Lincoln did not initially see himself as an abolitionist, believing that slavery was constitutionally protected but morally wrong. He advocated colonization of freed slaves as a solution. However, the Emancipation Proclamation, issued during the Civil War, declared the emancipation of slaves in rebel states as a military necessity. Though limited, it marked a turning point in ending slavery and helped undermine the Confederacy.
The Missouri Compromise was the result of the first debate in Congress concerning the spread of slavery, occurring in 1819-1820. When Missouri applied for admission into the Union, many in Congress objected to Missouri's admission as a slave state, supporting the Tallmadge Amendment that would have made gradual emancipation a condition for admission. When the Senate and the House could not agree on whether to pass the bill with or without the Tallmadge Amendment (the slave states had more influence in the Senate), Henry Clay proposed a compromise that brought Missouri into the Union as a slave state on the condition that Maine also be brought in as a free state and that all territories in the Louisiana Purchase north of the 36˚30 parallel be closed to slavery.
While many congratulated Henry Clay on a job well done, Thomas Jefferson worried greatly from his retirement at Monticello. He believed that the Missouri debate would only be the first of several debates regarding slavery and its expansion. While an opponent of the idea of slavery in the abstract, he did not see a path toward a practical end of slavery in the immediate future. With Jefferson's predictions coming true and the period between 1820-1860 being filled with debates concerning slavery, historians have often placed the Missouri Compromise at the beginning of the Antebellum (Before the War) Period.
For more PowerPoints for history and government courses, visit my website: http://www.tomrichey.net
Due to the current instability in the business world, organizations should be able to anticipate changes and have coherent responses at hand to effective manage risks, create value, build good relations, increase profit and improve competitive positioning.
A report titled Exploring Strategic Risk issued in 2013 for Forbes Insights by Deloitte, contains some very important conclusions for the business community. 300 executives from around the world were interviewed for the study, in an attempt to find out their vision of the risk strategy and current changes and analysing how organizations should face these new challenges.
Sometimes it is difficult to link risks to a specific financial impact and not all data are pertinent to the evaluation of emerging risks. That's why companies have to be aware of internal risks and manage them well in order to be able to manage external risks and invest into strategic assets such as human capital, clients and innovation.
This insight explains the case of the financial services as the sector that less trust generates due to its short-sightedness, lack of values and lack of professional education that resulted in corruption and bad practices, which compromised the financial sector.
The report A Crisis of Culture: Valuing Ethics and Knowledge in Financial Services examines the role of integrity and knowledge in restoring culture in the financial services industry. The conclusions appear in the full version of this document.
The financial industry is just one example in the wider panorama. Lack of values is widespread and creates significant risks. Bad practices trigger problems such as loss of profit, loss of reputation and even loss of shareholders, clients and employees.
The crisis, as well as the arrival of new technologies, urges companies to maintain their good practices and emphasize aspects as ethics, leadership, commitment, performance, transparency and sustainability.
The digital revolution and social networks encourage companies to be more transparent: companies meet their promises and obligations, deliver a coherent dialogue and improve the relationship with their stakeholders.
Application of values raises the possibility of good results and profits for companies through improvement of their reputation and business as well as optimization of resources. This certainly creates competitive advantages, establishes a strong cultural connection and improves employees’ motivation.
Before taking any decision, an institution should keep in mind the fact that it needs implicit and explicit public approval. Good business management implies risk management, creating a climate of trust, good will, credibility, social commitment and empathy between stakeholders and the company.
The debate over excellence, reputation, CSR and their impact on performance rages in the academic and professional communities.
Professionals responsible for intangible assets and those in charge of finance are a good reflection of this dual reality that frequently makes Board members and Management Committees take difficult decisions that don’t benefit both parts the same way.
In 2013, a research was held in Japan in order to shed light to explain the mechanisms that affect financial performance and, more specifically, identify which of these mechanisms are related to corporate reputation. It concluded that corporate value is constituted by four factors: organizational value, social value, business value and commercial value. Eventually, those companies that pay more attention to organizational and social value achieve greater commercial and business value.
This document analyzes the factors that constitute those values and the steps needed to improve reputation. It also explains relations between different factors of corporate reputation and financial performance in mathematical terms.
