History

Introduction

The history of slavery in the United States dates back to the beginning of the 17th century when the shores of Virginia first welcomed a ship full of captive Africans. While the patterns that slavery took in the United States may reminisce of those present in other countries, one distinctive feature unique to North America was its foundation on race. The slavery narrative of the US and Canada often revolved around skin color, therefore, drawing a line between human beings that deserved respect and those who did not. Nowadays, despite formal freedoms and liberties, the African-American community in North America is still struggling to live to its full potential. It is argued that one of the main reasons why society cannot become fully aware of racial disparities is its reliance on myths and misconceptions about slavery. This essay debunks the most common legends regarding slaves and slavery in North America and critically examines the notion of American diversity.

The Unspoken History of Slave Rebellions

One of the most persistent myths that are still very much present in popular culture is that slaves silently accepted their denigrated social standing. In the United States and Canada, slavery took centuries to be eradicated, and in the absence of substantial records about rebellions, it may seem that slaves were apprehensive of change. A prime example of this misconception is probably an influential modern rapper and producer Kanye West’s views on the past of the United States. Notorious for his sympathy for conservative political figures such as President Trump and Candace Owens, West infamously stated that “slavery was a choice (Staton, 2018).” It is readily imaginable how much controversy that statement generated, especially in the light of alarming political polarization in the US. Since then, the rapper apologized profusely for his choice of words. Yet, for all his apologies, such a worldview has yet to be overcome and is a symptom of a larger issue.

Covering the many slave rebellions occurring throughout America’s early history was not seen as reasonable by the superior social class. After all, truthful information on the subject could set a precedent, especially if a rebellion was at least semi-successful. Even today, very few history books or popular media outlets discuss rebellious slaves. Yet, history knows many examples – for instance, a rebellion at the Stono Plantation in 1739. Back then, a small group of enslaved Africans started off an insurgence by killing two guards. Others were moved by their example, and soon two dozen enslavers were massacred with the most violent overseers being the main target. 1831 Nat Turner’s uprising in 1831 was even more violent with the death count approaching 65 people (The American Civil War Museum, n.d.). It is worth mentioning that slave rebellions often took more peaceful forms: there are records of slaves secretly learning how to read and write and keeping these skills a secret. Raising awareness of slave rebellions would help to confront the dangerous myth of certain races being “apt” for service.

The Myth of Slave-Free Canada

Canada has long praised itself for its opposition to slavery. Admittedly, it is partly true: for decades, Canada offered asylum to US slaves due to the country’s earliest immigration policies. The most discussed phenomenon is probably the northbound Underground Railway that helped Africans escape to freedom. However, what Canadian historians unanimously decide to ignore is that their country has seen 200 years of slavery and had important ties to the Caribbean plantation economies. While the history and importance of the Underground Railways stand true, there are not enough discussions around slaves fleeing to the south to settle in slavery-free Vermont and other northern US states. Even more, captive Africans found their second home in the US, namely, Michigan and New England, after the war of 1812 (Parish, 2018). With that being said, the goal is not to figure out which North American country was more violent toward slaves but to raise awareness of how pandemic slavery was as a social and political phenomenon.

On par with the United States, Canada was resistant to changes that would mean pending slavery abolition. The first mentions of slavery date all the way back to 1628 – around that time, as many as 3,000 captive Africans were residing in Canada (Parish, 2018). Slavery became even more entrenched into the legal system of the country after Britain’s conquest of Quebec. Namely, on several occasions, the British Empire promised slave owners that their property rights would be respected. Apart from that, Canada helped the British stifle Caribbean slave rebellions that surged from 1791 through 1804 during the Haitian Revolution. Moreover, a number of well-known Canadian-born political figures fought relentlessly to re-establish slavery in the French colonies. Thus, it is safe to assume that Canada was rather actively contributing to African enslavement than undermining it.

The Myth of Abolition

At some point, both Canada and the United States rejected slavery-based economy and reached the point where abolition had become a viable solution. Yet, it would be naive to think that abolition ended slavery and racism in an instant. It is true conservative politicians and public figures often deny the legacy of the four centuries of slavery that still lingers and affects communities of color. What those who hold such views fail to comprehend is that abolition at the social and individual levels was a long and gradual process. Public opinions do not change overnight, and even after the Civil War, White Americans still had the same racist beliefs as before.

In the South, White Americans were overwhelmingly resistant to changing an enslaver’s mentality. While legally, they could no longer own slaves, they could reinforce regulations and exploit loopholes to control black labor (Parish, 2018). Their attempts to assert dominance resulted in such phenomenon as sharecropping – the kind of arrangement when Black Americans worked someone else’s land for a small share of crops. Slavery persisted in the form of convict leasing when prisons leased prisoners to railways, factories, mines, and plantations. Private parties exploited the incarcerated a big part of which was African Americans in return for scarce food and inhumane working conditions. Apart from that, Southern states were notorious for racial terror used to police the color line.

