James Oakes The Radical And The Republican

In the journal article “ Andrew Jackson versus the Historians”, author Charles G. Sellers explained the various interpretations of Jackson, from the viewpoint of Whig historians and Progressive Historians. These interpretations were based on the policies of Jackson. The Whig historians viewed the former president in a negative way. They considered him arrogant, ignorant, and not fit for being president. Sellers pointed out that it was not just because of “Jackson’s personality…nor was it the general policies he pursued as president” In fact, many of them approved of some of Jackson’s policies. It was due to the fact that many of these historians came from wealthy northern families or those in the middle class. Their families had control over politics before the Jacksonian period. When Jackson became president

The American Civil War was a period of internal conflict in the United States that took place from April 12, 1861 to May 13, 1865. The war divided the 34 states into two separate entities: the Union and The Confederacy. The Union was composed of the states that remained loyal to the U.S. Constitution and federal government, while the Confederate States of America seceded. Following Lincoln’s inaugural address in 1861, South Carolina became the first state to secede from the Union, quickly followed by the other states that would make up the Confederacy. The build up to the war, however, began long before. The first signs of conflict can be traced back to the writing of the three-fifths clause of the Constitution. Even today, nearly 150 years

The American Civil War that was started due to the controversy over slavery in 1861, was won by The Union supported by President Lincoln against the Confederate states. President Lincoln’s original goal during the civil war was to reunify the nation as quickly as possible and help both sides come to an understanding. After the Civil War ended in 1865, the newly formed United States’ reconstruction era began. The Reconstruction era was put into effect by the Congress in 1866 and lasted until 1877. The Union’s victory in the Civil War had given African Americans a new sense of hope, devastated the southern economy, and eased the history of disunity in American political life. Reconstruction was a program used to help the south rebuild and join

The series of essays in the novel “Profiles in Courage” by John F. Kennedy all demonstrate the single, truly rare character trait of courage through the actions of senators. The story of Edmund G. Ross undoubtedly portrays courage by his collected and determined demeanor in voting to avoid national corruption through a single phrase. Kennedy, through writing, is able to tell the brave story of Ross in the role of the shy, weak, underdog senator who makes a single decision that would destroy his political life, but save America from corruption. In “Profiles in Courage”, John F. Kennedy successfully uses his structures of his ideas and his detail placement of descriptive phrases, and words which set the tone and rhetorical devices that persuades the

On September 2nd, 1862, Abraham Lincoln famously signed the Emancipation Proclamation. After that, there’s been much debate on whether Lincoln’s Emancipation Proclamation truly played a role in freeing the slaves with many arguments opposing or favoring this issue. In Vincent Harding’s essay, The Blood-red Ironies of God, Harding argues in his thesis that Lincoln did not help to emancipate the slaves but that rather the slaves “self-emancipated” themselves through the war. On the opposition, Allen C Guelzo’s essay, Lincoln’s Emancipation Proclamation: The End of Slavery in America, argues in favor of the Emancipation Proclamation and Guelzo acknowledges Lincoln for the abolishment of slavery through the Emancipation Proclamation.

Abraham Lincoln and Frederick Douglass are American heroes with each exemplifying a unique aspect of the American spirit. In his recent study, "The Radical and the Republican: Frederick Douglass, Abraham Lincoln, and the Triumph of Antislavery Politics" (2007), Professor James Oakes traces the intersecting careers of both men, pointing out their initial differences and how their goals and visions ultimately converged. Oakes is Graduate School Humanities Professor and Professor of History at the Graduate Center of the City University of New York. He has written extensively on the history of slavery in the Old South.

Freedom is the primary ideal upon which America was founded. It is the tenet most cherished by the original colonists; it is a pillar upon which they built the new government. However, freedom was denied to a large part of America's citizens for a long time. Frederick Douglas was one of the greatest activists for African-American freedom of the 19th century; he used literary works and speeches, instead of violence, to achieve his goals. In his piece "What, to the Slave, is the Fourth of July?" he uses bold words and biting criticism to call attention to the gross injustices and hypocrisy of slavery in the United States.