Innovation is the factor that truly relates corporate reputation to business success. The factors that improve both economic results and reputation are the ability to lure resources and expand internationally. That’s why companies need to bring best talent and state-of-the-art technologies on board.
In this document, it is explained the case of ING Direct in Australia to show the contribution of corporate reputation to financial results.
By using Net Promoter Score (NPS) (an index developed by U.S.-based Professor Reichheld which stands for a positive or negative correlation between the number of promoters and the number of detractors), ING Direct was able to measure the impact of its brand strategy on the Australian market. The company achieved a high recommendation level reflected in the exponential growth of deposits, funds and assets.
Good economic results impact reputation and sustain it over time. However, as in the example of ING Direct and many other companies, a good reputation is able to improve financial results as well as the competitive and economic position.
The Missouri Compromise was the result of the first debate in Congress concerning the spread of slavery, occurring in 1819-1820. When Missouri applied for admission into the Union, many in Congress objected to Missouri's admission as a slave state, supporting the Tallmadge Amendment that would have made gradual emancipation a condition for admission. When the Senate and the House could not agree on whether to pass the bill with or without the Tallmadge Amendment (the slave states had more influence in the Senate), Henry Clay proposed a compromise that brought Missouri into the Union as a slave state on the condition that Maine also be brought in as a free state and that all territories in the Louisiana Purchase north of the 36˚30 parallel be closed to slavery.
While many congratulated Henry Clay on a job well done, Thomas Jefferson worried greatly from his retirement at Monticello. He believed that the Missouri debate would only be the first of several debates regarding slavery and its expansion. While an opponent of the idea of slavery in the abstract, he did not see a path toward a practical end of slavery in the immediate future. With Jefferson's predictions coming true and the period between 1820-1860 being filled with debates concerning slavery, historians have often placed the Missouri Compromise at the beginning of the Antebellum (Before the War) Period.
For more PowerPoints for history and government courses, visit my website: http://www.tomrichey.net
Due to the current instability in the business world, organizations should be able to anticipate changes and have coherent responses at hand to effective manage risks, create value, build good relations, increase profit and improve competitive positioning.
A report titled Exploring Strategic Risk issued in 2013 for Forbes Insights by Deloitte, contains some very important conclusions for the business community. 300 executives from around the world were interviewed for the study, in an attempt to find out their vision of the risk strategy and current changes and analysing how organizations should face these new challenges.
Sometimes it is difficult to link risks to a specific financial impact and not all data are pertinent to the evaluation of emerging risks. That's why companies have to be aware of internal risks and manage them well in order to be able to manage external risks and invest into strategic assets such as human capital, clients and innovation.
This insight explains the case of the financial services as the sector that less trust generates due to its short-sightedness, lack of values and lack of professional education that resulted in corruption and bad practices, which compromised the financial sector.
The report A Crisis of Culture: Valuing Ethics and Knowledge in Financial Services examines the role of integrity and knowledge in restoring culture in the financial services industry. The conclusions appear in the full version of this document.
The financial industry is just one example in the wider panorama. Lack of values is widespread and creates significant risks. Bad practices trigger problems such as loss of profit, loss of reputation and even loss of shareholders, clients and employees.
The crisis, as well as the arrival of new technologies, urges companies to maintain their good practices and emphasize aspects as ethics, leadership, commitment, performance, transparency and sustainability.
The digital revolution and social networks encourage companies to be more transparent: companies meet their promises and obligations, deliver a coherent dialogue and improve the relationship with their stakeholders.
Application of values raises the possibility of good results and profits for companies through improvement of their reputation and business as well as optimization of resources. This certainly creates competitive advantages, establishes a strong cultural connection and improves employees’ motivation.
Before taking any decision, an institution should keep in mind the fact that it needs implicit and explicit public approval. Good business management implies risk management, creating a climate of trust, good will, credibility, social commitment and empathy between stakeholders and the company.
The debate over excellence, reputation, CSR and their impact on performance rages in the academic and professional communities.
Professionals responsible for intangible assets and those in charge of finance are a good reflection of this dual reality that frequently makes Board members and Management Committees take difficult decisions that don’t benefit both parts the same way.