The North that is known to be anti-slavery was far from perfect. While slaves were emancipated on paper, many were left without means for survival because White Americans refused to make confiscated lands available to them (Parish, 2018). The general logic was that African Americans would not make good use of these lands and abandon them without White supervision. Soon constant conflicts gave way to segregation when public pools, phone booths, hospitals, asylums, jails, and residential homes for the elderly and handicapped had varying levels of access for White and Black Americans. De jure, segregation was upheld no earlier than 1964, meaning that many elderly African Americans living today witnessed its horrors.

Slavery and Public Education

Many facts covered in this essay are not common knowledge. Probably the main reason behind it is public education failing to teach school students about slavery. Curriculum standards do not offer any practical help: they are broad and vague and leave plenty of leeway to individual schools. Mentions of slavery are sporadic, taken out of context, or sanitized to leave out the most disturbing details. For instance, a recent survey showed that only 8% of school students could name slavery as the main motivator of the Civil War (Loewen, 2018). They do not quite understand how slavery underpinned every aspect of life in the South, or how the economy of the North largely depended on captive Africans. It is safe to assume that this ignorance is far from innocent. Without knowing the real history of their country, these students will be unable to understand today’s politics and the origins of racial disparities.

There are many persistent issues with how slavery is taught in schools that include but are not limited to:

1. teaching American history as the history of human progress with no setbacks. This worldview does not allow for abolition not being the final step to end racism. It also dismisses the legacy of slavery that still plagues Black communities – this would contradict the “American dream”;
2. presenting slavery as a minor aberration and a peculiar institution of the South. For many years, slavery was the norm backed up by the Constitution and supported by many great thinkers and progressivists;
3. not explaining the obvious relationship between White supremacy and slavery given that the former used to justify the latter. This makes understanding the rise of the alt-right movements in today’s America a rather difficult task (Loewen, 2018).

Since it is obvious that the current curriculum does very little for the truthful representation of the issue, the Southern Poverty Law Center has provided it’s own take on how history classes should be organized. Basically, the institution issued a statement that prescribes to highlight the following:

1. Slavery made part of all the colonial powers and was present in all of the European colonies in North America;
2. Slavery was vital to the development and growth of the economy in North America;
3. Enslaved Africans resisted in both revolutionary and everyday ways;
4. Slavery was the central cause behind the Civil War;
5. Slavery shaped US mentality and views on racial justice to a large degree;
6. Its legacy continues to influence modern society and should be reckoned with.

Overall, the Southern Poverty Law Center acknowledges that teachers might be lacking the sense of direction given how unclear the current prescriptions are. The new recommendations are to guide them were they to choose to bring supplementary materials.

The Myth of Diversity

The aforementioned pessimistic points may be undermined by the seemingly successful efforts to transform American society and make it more accepting of racial minorities. After all, in recent years, Black culture has not only gone mainstream but also been overtly celebrated due to the plethora of Black artists, thinkers, and other public figures (Bobier, 2014). The question arises as to whether America is approaching cohabitation where different races would live and let live without imposing hierarchies. Shohat and Stam (2014) argue that for now, those believing in social justice should temper their optimism. Multiculturalism that is being widely propagated is nothing more than assimilationism: racial and ethnic minorities are forced to comply with the White norm to be accepted. In a way, the current situation may be reminiscent of that in the 20th century when slavery was long gone but Black behavior was still controlled by those in power.

Another reason why American diversity may be nothing more than a beautiful legend is how it validates Black people. In his article, Matthes (2016) explains that admiration for racial diversity often borders on cultural appropriation. It strips Black people of their humanity and treats them as a source of entertainment and creative ideas. In this way, White people may only be interested in the products of Black culture while detaching themselves from its realities. This attitude may also be traced back to the tradition of White superiority that reigned supreme in the United States for centuries on end.

Conclusion

Slavery is one of the most horrid forms of human exploitation encountered in many progressive cultures and societies. Slavery is pervasive in a way that it affects entire generations of people even after official abolition. In order to tackle its legacy, society needs to be more aware of the phenomenon itself, which is sadly not the case for the United States and Canada. The real history of slavery is almost completely eradicated from public education, leaving sporadic fragments that do not amount to a full picture. This leads to persistent myths such as slavery being a choice or abolition ending racism once and for all. Canadian historians also prefer not to focus on the two centuries of slavery whose realities were similar to those in the United States. While some progress regarding the issue of racism has been made, eliminating disparities is a work in progress. America might only be able to embrace diversity when it will acknowledge Black culture without exploitation and take its problems more seriously.

References

The American Civil War Museum. (n.d.). Myths and misunderstandings: Slavery in the United States. Web.

Bobier, K. (2014). Bound to appear: Art, slavery, and the site of blackness in multicultural America. Journal of Contemporary African Art, 2014(34), 116-118.

Loewen, J. W. (2018). Teaching what really happened: How to avoid the tyranny of textbooks and get students excited about doing history. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.

Matthes, E. H. (2016). Cultural appropriation without cultural essentialism?. Social Theory and Practice, 42(2), 343-366.

Parish, P. J. (2018). Slavery: History and historians. Abingdon, UK: Routledge.

