism but despite the fact that white people were reluctant to issue proper equipment, paying these black soldiers lesser than whites they still resist their demeaning position in the Union army. The film was all about the former black slaves who bravely fought in order to win the liberty for their enslaved brothers. The film also showed different scenes about the infantry regiments who witnessed the federal service of Union Army during the Civil war. The film was historically accurate in some aspects but some were quite contrasting. Other historical aspects has been bent slightly such as the older depiction of Frederick Douglass in contrast with the historically accurate rendering of uniforms, weaponry and the battle’s opposing lines, the siege of a fortress; The role give to Shaw was also accurate; his acceptance to lead the 54th which was held in the field an not at the ball; Free-born blacks from the North had been drilled in local militaries before they got enlisted; Whipping was really used in Union army as a form of discipline; the 54th was the first black regiment ; Col. James Montgomery was depicted as murderer of racist which distorted the fact that he was supporting John Brown as an abolitionist. Finally, the assault on Fort Wagner was set with the sea on their left though they should be travelling north where the sea must be on their right. As part of our history, the portrayals of the role revealed that people were basically good but also has an evil instinct and this plays an important event towards the modern world which gave us a deeper understanding of why racism started. The film was made in 1980’s and was released in December 1989 in the U.  S. The film was very timely since President Abraham Lincoln has been assassinated in 1985 which gave a great influence in the movie since he was the President during the Civil wars (Swanson; 42). President Lincoln finally helped the black men to secure the final victory after the fort has been abandoned. With this event from the scene, it shows that in our history, the government implemented rules regarding the separation of black people from the white together with all the policies that are given to them whenever they protest or did not follow the rules. The film characters were mostly black people which can be critiqued as one sided view of the film to somehow suit their liberal agenda. Glory brought up some issues during those times such as slavery and sacrifice in order to be considered as men (Clamen, 2009). However, on the other hand, it only focused on one side which created negative rumors about Confederates as faceless enemies. The audience who will see it could create different interpretation about what had happened in the past which could possibly result to a new discussion for debates. Somehow it could be diverted to issue in our present world that’s why, the director should be careful about it. The movie wants to tell the viewers that racism became a part of our past but because the black people fight for what they believe is right and showed that they can also be a great hero, they have been given the chance to prove that color should not be an issue when we talk about serving the nation. Opinion I have learned so much from life when I watched the movie. I have seen how hard it is to live at that time specially when you belong to the black race. It is very obvious how the black people were treated as slaves at that time. The movie also shows the hardship that the black people experience. They don’t have a very good place to live in, they don’t have luxuries, they were not given importance on the society and they don’t have much privilege during those times. Since this movie was based from our history, I can say that everything that’s happening in modern times was really affected by it, and the result could be good or bad. Good, in a sense that white people and black people were now united, bad to some people who still discriminate black people because of the history. It is also obvious in the film that the black soldiers were into special colored units which shows a form of segregation, another practice of racist in our nation’s history. I think that the movie brought up the best in conveying the historical lesson to the audience. Each scene seems very realistic though not all, each line in the script was very essential and the characters did a very good job which made it possible in making this film a good one. Conclusion In general as a conclusion, racism has been part of the history which practically and emotionally, gave the black people the will and the courage to fight for their rights to be recognized as people and as part of the American society that in the end, their contribution has led to the victory of the whole and they have been recognized. However, Hollywood is still going to give us a movie that will show us our past, but it needs a critical research, and deep examination of what had really happened in the past so that the movie will not appear biased to anyone else who will see it and those who are still connected with it. Overall, Hollywood is a big help to us in shaping our knowledge about what happened in our history as the film makers are making it as accurate as possible.