In 2013, a research was held in Japan in order to shed light to explain the mechanisms that affect financial performance and, more specifically, identify which of these mechanisms are related to corporate reputation. It concluded that corporate value is constituted by four factors: organizational value, social value, business value and commercial value. Eventually, those companies that pay more attention to organizational and social value achieve greater commercial and business value.
This document analyzes the factors that constitute those values and the steps needed to improve reputation. It also explains relations between different factors of corporate reputation and financial performance in mathematical terms.
Innovation is the factor that truly relates corporate reputation to business success. The factors that improve both economic results and reputation are the ability to lure resources and expand internationally. That’s why companies need to bring best talent and state-of-the-art technologies on board.
In this document, it is explained the case of ING Direct in Australia to show the contribution of corporate reputation to financial results.
By using Net Promoter Score (NPS) (an index developed by U.S.-based Professor Reichheld which stands for a positive or negative correlation between the number of promoters and the number of detractors), ING Direct was able to measure the impact of its brand strategy on the Australian market. The company achieved a high recommendation level reflected in the exponential growth of deposits, funds and assets.
Good economic results impact reputation and sustain it over time. However, as in the example of ING Direct and many other companies, a good reputation is able to improve financial results as well as the competitive and economic position.
Promoting multidimensional teams has a positive impact on business outcomes. Female presence in company's executive bodies is essential to build business projects that are successful and long-term oriented.
During the meeting held by Woman's Week foundation and the Association of Directors of Communication in Spain (Dircom), Chief Communication Officer and companies, committed to equal opportunities and diversity, professionals discussed about CSR regarding gender diversity.
We are indeed living a shift of paradigm where companies are more sensitive to the economic importance of their role as social actors and the strategic and integrated management of key intangible assets such as reputation, brand, communication or public issues. We are immersed in the so-called "reputation economy".
The main advantages of promoting diversity within the corporation are the greater capacity of attracting and retaining talent, improvement of leadership and innovation strategies and a closer approach to key stakeholders for the company. In fact, the main idea of the concept of diversity is to optimize human resources presented by heterogeneous groups, this is to say, diverse regarding the gender, age, race or nationality of their members.
We are making progress in integrating diverse teams in the organization, but we are still below the goal of 40 % female board managers in companies set out by the European Parliament and the European Commission.
This insight addresses the current situation and future leadership, where diversity will play a major role for sure.
Reputation is probably the most important asset owned by a company, and not only because it attracts and retains the best resources, but also because it leverages the value of the company’s unique character and identity by showing how well the company manages to align its external perception with the internal reality.
This document was prepared by Corporate Excellence and among other sources contains references to Corporate Reputation and Competitiveness by Gary Davies and Rosa Chun, Professors at the University of Manchester (the UK) and the IMD Business School (Switzerland), respectively, and published by Routledge in 2003.
Several years ago brands expanded their role from the original area of marketing and sales to the corporate scale, leaving behind exclusive association with products and moving towards reflecting the company in its entirety. Today brands are making another step forward: they still reflect the commercial and corporate areas, but the intersection of the two areas yielded a new field: brand as a company.
This document was prepared by Corporate Excellence – Centre for Reputation Leadership and contains references to the speech delivered by Terry Tyrrell, the President and Co-Founder of The Brand Union (2007), formerly Sampson Tyrrell (1976) and Enterprise IG (1996), and a member of the Advisory Board of Corporate Excellence – Centre for Reputation Leadership, at the event titled Meeting the Board: The Company Brand, held in Madrid on January 31, 2013.
