The Reconstruction period in American history saw the implementation of three different plans: Lincoln’s Proclamation of Amnesty and Reconstruction (10% Plan), Andrew Johnson’s Reconstruction Plan, and the Congressional Reconstruction Plan (Congress) (OpenStax, 2014).

First, we have Lincoln’s Proclamation of Amnesty and Reconstruction. This plan offered a pardon to Confederates, except high-ranking officials and war criminals, who pledged loyalty to the Union and supported the end of slavery. Once 10% of the state’s voting population took the oath, they could form new state governments and be readmitted to the Union (OpenStax, 2014).

Next, we have Andrew Johnson’s Reconstruction Plan. Johnson took a more lenient approach, requiring Southern states to declare secession illegal, ratify the 13th Amendment, and nullify Confederate war debts. Once these conditions were met, the states could be readmitted to the Union (OpenStax, 2014).

Lastly, there was the Congressional Reconstruction Plan, also known as Radical Reconstruction. This plan aimed to punish the South and protect African American rights. It divided the South into military districts, required states to draft new constitutions granting voting rights to African Americans, and ratify the 14th and 15th Amendments. Only then could the states be readmitted to the Union (OpenStax, 2014).

Now, let’s address the topic of whether the South should have been treated as a defeated nation or rebellious states. The South had seceded from the Union and fought against it to preserve slavery. Treating the South as a defeated nation would suggest a harsher approach with more severe consequences. On the other hand, treating them as rebellious states acknowledges their former allegiance to the Union and aims to reintegrate them back into the country. The decision to treat the South as defeated or rebellious had significant implications for the Reconstruction process and the relationship between the North and South (Foner, 1988).

Moving on to the changes in American culture and society during Reconstruction, there were notable differences between the North and South. The North had already undergone significant industrialization and urbanization, leading to the growth of cities, factories, and a more diverse economy. In contrast, the South was primarily agrarian and heavily relied on enslaved labor. During Reconstruction, the North continued to industrialize and modernize, while the South faced challenges in rebuilding its economy and adapting to the end of slavery. African Americans in the North experienced more opportunities for education, employment, and political participation compared to their counterparts in the South (Foner, 1988).

Lastly, let’s analyze the impact of the Compromise of 1877 that ended Reconstruction on African Americans. This compromise marked the end of Reconstruction and had significant consequences for African Americans. In exchange for the disputed electoral votes in the presidential election, Republicans agreed to withdraw federal troops from the South, effectively ending the military occupation and protection of African Americans. This compromise allowed Southern Democrats to regain political power and implement segregationist policies, leading to the establishment of the Jim Crow system and the disenfranchisement of African Americans. As a result, African Americans faced increased discrimination, violence, and limited opportunities for social and economic advancement (Foner, 1988).

In conclusion, Reconstruction was a complex period in American history with differing approaches and outcomes. It shaped the future of the country, particularly in terms of race relations and the rights of African Americans.

References:

Foner, E. (1988). Reconstruction: America’s unfinished revolution, 1863-1877. Harper & Row.

OpenStax. (2014). U.S. history. OpenStax CNX. Retrieved from https://cnx.org/contents/p7ovuIkl@6.18:gMXC1GEM@7/…

Case Assessment

As the world’s population nears 10 billion by 2050, the effects of global warming are stripping some natural resources from the environment. As they diminish in number, developing countries will face mounting obstacles to improving the livelihoods of their citizens and stabilizing their access to enough food. The reason these governments are struggling even now is that our climate influences their economic health and the consequent diminishing living standards of their people. Climate changes are responsible for the current loss of biodiversity as well as the physical access to some critical farming regions. As such, these changes in global weather patterns diminish agricultural output and the distribution of food to local and international markets. These difficulties will become even more significant for these countries as the Earth’s climate changes for the worse. Temperatures are already increasing incrementally, and polar ice caps are melting, so the salient question is: what does this suggest for developing societies?

The issue before the developing world is not its lack of food, but rather how to gain access to food. Simply put, changes in our climate are affecting the global food chain, and hence, the living standards of entire populations. Added to this is the fact that food is not getting to where it is needed in time to prevent hunger or starvation. In many developing countries, shortages are due to governments’ control over distribution networks rather than an insufficient supply of food itself. In effect, these governments are weaponizing food by favoring certain ethnic or religious groups over others. When added to the dramatic climate changes that we are experiencing even now, the future for billions of poor people looks increasingly dim.

Instructions

You are to write a minimum of a 5-page persuasive paper for the UN that addresses the following questions about the relationship between atmospheric weather patterns and food security in the developing world:

1. Climate change and global warming are often used interchangeably, but they are not the same phenomenon. What are the differences between the two concepts and what leads to the confusion between them?
2. In 1900, the average global temperature was about 13.7° Celsius (56.7° Fahrenheit) (Osborn, 2021), but as of 2020, the temperature has risen another 1.2°C to 14.9°C (58.9°F). According to the Earth and climate science community, if the Earth’s surface temperature rises another 2°C (3.6°F), we will suffer catastrophic weather patterns that, among other things, will raise sea levels, cause widespread droughts and wildfires, result in plant, insect, and animal extinctions, and reduce agricultural productivity throughout the world (Mastroianni, 2015 and Lindsey & Dahlman, 2020). How much credibility do you place in these projections? Why?
3. There is no question that the Earth’s food sources are threatened by changes in its weather patterns, but what specific challenges does climate change pose to the food security of people in the developing world?
4. There is currently a debate among some multinational lending agencies like the International Monetary Fund, UNICEF, and AID over the financial support for food security that has been misused by recipient government officials. On the other hand, U.S. authorities insist that misuse of its assistance is not occurring because it has strict monitoring oversight in place. What is your position on this matter? Is there evidence that financial assistance to developing governments is being widely misused by government officials?