Shohat, E., & Stam, R. (2014). Unthinking Eurocentrism: Multiculturalism and the media. Abingdon, UK: Routledge.

Staton, T. (2018). From the editorial board: Free thought or the absence of thought? Critical media literacy in the age of social media. The High School Journal, 101(4), 213-216.

Introduction

Gaius Octavius, popularly known as Emperor Augustus, is considered one of the most important rulers of Rome. He is the individual credited with the founding of the Roman Empire in 27BC after the collapse of the Roman Republic. Augustus was able to overcome the social and political upheaval prevalent in Rome after the ruin of the republic and his reign is considered a pivotal moment in western history. Augustus held extraordinary powers and he was able to rule almost like a king. He embarked on a mission to restore the glory of the Roman state and achieved some considerable success. A major objective of Augustus’ reign was the restoration of traditional Roman values and morality in society. To achieve this goal, he personally introduced laws that were aimed at regulating marriage and sexual conduct among citizens. Before these laws were passed, individuals were at liberty to monitor and regulate their own moral conduct. The marriage and adultery legislation introduced by Augustus had an important impact on the social order in Roman society, which was at that time rife with moral corruption. The laws where enacted to deal with marriage avoidance, the preference for childless unions, marriage of lower class women by the Roman elite, and adultery, all of which threatened the continuity of the Roman aristocracy.

Reasons for the Laws

At the time Emperor Augustus established the Roman Empire, the state was in disarray due to political upheaval and decades of civil war. Rome had experience political crisis that had led to wars between different groups. Augustus had managed to emerge victorious and establish an empire in place of the late republic (Cassius 13). However, the new government was in danger of falling since it faced some of the problems that had led to the collapse of the republic. Augustus was eager to restore the state and establish a powerful empire. The decline in moral conduct by Romans was seen as one of the main explanations for the political crisis that led to the demise of the Roman Republic. Dealing with the morality crisis that his empire faced was therefore a cornerstone of Augustus’ plan for state restoration.

Another reason for the implementation of the marriage legislation was the need to rehabilitate the marriage institute. When Augustus became Rome’s ruler, the marriage institute was experiencing a profound breakdown. This was especially evident among the elite who engaged in numerous extramarital affairs and divorced each other regularly (Miles 211). There was also a preference for bachelor lives by a number of the aristocrats or getting married but not having children. Augustus felt compelled to take action that would restore the integrity of the marriage institute and promote child bearing within the family setting.

In addition to this, Augustus was greatly troubled by the demographic patterns evident in his empire. At the time of the formation of the Roman Empire, the population of the upper class members of the society was considerably low. This was an issue of great significance since the elite played a key role in preserving the Roman Empire. According to Edmondson, the aristocratic held administrative positions and dominated the economic and political sphere of Roman society (252). The prosperity of Rome therefore depended on the existence of this class. Augustus was therefore concerned about the declining number of nobles within the State. The marriage and adultery laws were part of the social engineering program aimed at replenishing the dwindling number of the upper class.

Implementation of the Legislations

Augustus’ laws used a number of strategies to promote marriage in the Empire. Various rewards, punishments, and incentives were used to encourage people to marry and produce children within the marital context. To promote marriage, the laws imposed high taxes to unmarried people while low taxes were issued to the married couples. The Augustan laws made marriage compulsory for men from the ages of 25 to 60 and women from 25 to fifty (Miles 213). Most of the elite had chosen to remain unmarried in order to enjoy their wealth and freedom. The heavy taxation introduced as a result of Augustus’ laws removed this incentive since the unmarried lost significant wealth to the government through tax. Due to the financial pressure caused by the marriage laws, many elite bachelors chose to not only marry but also to do so at a younger age than they would have done without the tax burden imposed on them. Once in marriage, the laws tackled the problem of high divorce rates by imposing a minimum period that couples had to stay in the union before they could seek divorce (Suetonius 179).

The marriage laws addressed the problem of low population among the elite by encouraging child bearing. The laws stipulated that for a person to be eligible for appointment in certain senior public officer, he had to be a father. The number of children an aristocrat had affected his chances of being appointed to prestigious positions (McGinn 57). Men with three or more children gained priority in the competition for public office. Frier and McGinn observe that the childless married couples were barred from certain appointments (103). This situation pressured many ambitious administrators to have many children in order to increase their chances of acquiring senior appointments. In addition to these government rewards for children, Augustus’ laws included some financial incentives. The financial incentives were in the form of policies that influenced inheritance. Specifically, the legislation denied childless couples the right to receive inheritance. This was significant since most of the elites with modest finances relied on the generous inheritances from their rich relatives to maintain their lavish lifestyles and position in society. Without children, such elites would be denied their inheritance and this would have an adverse effect on their social status.

The laws led to the preservation of the integrity of the aristocracy by dictating who could join this group. While Emperor Augustus wanted to increase the number of the Roman elites, he also wanted to preserve the purity of the ruling class. This could only be achieved by encouraging the elite to marry within their own class. Frier and McGinn admit that the Augustan marriage laws were meant to create legal barriers to marriage (34). These barriers were based on social prejudice and they were meant to ensure the integrity of the ruling class by preventing certain people from joining this class through marriage. Miles documents that the laws discouraged senatorial men from marrying women outside their political order (213).