CHAPTER 8 RECONSTRUCTION, Opening and Closing , 1865-1900Cont.docxchristinemaritza
CHAPTER 8: RECONSTRUCTION, Opening and Closing , 1865-1900
Contents
Introduction and Pre-Reading Questions: 1
Documents: 5
Document 1, Harper’s Weekly comments on the Freedman’s Bureau, 1868 (Harper's Weekly, 1868) 5
Document 2, Former slaves reflect on their happiness with freedom and the Thirteenth Amendment (Library of Congress, 1936-1938) 7
Document 3, Mississippi Black Codes, 1865 (America Past and Present Online, 1865) 13
Document 4, Reflections on the Lincoln Assassination (The New York Times, 1865) 15
Document 5, President Andrew Johnson orders the return of Field Order 15 land (Engine of Souls Forum, 1865) 18
Document 6, The 14th and 15th Amendments (The Charters of Freedom, 1866 (r. 1868); 1869 (r. 1870)) 19
Document 7, The Arkansas Gazette on Black Male Suffrage, 1890 (Perman, 2001) 20
Document 8, 1868 Ku Klux Klan Charter (albany.edu, 1868) 21
Post-Reading Exercises: 22
Works Cited 22
Introduction and Pre-Reading Questions: As you know, the North won the Civil War in 1865 under the presidential leadership of Abraham Lincoln. Well, Lincoln had his work cut out for him as president during this war, and, in particular, he had his work cut out for him in terms of figuring out what to do with the South once the war was over. It became clear by 1864, well before the Confederacy surrendered, that the Union was going to win the war. Looking back, it seems that perhaps Lincoln shouldn’t have let the war go on so much longer, since it was obvious—really to both sides—who the eventual victor would be. Indeed, some have argued that Lincoln should have negotiated with the South to try and end the war sooner. But Lincoln would have argued that he could never have negotiated with the South—he insisted that since the Confederacy was a rebellious bunch, since they had no legal right to exist, he couldn’t negotiate with them.
So Lincoln instead had to focus on what to do with the South once the war really did end. Lincoln did know one thing for sure—he knew he couldn’t just readmit the South and pretend that nothing had happened. Too much blood had been shed for that and he also didn’t want anyone to think that when they didn’t like a governmental policy, they could just secede from the Union with no consequences. This much was clear to Lincoln early on, but aside from this, he wasn’t too sure on how to proceed with the reunification or the reconstruction of the nation.
By the time the war did finally end in 1865, the South was in tatters, with homes and buildings destroyed, railroads and bridges completely gone, fields untended. The Emancipation Proclamation had stripped many Southerners of their slaves and many acutely felt new economic burdens, particularly because so many fathers and sons had been killed in the war. For these white Southerners, they hoped that the period of Reconstruction—the period of reunifying the nation—would consist of the federal government stepping out of southern affairs and they hoped to see African ...
Abraham Lincoln And The Corwin Amendment - The Infamous Ghost Version Of Th...
Lincoln
1. 1. Lincoln wasn’t an abolitionist.
Lincoln did believe that slavery was morally wrong, but there was one big problem: It was sanctioned by the
highest law in the land, the Constitution. The nation’s founding fathers, who also struggled with how to address
slavery, did not explicitly write the word “slavery” in the Constitution, but they did include key clauses protecting
the institution, including a fugitive slave clause and the three-fifths clause, which allowed Southern states to
count slaves for the purposes of representation in the federal government. In a three-hour speech in Peoria,
Illinois, in the fall of 1854, Lincoln presented more clearly than ever his moral, legal and economic opposition to
slavery—and then admitted he didn’t know exactly what should be done about it within the current political
system.
Abolitionists, by contrast, knew exactly what should be done about it: Slavery should be immediately abolished,
and freed slaves should be incorporated as equal members of society. They didn’t care about working within
the existing political system, or under the Constitution, which they saw as unjustly protecting slavery and slave
owners. Leading abolitionist William Lloyd Garrison called the Constitution “a covenant with death and an
agreement with Hell,” and went so far as to burn a copy at a Massachusetts rally in 1854. Though Lincoln saw
himself as working alongside the abolitionists on behalf of a common anti-slavery cause, he did not count
himself among them. Only with emancipation, and with his support of the eventual 13th Amendment, would
Lincoln finally win over the most committed abolitionists.
2. Lincoln didn’t believe blacks should have the same rights as whites.
Though Lincoln argued that the founding fathers’ phrase “All men are created equal” applied to blacks and
whites alike, this did not mean he thought they should have the same social and political rights. His views
became clear during an 1858 series of debates with his opponent in the Illinois race for U.S. Senate, Stephen
Douglas, who had accused him of supporting “negro equality.” In their fourth debate, at Charleston, Illinois, on
September 18, 1858, Lincoln made his position clear. “I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been, in favor
of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races,” he began, going on
to say that he opposed blacks having the right to vote, to serve on juries, to hold office and to intermarry with
whites. What he did believe was that, like all men, blacks had the right to improve their condition in society and
to enjoy the fruits of their labor. In this way they were equal to white men, and for this reason slavery was
inherently unjust.
