Treatment of African American's Throughout the Ages

     Discrimination can be defined as "unfair treatment of a person or racial group." Unfortunately, this very act remains apparent throughout U.S. history. Despite the fact that many precautions were taken in an effort to prevent mistreatment of the African American race, discrimination pressed onward at full force, flying by all barriers that were designed tokeep it at bay. Some of these barriers include the Emancipation Proclamation and a group of Amendments as well. However, the white race still always withheld a superior attitude. Miniscule daily activities became arduous for blacks, who always had to watch their behavior. Even the simpliest reflex or impulse could land them in jail or sentenced to death. The had to refrain from even looking white people in the eye, stepping out of line, or doing anything else considered "disrespectful" on their behalf.
   The Reconstruction Era possessed the same struggles for African Americans. Despite the Emancipation Proclamation, which Lincoln issued just before, the racism continued. The reason behind this can be found in how the Proclamation actually was. Although it is most reknowned for having "freed the slaves," in reality, it could not enforce this law. At the time of it's release, the Union had no authority over the Confederacy, so the Proclamation had little effect overall. However, the efforts to balance out the treatment of blacks continued with a series of ammendements. Amendment thirteen abolished slavery, amendment fourteen provided constitutional guarentee of the rights and security of freed people, and Amendment 15 gave the right to vote based on race, color, or previous condition of servitude. All of these sound like specific and helpful laws to pass, right? Well unfortunately, these didn't stop the Black Codes, (later known as Jim Crow laws,) from springing into effect. The Black Codes were laws that restricted the rights of African Americans in the South. Overall, these codes practically made freedom completely out of reach, once again, for blacks. Commonly, codes involved employment of the former slaves. In many states, if unemployed, African Americans faced the potential of being arrested and charged with vagrancy. These laws imposed severe restrictions on blacks, prohibiting their right to vote, forbidding them to sit on juries, limiting their right to bare arms, along with many other restraints.
    In contrast, a great and effective push for change was brought in with the Civil Rights Movement in the 1950s and 1960s. The Civil Rights Movement was a political movement for equailty of all people, regardless of race. With the movement came many acts of rebellion and non-violent protest, particularly from prominent figures of the movement such as Rosa Parks, Malcolm X, W.E.B. Du Bois, and of course, Martin Luther King Jr. These figures in themselves bring up what is perhaps one of the most interesting points of the Civil Rights Movement: African Americans were fighting for their rights. As stated earlier, during the Reconstruction Era, African Americans had to submit. They were in an awkward limbo of not being enslaved but having nowhere to go, and so they had to watch every step they took. However, the Civil Rights Movement represent not only the government taking action, but African-Americans themselves stepping up and fighting for their rights. This in itself is a notable accomplishment.
    In both of these instances throughout history, not even goal was reached. Not every right for African-Americans was restored, and certaintly, not everything was perfect. However, improvement was made, and more so was made until today- where discrimination is still unfortunately apparent, but not near as much as before. Nothing will ever be as flawless as it is so obviously desired, but for today, America can proudly represent itself as a country very low on racism and discrimination.


Source: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:AfricanAmericans1.png

Should the Government Govern at All?

Personally, I believe the answer is yes.
When Thoreau said, "that government is best which governs the least," he stated his opinon that the most successful governments prove to be ones who make as little interference with the people as possible. I am not entirely sure I agree.
I believe this quote could be looked at from a few different perspectives.
For one, it can be viewed in regards to dictatorship. Obviously, in cases like that of Hitler's, there is a time when the government can be altogheter far too involved with the people. With these scenarios in mind, Thoreau's quote might make all kinds of sense. The government should back off and let the people handle it, because when one person gets too power hungry, an entire nation can pay for it.
However, it is quite blantatly clear that not ever case is that of Hitler's. I believe that, without taking it too far, the government can steer the country in a better direction. There are so many people in each nation, all with different viewpoints and different drives. It would be near impossible to work it all out on our own. The government remains very neccessary.
The government should remain active and apparently in the lives of the people, but only to the extent of which it is necessary, beneficial, and appropriate.

Ignorance is Bliss

Going off of Voltaire's statement, it's not something we neccessarily understand until our later years of schooling. All throughout elementary and even middle school, students are spoon-fed the same lies we've always been taught. This brings up a risky topic, should younger students be taught how things actually went down? Should they be exposed to tales of brutal slaughter and reckless conquer? In my opinion, not necessarily. It's a bit much for young kids. However, does that mean we have to flat out lie? I truly don't think so. I don't believe that it is at all neccesary to hide the complete truth from younger kids. History can be touched on in elementary schooling, perhaps teaching the basic facts, rather than the basic lies. If that is done in the younger years, then, when students reach mid and junior high, they could start to delve deeper into actuality. I believe that is a far more suitable age for comprehension of some of the crazy subjects that come up. So altogether, I think we should change how we teach younger students. Instead of flat out lying, we should just give them a basic understanding, providing a foundation for what they'll learn more of in the future.

The Accepted Misconception

When Voltaire stated "History is a lie commonly agreed upon," he referred to the nature of which we, as humans, choose to leave our legacy. Throughout all nations, so-called 'history' has been altered, or edited, to make the specific country to which it pertains to look a little better, a little braver, or a little less like completely jerks. Once this 'new' story is created, it's recorded, the way they want people to see it in the future. It makes sense, since naturally, humans would never want to own up to their own wrongdoings. This proves to be the same basic principle. All through out time, people lie to cover their tracks, and those lie's get passed down to generation after generation, who accept what is told to them.