The adultery laws sought to stabilize marriage by encouraging fidelity. Stiff penalties were imposed on anyone found to have engaged in marital infidelities. The penalties for adulterous wives were divorce and a loss of dowry. In addition to this, the women were ostracized and not allowed to remarry. Husbands could not ignore adultery on the part of their wives and they were legally obligated to report the matter to the authorities. The penalties for violating the marriage and adultery laws were strict and often imposed on members of the society in spite of their sociopolitical status. Suetonius reports that Augustus banished his own daughter, Julia, and later his granddaughter for alleged violation of the adultery law (223). While men were allowed to engage in affairs with unmarried women and slaves, any sexual relationship with a married woman led to stiff penalties. The penalties included a loss of property, imprisonment and even banishment to an island (Frier and McGinn 103).

Outcomes of Augustus’ Legislations

Augustus’ policies had a significant impact on the social life of Romans. The marriage laws were not simply enacted to enhance the welfare of individual Romans but to ensure the strength and continuity of the empire’s sociopolitical organization. The marriage laws increased state interference in matters of private conduct by society. According to Edmondson the laws represented a “profound attack on personal freedom and it brought the private life of all Romans under the heel of state oversight and regulation” (55). By doing this, the Augustus administration was able to improve the morality levels in the empire and therefore hasten the restoration of Roman prestige. This prestige had been damaged by the significant immorality of Romans in the decades leading to the collapse of the Republic. By having the legislation on morals and marriage central to his reign, Augustus was able to restore the traditional prestige that Rome had enjoyed in the glory days of the republic.

Augustus was able to increase his popularity and the level of support among his subjects through his legislations. The emperor promoted the laws as a way for the Romans to regain their prestige by reverting to their traditional values. The citizens were attracted to this leader who stood for the traditional values that the Romans cherished. Some historians argue that the laws were aimed at reinforcing the political power of the emperor by increasing his popular support base (Miles 213).

The population of the Roman elite increased as a direct result of the laws. As noted, the dwindling numbers of the aristocracy was one of the main motivations for implementing the marriage and adultery laws. Once the laws were in place, the upper-class members of the society were encouraged, through the government sanctioned incentives and penalties, to enter into marriage unions and bear children. Augustus’ policies achieved their demographic goals by promoting the increase in number of Roman elites. The success of the Empire was therefore assured during Augustus’ reign since his laws led to the increase in number of the ruling class.

Conclusion

This paper set out to discuss Emperor Augustus’ marriage and adultery legislations, which were a series of laws aimed at regulating social behavior among the Romans. The paper began by acknowledging the significance of Augustus’ reign in Roman History. It then expounded on the marriage laws and showed how they were meant to penalize sexual indulgence and promote child-bearing, especially among the elite. While the laws were an attack on the personal freedoms of Roman citizens, they fulfilled an important role in the society. The legislations were able to restore the prestige of the Roman Empire and promote the marriage institute in society. They also contributed to the increase in the population of the elite who were considered crucial to the continued success of the empire.

Works Cited

Cassius, Dio. The Roman History: The Reign of Augustus. Trans. Ian Scott-Kilvert. NY: Penguin Classics, 1987.

Edmondson, Jonathan. Augustus: His Contributions to the Development of the Roman State in the Early Imperial Period. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2009. Print.

Frier, Bruce and Thomas McGinn. A Casebook on Roman Family Law. Oxford University Press, 2004.

McGinn, Thomas. “The Social Policy of Emperor Constantine in Codex Theodosianus 4,6,3.” Tijdschrift voor Rechtsgeschiedenis 67.1 (1999): 57-73. Web.

Miles, Gary. Livy: Reconstructing Early Rome. Cornell University Press, 1997.

Suetonius, Gaius. The Lives of the Twelve Caesars. Trans. John Rolfe. NY: Loeb Classical Library, 1914. Print.

Source Analysis

Frier, Bruce and Thomas McGinn. A Casebook on Roman Family Law. NY: Oxford University Press, 2004. Print.

This secondary source will be used as a major resource for the term paper on the topic “The Marriage and Adultery Laws of Emperor Augustus”. I chose the particular resource for a number of reasons. To begin with, the information provided in the book can be assumed to be reliable since its two authors have well established credentials. Bruce Frier is an authority on the subject of Roman Family Law and is a professor of Classics and Roman Law while Thomas McGinn is an authority on the subject and is a professor of Classical Studies.

The book sets out to address the family law issues of the Roman Empire. It covers the period between 30BC and 250AD which means that years of the early Roman Empire are covered within the book. It offers a comprehensive review of some of the family law issues including marriage, divorce, inheritance, and children. The book presents numerous case studies from Roman legal sources to demonstrate how the Romans addressed various issues.

This resource addresses the laws passed by Emperor Augustus in 18 – 17 BC to regulate social conduct of the Romans. The book provides information that gives the context within which Emperor Augustus’ policies where implemented. It highlights the moral corruption that Rome was facing and the need for legislation to regulate social behavior. The book explains the rationale behind Augustus’ legislation and goes on to show how they were implemented during his rule.

