In the first article, Slavery without Submission, Zinn talked about the brutalities of slavery. While Lincoln did abolish slavery, Zinn gave an interesting perspective that differs from what most people are told. We are generally taught that Lincoln abolished slavery because he was pro-equal rights and did not believe in it. However, it seems as if his motivation was more economic and political Lincoln stated that if he could free the slaves and save the Union at the same time, then he would. Also, people do not focus on the fact that The Emancipation Proclamation led to black people being able to fight for the Union army. It seems as if Lincoln knew that more soldiers would be helpful in beating the south and that was another reason for why he freed the slaves.<\/p>\n
The second article, Or Does it Explode, shows how life after the slaves were freed was still extremely tough for them. They were taken advantage of by rich white farmers because they needed jobs and there was still the same amount of racism in the south. When the Republicans agreed to pull Union soldiers out of the south so that Hayes could become president, the south basically went back to how it was except without slavery. I agree with MLK when he said that the riots were good because they brought attention to the matter, but they were not going to get them to their overall goal. I think that most people, including me, forget how recently America became desegregated.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
In the first article, Slavery without Submission, Zinn talked about the brutalities of slavery. While Lincoln did abolish slavery, Zinn gave an interesting perspective that…<\/p>\n