Biography of Captain William Kidd, Scottish Pirate

William Kidd (c. 1654–May 23, 1701) was a Scottish ship’s captain, privateer, and pirate. He started out on a voyage in 1696 as a pirate hunter and privateer, but he soon switched sides and had a brief but moderately successful career as a pirate. After he turned pirate, his wealthy backers back in England abandoned him. He was later convicted and hanged in England after a sensational trial. Fast Facts: William Kidd Known For: Kidd was a Scottish ships captain whose adventures led to his trial and execution for piracy.Also Known As: Captain KiddBorn: c. 1654 in Dundee, ScotlandDied: May 23, 1701 in Wapping, EnglandSpouse: Sarah Kidd (m. 1691-1701) Early Life Kidd was born in Scotland sometime around 1654, possibly near Dundee. He took to the sea and soon made a name for himself as a skilled, hardworking seaman. In 1689, sailing as a privateer, he took a French vessel: the ship was renamed the Blessed William and Kidd was put in command by the governor of Nevis. He sailed into New York just in time to save the governor there from a conspiracy. In New York, he married a wealthy widow. Not long after, in England, he became friends with the Lord of Bellomont, who was to be the new governor of New York. Setting Sail as a Privateer For the English, sailing was very dangerous at the time. England was at war with France and piracy was common. Lord Bellomont and some of his friends suggested Kidd be given a privateering contract that would allow him to attack pirates or French vessels. The suggestion was not accepted by the government, but Bellomont and his friends decided to set up Kidd as a privateer through a private enterprise: Kidd could attack French vessels or pirates but he had to share his earnings with the investors. Kidd was given the 34-gun Adventure Galley and he set sail in May 1696. Turning Pirate Kidd set sail for Madagascar and the Indian Ocean, then a hotbed of pirate activity. Nevertheless, he and his crew found very few pirate or French vessels to take. About a third of his crew died of disease, and the rest became surly because of the lack of prizes. In August 1697, Kidd attacked a convoy of Indian treasure ships  but was driven off by an East India Company Man of War. This was an act of piracy and clearly not in Kidd’s charter. Also, about this time, Kidd killed a mutinous gunner named William Moore by hitting him in the head with a heavy wooden bucket. The Pirates Take the Queddah Merchant On January 30, 1698, Kidds luck finally changed. He captured the Queddah Merchant, a treasure ship heading home from the Far East. It was not really fair game as a prize, though. It was a Moorish ship, with cargo owned by Armenians, and was captained by an Englishman named Wright. It was allegedly sailing with French papers. This was enough for Kidd, who sold off the cargo and divided the spoils with his men. The holds of the merchantman were bursting with a valuable cargo, and the haul for Kidd and his pirates was 15,000 British pounds, well over $2 million today). Kidd and his pirates were rich men. Kidd and Culliford Not long after, Kidd ran into a pirate ship captained by a notorious pirate named Culliford. What happened between the two men is unknown. According to Captain Charles Johnson, a contemporary historian, Kidd and Culliford greeted each other warmly and traded supplies and news. Many of Kidds men deserted him at this point, some running off with their share of the treasure and others joining Culliford. At his trial, Kidd claimed that he wasnt strong enough to fight Culliford and that most of his men abandoned him to join the pirates. He said he was allowed to keep the ships, but only after all the weapons and supplies were taken. In any event, Kidd swapped the leaking Adventure Galley for the fit Queddah Merchant and set sail for the Caribbean. Desertion by Friends and Backers Meanwhile, news of Kidd becoming a pirate had reached England. Bellomont and his wealthy friends, who were very important members of the government, began distancing themselves from the enterprise as quickly as they could. Robert Livingston, a friend and fellow Scotsman who knew the king personally, was deeply involved in Kidds affairs. Livingston turned on Kidd, trying desperately to keep secret his own name and those of the others involved. As for Bellomont, he put out a proclamation of amnesty for pirates, but Kidd and Henry Avery were specifically excluded from it. Some of Kidds former pirates would later accept this pardon and testify against him. Return to New York When Kidd reached the Caribbean, he learned he was now considered a pirate by the authorities. He decided to go to New York, where his friend Lord Bellomont could protect him until he was able to clear his name. He left his ship behind and captained a smaller ship to New York. As a precaution, he buried his treasure on Gardiners Island, off of Long Island. When he arrived in New York, he was arrested and Lord Bellomont refused to believe his stories of what had transpired. He divulged the location of his treasure on Gardiners Island and it was recovered. He spent a year in prison before being sent to England to face trial. Death Kidds trial took place on May 8, 1701. The trial caused a huge sensation in England, as Kidd pleaded that he had never actually turned pirate. There was plenty of evidence against him, however, and he was eventually found guilty. He was also convicted of the death of Moore, the rebellious gunner. Kidd was hanged on May 23, 1701, and his body was put into an iron cage hanging along the River Thames, where it served as a warning to other pirates. Legacy Kidd and his case have generated a great deal of interest over the years, far more than other pirates of his generation. This is probably due to the scandal of his involvement with wealthy members of the royal court. Then, as now, his tale has a lurid attraction to it, and there are many detailed books and websites dedicated to Kidd, his adventures, and his eventual trial and conviction. This fascination is Kidds real legacy because, frankly, he wasnt much of a pirate. He didnt operate for very long, he didnt take a great many prizes, and he was never feared the way other pirates were. Many pirates—such as Sam Bellamy, Benjamin Hornigold, or Edward Low, to name just a few—were more successful on the open seas. Nevertheless, only a select handful of pirates, including Blackbeard and Black Bart Roberts, are as famous as William Kidd. Many historians feel that Kidd was treated unfairly. For the time, his crimes were not truly terrible. The gunner Moore was insubordinate, the meeting with Culliford and his pirates may have gone the way Kidd said it did, and the ships he captured were at the very least questionable in terms of whether they were fair game or not. If it were not for his wealthy noble backers, who wished to remain anonymous at all costs and to distance themselves from Kidd in any way possible, his contacts probably would have saved him, if not from jail then at least from the noose. One other legacy Kidd left behind was that of buried treasure. Kidd left behind some of his loot, including gold and silver, on Gardiners Island, which was later found and cataloged. What intrigues modern treasure hunters is that Kidd insisted until the end of his life that he had buried another treasure somewhere in the Indies—presumably in the Caribbean. People have been looking for that lost treasure ever since. Sources Defoe, Daniel.  A General History of the Pirates. Dover Publications, 1972.Konstam, Angus.  The World Atlas of Pirates: Treasures and Treachery on the Seven Seas, in Maps, Tall Tales, and Pictures. The Lyons Press, 2010.