Using this source I will be able to provide compelling evidence to explain why Augustus felt the need to enact the marriage and adultery laws. I will also be able to assess the impacts of these laws on Roman Society.

Introduction

In the ancient world, law and justice were used to maintain peace and harmony between people living in different societies. These laws were used to judge citizens of territories where ancient empires had acquired authority to administer as the dominant source of government. Ancient laws and justice systems were influenced by religious doctrines, where the elite was given more protection compared to common citizens. In these societies, laws were used to protect the interests of the elite from any form of violation by people from lower classes. This paper will discuss how law and justice were applied in ancient societies by analyzing the Twelve Tables in Ancient Rome and The Laws of Hammurabi in Ancient Babylon.

Twelve Tables

The Twelve Tables in Ancient Rome served as the foundation of Roman law and was formed to govern how the Roman Republic was ruled. They were influenced by unwritten customary laws which were observed by Roman citizens in different parts of the empire. Before the formation of these laws, there were a lot of class struggles between aristocrats and working-class citizens of the empire. In essence, the Twelve Tables were a set of rules that were used to govern Roman citizens by the empire’s rulers. The structure adopted for these laws was similar to ancient Greek laws even though they were written in Latin. They were publicly displayed for all Roman citizens to read and understand. They conferred different penalties depending on the nature of the offense committed, severity, and the social status of the offender. The Twelve Tables were used by magistrates, who formed part of the privileged class to enforce law and order in the empire. They consisted of statutes that set norms and practices all citizens in the empire were required to observe.

Significance of Each Table

They are widely regarded as the foundation of modern law because they sought to address various legal and justice issues in ancient Rome. The first table enforced the supreme authority of the court. Any person summoned had to appear before the magistrate and if he failed, he would be brought to court by force. It also stipulated that an accused person’s court had a right to an advocate with a similar social status. Therefore, conflicting parties were required to present their issues in a trial, where a judge would administer a final ruling. The second table outlined penalties for various offenses committed by Roman citizens. A free citizen found guilty of theft was flogged and ordered to repay stolen items to the owner while a slave found guilty of theft was sentenced to death by getting thrown off a cliff.

The third table dealt with fraud and required that a person accused of engaging in fraudulent acts pay double the amount he had taken to compensate the aggrieved party. This had to be repaid within thirty days, a failure to which the guilty party was required to perform free hard labor for sixty days or become a slave. The fourth table mandated that a father had the right to sell his own children as slaves. If a father sold a child more than three times, he was considered a free citizen who was no longer under his father’s authority. The law also stipulated that fathers had a right to kill their deformed children after birth. The fourth law demonstrates how fathers were given absolute powers over their families.

The fifth table gave men the power of guardianship over females irrespective of their age. During the marriage, a woman and her guardian had to agree before any dowry payments were made. The law also recognized the legality of a will left by a deceased person and any division of possessions left by the deceased had to be done in accordance with his will. The sixth table required that a formal agreement between a seller and a buyer be recorded before any commercial land transaction was done. The agreement between parties involved was legally binding and they were all supposed to respect it. A woman was given rights of ownership over her husband’s property if she had proof that they had stayed together for more than one year. This law also required men to show valid reasons that made them divorce their wives before their wishes could be granted.

Table seven outlined property planning laws that all citizens were required to observe during the construction of their buildings. The law mandated that a property owner had to build his building several feet apart from the next building taking into consideration roads that were used for passage. Boundary disputes between two property owners were arbitrated by a praetor who determined where the true boundary lay after reviewing issues raised by parties involved. Table eight prohibited citizens from writing libelous statements and any person found guilty of writing these statements was sentenced to death by clubbing. A thief found guilty of stealing another person’s property at night was sentenced to death. The law also banned citizens from holding seditious meetings at night. The ninth table mandated that all statutes applied to all Roman citizens equally irrespective of their status. Judges who were found guilty of receiving bribes and other favors were condemned to death.

The tenth table outlawed all funeral ceremonies within the walls of the city. The law also valued the importance of oath-taking by citizens because the act showed a strong sense of duty to the empire. Table eleven mandated that crucial laws in the empire could only be adopted after all citizens had approved them through voting. This law also upheld that senators were not allowed to get married to common citizens. The twelfth table prohibited any form of sacred rituals being done in a property that had ownership disputes. The law also assigned responsibility to the owner of a slave who damaged the property of a fellow Roman citizen. The twelve tables were comprehensive because they addressed all legal and justice issues that were deemed important by Roman citizens. They were obtained from common customary law and touched on civil issues, public affairs, religious matters, and property laws.