Like his views on emancipation, Lincoln’s position on social and political equality for African-Americans would
evolve over the course of his presidency. In the last speech of his life, delivered on April 11, 1865, he argued
for limited black suffrage, saying that any black man who had served the Union during the Civil War should
have the right to vote.
3. Lincoln thought colonization could resolve the issue of slavery.
For much of his career, Lincoln believed that colonization—or the idea that a majority of the African-American
2. population should leave the United States and settle in Africa or Central America—was the best way to confront
the problem of slavery. His two great political heroes, Henry Clay and Thomas Jefferson, had both favored
colonization; both were slave owners who took issue with aspects of slavery but saw no way that blacks and
whites could live together peaceably. Lincoln first publicly advocated for colonization in 1852, and in 1854 said
that his first instinct would be “to free all the slaves, and send them to Liberia” (the African state founded by the
American Colonization Society in 1821).
Nearly a decade later, even as he edited the draft of the preliminary Emancipation Proclamation in August of
1862, Lincoln hosted a delegation of freed slaves at the White House in the hopes of getting their support on a
plan for colonization in Central America. Given the “differences” between the two races and the hostile attitudes
of whites towards blacks, Lincoln argued, it would be “better for us both, therefore, to be separated.” Lincoln’s
support of colonization provoked great anger among black leaders and abolitionists, who argued that AfricanAmericans were as much natives of the country as whites, and thus deserved the same rights. After he issued
the preliminary Emancipation Proclamation, Lincoln never again publicly mentioned colonization, and a mention
of it in an earlier draft was deleted by the time the final proclamation was issued in January 1863.
4. Emancipation was a military policy.
As much as he hated the institution of slavery, Lincoln didn’t see the Civil War as a struggle to free the nation’s
4 million slaves from bondage. Emancipation, when it came, would have to be gradual, and the important thing
to do was to prevent the Southern rebellion from severing the Union permanently in two. But as the Civil War
entered its second summer in 1862, thousands of slaves had fled Southern plantations to Union lines, and the
federal government didn’t have a clear policy on how to deal with them. Emancipation, Lincoln saw, would
further undermine the Confederacy while providing the Union with a new source of manpower to crush the
rebellion.
In July 1862 the president presented his draft of the preliminary Emancipation Proclamation to his cabinet.
Secretary of State William Seward urged him to wait until things were going better for the Union on the field of
battle, or emancipation might look like the last gasp of a nation on the brink of defeat. Lincoln agreed and
returned to edit the draft over the summer. On September 17 the bloody Battle of Antietam gave Lincoln the
opportunity he needed. He issued the preliminary proclamation to his cabinet on September 22, and it was
published the following day. As a cheering crowd gathered at the White House, Lincoln addressed them from a
balcony: “I can only trust in God I have made no mistake … It is now for the country and the world to pass
judgment on it.”
5. The Emancipation Proclamation didn’t actually free all of the slaves.
Since Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation as a military measure, it didn’t apply to border slave states
like Delaware, Maryland, Kentucky and Missouri, all of which had remained loyal to the Union. Lincoln also
exempted selected areas of the Confederacy that had already come under Union control in hopes of gaining
3. the loyalty of whites in those states. In practice, then, the Emancipation Proclamation didn’t immediately free a
single slave, as the only places it applied were places where the federal government had no control—the
Southern states currently fighting against the Union.
Despite its limitations, Lincoln’s proclamation marked a crucial turning point in the evolution of Lincoln’s views
of slavery, as well as a turning point in the Civil War itself. By war’s end, some 200,000 black men would serve
in the Union Army and Navy, striking a mortal blow against the institution of slavery and paving the way for its
eventual abolition by the 13th Amendment.
Related
Emancipation Proclamation - Topic
Emancipation Proclamation - Video
Civil War 150 - Interactive
Abraham Lincoln - Video
25
Categories: Abraham Lincoln, American Civil War, Slavery