Although a century apart, Martin Luther King Jr’s Letter from Birmingham Jail and Frederick Douglass’s What to a Slave is the fourth of July are kindred spirits. Notwithstanding the many differences in their respective writing styles, deep down the essence of the message conveyed is still very much the same. Both Martin Luther King Junior and Frederick Douglas had similar beliefs and concepts related to the treatment of the African American community. They both describe a tough yet heart breaking situation that makes them question their moral values and doubt the system and its ability to change for better. Both King and Douglass were advocating for the same thing: their constitutional sanction of freedom.

The American Revolution is arguably the turning point of American history as it resulted in somewhat of a significant, positive change in politics, economics, and society as a whole. However, from 1775 to 1800, the effects of the revolution on the American society were subtle as most principles glorified by revolutionists contradicted the examples set forth by colonial reality. Perhaps most alike to revolutionary beliefs was the American economy and how it participated in free trade or encouraged the independence of hard labor. Politically, the states did apply Enlightenment and republican ideas as promised, but more often than not, the benefits of such ideas were limited to rich, land-owning, protestant, white men. This glorification of

“If there is no struggle, there is no progress.” This quote from Frederick Douglass expresses his struggle with slavery throughout his lifetime much like his speech “What to the Slave is the Fourth of July?” Douglass was asked to give this speech for an Independence Day celebration, but took an unexpected turn down a path his audience may not have been ready for. He uses ethos, pathos and an abrupt tone to present his argument against slavery.

Frederick Douglass, born a slave and later the most influential African American leader of the 1800s, addresses the hypocrisy of the US of maintaining slavery with its upheld ideals being freedom and independence on July 4th, 1852. Douglass builds his argument by using surprising contrasts, plain facts, and provocative antithesis.

In An Imperfect God, Henry Wiencek presents George Washington as a specific case through which to study what he calls the great “paradox” of American history: how a nation founded on the philosophies of liberty and equality also kept human beings in chains. Washington was a slave-owner his entire life and he took the role of managing the slaves who lived and worked at Mount Vernon including their purchase and sale. Prior to the Revolution, Washington “was just another striving young planter, blithely ordering breeding wenches for his slave trade, blithely exiling a man to a likely death at hard labor” (Wiencek 133) The fortune produced by Washington’s slaves kept him in the ranks of Virginia’s planter elite, securing the social and political prestige that helped lead the Second Continental Congress to appoint him commander-in-chief of the Continental Army in 1775. Washington was joined by slaves while leading the Continental Army in the field of battle, as well as during his time as president. Yet Wiencek also argues that the Revolution and the establishment of the new democracy changed Washington’s beliefs on slavery. By the end of his life, Washington had changed completely and “sickened by slavery, willing to sacrifice his own substance to end it.” (Wiencek 274) Many of the founding fathers recognized the problems created by slavery. Unlike his contemporaries, Washington did not leave an extensive written record detailing his public positions and reserved judgments on

In this chapter of the Founding Brothers, Ellis centers the idea of Slavery. He employs the idea of both hindsight and foresight to explore the collapse of the Congress. He displays the Congress to not stand up to its expectations at both private and public means.

Chapter 5 “The Revolutionary Era: Crossroads of Freedom,” This chapter focuses on Revolutionary era and the war between Britain and the colonies. It shed light on the lives of the African Americans during the war and the decisions they made to fight with or against the colonies they were enslaved in.

Allen Guelzo and Vincent Harding approached Lincoln’s Emancipation Proclamation and the eventual abolition of slavery from two very different viewpoints. The major disagreement between them is whether the slaves freed themselves, or Abraham Lincoln and his Emancipation Proclamation freed them. Harding argued the former view, Guelzo took the later. When these essays are compared side by side Guelzo’s is stronger because, unlike Harding, he was able to keep his own views of American race relations out of the essay and presented an argument that was based on more than emotion.