Hammurabi’s Laws

The Code of Hammurabi was used in ancient Babylon during Hammurabi’s reign as king from 1792 to 1750. Hammurabi was motivated to codify more than 280 laws which were used to govern the territory that was under his authority. These laws were borrowed from ancient Mesopotamian customs and they were used to maintain law and order in the area. Hammurabi had a vision of uniting all city-states that were under his domain and to achieve his goal, he used a set of laws to unify all people in different city-states in the empire. The preamble to these laws outlines the importance of a just society that does not have wicked people to ensure the weak are adequately protected. Hammurabi’s laws were used to regulate different activities in Babylon and they made all citizens understand their legal obligations in the empire.

Some of the laws contained in the code served brutal punishments to offenders. They were used to deter Hammurabi’s subjects from engaging in any acts that were either deemed immoral or illegal. Hammurabi’s laws conferred harsh sentences both to the elite and common folk, though slaves that broke the law received more severe penalties because they were considered inferior beings. For instance, people who were found guilty of robbing fellow citizens were sentenced to death. The code also had a law that punished children who fought with their fathers. A child who was accused of beating up his father had his hands chopped off for disobedience. A slave who was found guilty of speaking disrespectfully to his master was punished by having one ear chopped off. Hammurabi’s laws were harsher compared to the twelve Roman laws. However, both sets of laws were heavily influenced by cultural customs, and penalties administered were influenced by the social status of an offender.

Hammurabi laws were vindictive and they were used to carry out vengeance against persons found guilty of various offenses. Babylon and other ancient societies equaled the concept of vengeance with justice. Slaves were not given adequate protection and any person who was found sheltering a runaway slave was sentenced to death. Freemen were prohibited from encouraging slaves to disobey or escape from their owners’ homes and any person found guilty of this crime was sentenced to death. The law also set clear responsibilities that property owners were supposed to adhere to during construction. The law also stipulated that a man who rents land from another man for farming bears all liabilities sustained by his crops before harvest. Therefore, the owner of the land is not required to compensate the tenant if his crops get destroyed by bad weather.

The law also set clear issues that deal with marriage, women’s rights, and divorce. The code stipulated that men who abandoned their wives could not claim their rights as husbands after their wives had been courted by other men. It also mandated that a wife accused of being unfaithful or disrespectful to her husband will be made to go back to her father’s house. It also imposed stiff penalties on women that were openly found to be unfaithful to their husbands. They were sentenced to death by drowning. Hammurabi’s laws imposed stiff penalties depending on the status of the person accused of committing a particular crime. They were influenced greatly by religious beliefs in ancient Babylon.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the two sets of laws administered different forms of punishment to people who had been accused of violating them. The twelve tablets allowed accused persons the right to have an advocate during the trial to enable them to prove their innocence. Hammurabi’s laws were more vindictive and they were used to make ancient Babylonians submit to the authority of their king. Religion and traditional customary practices influenced the formation and application of these laws in the two ancient empires.

Introduction

Feminist Sex Wars of the 1970s and 1980s were acrimonious debates about a number of issues relating to sex and the role of women in this context. In the debate that was uniquely feminist in nature, the focus was on various issues about sex and how different members of the society viewed it. According to Duggan and Hunterⁱ, one of the main issues was pornography and how it impacted the fight for the rights of women to choose their sexual orientation without any form of criticism from society. The anti-porn feminists argued strongly against porn. To this group, pornography portrayed women as objects for sexual gratification for men. It takes away the dignity of women, leaving them empty. On the other hand, the pro-porn feminists held that pornography did not have any negative connotation about women. They argue that the actors are consenting adult men and women who believe that what they are doing is morally right.

According to Martindaleⁱⁱ, the pro-porn feminists were opposed to the idea of the anti-porn feminists that women should avoid exposing their privacy before the camera. This was seen by the pro-porn feminist as an oppressive approach to dealing with the issue. In the current society, women, just like men, should be allowed to express their sexual orientation without any prejudice. This is one of the ways of empowering women. For this reason, pornography should not be viewed from a partial angle of just looking at the female actress. It should be taken from a holistic form where the analysis should focus on both male and female actors. Both are involved in the industry, and it would only be fair to analyze the industry by addressing this fact. Giving a biased focus on men gives the impression that women are still the weaker sex than men in society. This is what the pro-porn feminists were opposed to in this war. They argued that both parties are equal and that if the anti-porn feminists thought that women in pornographic films are used as objects, then they should show maturity in the fight for equity by defending the men in those films as well. In this research, the focus will be on feminists who were pro-porn during the sex wars in the 1970s and 1980s.

Feminist Sex Wars

According to Jeffreysⁱⁱⁱ, the feminist sex war was one of the unique revolutionary debates that had the main players as women. Men played a partial role in these debates, preferring to let women fight their own battle. This scholar says that there was a growing discomfort among many women about the issue of sexuality. The film titled ‘Snuff,’ which was produced in 1976, sparked the public debate on the role of women in society and the effects of pornographic films. Andrea Dworkin was one of the pioneers of this debate. She was concerned about the perception that society, especially men, had towards women. To her, women were seen as objects meant to offer sexual gratification to men. She argued that this was not only demonstrated in prostitution that was common in New York and various parts of the world, but also in pornographic films.

It was a concern to her that the government was ignoring the issue of pornography as it was gaining popularity in society. When this debate started, many thought that it would be a revolutionary debate that would pitch women on one side and men on the other side. Andrea Dworkin was able to convince women that pornography was wrong. She traversed the country and organized public rallies to denounce it. She argued that pornography was the main factor that led to increased cases of rape in the country.^iv She was able to get the backing from other staunch human rights activists such as Ellen Willis, Susan Griffin, and Kathleen Barry. It is strange that Kathy Acker and Susie Bright were some of the followers of anti-porn feminism during its early days. Andrea was seen as a hero who opened a topic that no one had dared talk about, and most women were in support of her efforts.

In the early 1980s, there seemed to be a shift of ideology among some of the followers of Andrea. Led by Susie Bright, a section of women started approaching this debate from a different point of view. While the anti-porn crusaders used public forums such as rallies to champion the crimination of pornography in the country, a new outfit that was pro-porn took a scholarly approach. They wrote books and articles in the newspapers criticizing the ideology of the anti-porn crusaders. Susie was particularly concerned with the approach that anti-porn crusaders had taken about issues of pornography and commercial sex workers. According to her, the sex workers went to the streets out of their own free will to earn a living^v. Their concern is to offer service to willing people and get paid out of this, just like a painter or a gardener.

The claim that this was a patriarchal-motivated act was, therefore, not convincing to her. Similarly, she believed that pornography was offering women the opportunity to get liberation when talking about the issue of sexuality. Women, just like men, should be allowed to enjoy sex and express their views freely without feeling intimidated. Criticizing women who act in pornographic films and ignoring the fact that men are also part of the action is unfair to women. It is a clear demonstration that this group feels that women are lesser beings when compared to men. Similarly, appearing to defend women who act in these films and ignoring that men are also part of the action is unfair to women. This is so because it emphasizes the belief in society that women are weak and need constant protection. To Susie, this was wrong and demeaning to women that the pro-porn activists claimed to protect. It would be important to focus on the events that took place in this war in order to understand how the pro-porn feminists fought to make their voices be heard and their contributions be appreciated in this debate.

Samois

Samois was the earliest pro-porn feminist group to be started in the United States in 1977. It gave rise to what would be called feminist war because till then, the war against pornography and prostitution seemed to be a fight between men and women. However, this group of lesbians came out to strongly oppose the arguments put forth by the anti-porn activists. One factor that brought members of this group together was that they were lesbians. They analyzed principles laid by the anti-porn activists and realized that their practice was part of what was criticized by this group. This made them feel outsiders to the movement. According to Nestle^vi, the name Samois was taken from a story titled ‘Story of O,’ where one of the main characters was a lesbian.

The founders of Samois were convinced that women deserve to be given the right to define their sexual orientation. They argued that men were living in a free world where no one questioned their choices. However, this was different when the issue concerns women. Society still had the belief that women should be closely controlled, and this denied them the liberty to make any choices. In particular, this group was determined to fight for the rights of the lesbians as they realized that the arguments of the anti-porn feminists were against their freedom. It is important to note that this group was not very successful because it was the first organization that was coming out publicly in support of pornography and prostitution in society. Most of their contributions were made in the print media, avoiding public rallies for fear of a possible attack by the extremists.

The group was criticized by the anti-porn feminists, especially the Women against Violence in Pornography and Media. They were seen as a thorn in the flesh, fighting against the principles that were viewed as acceptable by women. Gayle Rubin and Pat Califia were some of the founders of this group. This organization only lasted for six years, and in 1983, it split up into various smaller groups. The split was caused by infighting among members who disagreed on some of the fundamental principles. For instance, while all members agreed on the need to fight for the rights of lesbians in society, a section was opposed to violence in pornography, a view that was shared by the anti-porn feminists. The disagreements led to the split of the organization in 1983, with members forming realignments based on their personal principles. One of the biggest groups formed after the split was The Outcasts, which lasted until 1997, later changing its name to The Exiles. This new group was pro-porn, arguing that the parties involved in pornography are consenting adults. Some of the members of this group published articles and books in support of their view towards this philosophical war.

Lesbian Sex Mafia

In 1981, a sex-positive feminist Dorothy Allison founded a group she named Lesbian Sex Mafia^vii. She was concerned with the criticism that the lesbians, bisexuals, transsexuals, and sexual women were facing in New York. They were forced to live in fear of possible attacks from the anti-porn feminists. Most of them were forced to hide their sexual orientation because of the momentum that the anti-sex feminists had gained in this state. According to Allison, the anti-porn feminists were rigid minded, with principles that belittled women they claimed to protect.

In one of her publications, Allison claimed that men had thrived in the field of sexuality as they were free to express themselves and decide on sexual orientation. On the other hand, women have lived in a society where they are expected to be dormant when it comes to issues of sexuality. They are supposed to be recipients and not initiators. To Allison, this era was long gone, and it was the right time to allow women to make the decision about their own sexuality, a freedom that was enjoyed by men. She believed that controlling women’s sexuality in any way was the equivalent of taking power away from women and handing it over to men. This is contrary to the belief of the pro-porn feminists, who believed that their principles centered on empowering women.

Some of the principles that this organization strongly supported included fantasy role-playing, fetishes, sadomasochism, unrestrained sexual expressions, and alternate gender identities. It is important to note that some of these principles were strongly opposed by the anti-porn feminists who formed the basis of this organization. For instance, this organization strongly supported sadomasochism as they considered it a practiced that allowed women to express themselves in various forms as long as they were not forced into the act. However, the anti-porn feminists considered this one of the worst acts that belittled women and made them be seen as objects of pleasure for men. This was a major point of disagreement among these two warring parties. According to Meika^viii, while one party saw this as a demonstration that women were in bondage and used the way men desired, the other section felt that this was another form of expression for women.

Another fundamental disagreement between Lesbian Sex Mafia and the anti-porn feminists was on alternate gender identities. The anti-porn feminists were conservatives who believed that women should remain women, and they should be proud of this fact when expressing their sexuality. On the other hand, the Lesbian Sex Mafia believed that women could alternate gender identity when expressing their sexuality as this formed the basis of lesbianism. According to this group, for one to be a lesbian, she must have a feeling that she is a man in her sexual orientation, and this will make men unattractive to her. She will view men to be of the same gender. For this reason, she will be attracted to other women. This essentially means that there is an alternation of gender identity. Lastly, these two groups largely differed in their view of unrestricted sexual expression.

The two groups claimed that they supported unrestricted sexual expression of women. To the anti-porn feminists, women should be respected and be allowed to make their own choices of the people they would want to be intimate with within their lives. Their romantic lives should not be subject to filming because the pleasure generated from the intimacy should be enjoyed by the two parties, and not a third party. They should not be used as objects of sexuality by men who may be interested in the funny exploration of the body of women. This is contrary to the view held by the Lesbian Sex Mafia. To this group, women should be granted total freedom to express their sexuality. Those who wish to act in pornography should not be simply restricted because they are women. Women who are interested in watching pornographic should be given the liberty to do so because men have never been restricted from such films.

The group also argued that women should not be restricted in their dressing code, something that anti-porn feminist was very critical about. The Mafia sought to give total liberation to women, handing them the power to choose their personality as far as sexuality was concerned. This organization remained very strong during the feminist sex war, especially due to its liberal approach to various issues of sexuality. Membership was open to women aged 18 years and above. The group would organize some play parties where members would watch erotic movies or practical plays by some of the members. They would also sell sex toys to its members or other parties that visited their dungeons. This was seen as an open defiance to the moralist approach taken by the anti-porn feminists, a fact that that intensified the war. Their act received massive criticism, especially in some of the rallies in New York organized by Andrea Dworkin. They were seen to be the force that was acting against the right course that would liberate women from bondage.

The group was bringing a new approach to the war against pornography and male dominance in the area of sexuality. Women were now doing what Dworkin and her movement had associated men with, and the group had a substantial following. This was seen as a betrayal to the women in the society, according to Dworkin. While they were busy fighting for some of these vices from being committed by men to women, a section of women were not committing the same acts to fellow women and publicly justifying their course. Dworkin and her movement realized that the real enemy in their fight for liberation was not men but fellow women. On the other hand, the pro-porn feminists viewed the anti-porn feminists as the real enemies of the fight for their total liberation. Herbert says that the development of these two strong factions in this debate made men completely withdraw from the war to let the women find the course they thought was the best for all (Meika ). In fact, the only parties that joined in the battle were the pornographic film producers and religious leaders because of their vested interests. The research by Nestle shows that this group still exists in New York and various parts of the United States, and it has held to its initial principles so dearly.

Sex-Positive Movement

Feminists against censorship were pro-sex feminist campaigns that were started in the 1980s in response to the strong opposition to pornography in the United States. A section of the society was increasingly growing intolerant of the campaigns by the pro-porn feminists, especially on the use of pornographic materials. Led by Susie Bright, Kathy Acker, and Rachel Kramer Bussel, these pro-porn feminists were determined to fight against the censorship that they considered was an attempt to control the kind of materials that women had access to^ix. They argued that pornographic materials had been widely used in the country by men, and for this reason, it was not right to censor its use simply because women had developed an interest in it. They believed that censorship was an attempt to define and rigidly control women’s sexuality, something that they were strongly against. Their campaign was, therefore, a direct attempt to liberate women from such control.

They believed that women, just like men, had the liberty to decide if they wanted to engage in the production or consumption of pornographic materials as long as they are of the legal age. The sex-positive movement was strongly supported by a group of people who believed in safe sex and the relevance of informed consent when women engaged in the production of pornographic materials. Bronstein^x says, “Sex positivity is an attitude towards human sexuality that regards all consensual sexual activities as fundamentally healthy and pleasurable, and encourages sexual pleasure and experimentation.” This philosophy holds that any sexual activity that a woman engages in-, as long as it is done with her full consent- is a pleasurable act that has some form of fulfillment to both parties. This philosophy does not exist among different sexual activities, as long as the act is safe, and both parties to it have consented to it. In fact, this movement strongly opposed the call against lesbianism in society. The movement was seen to fight for the rights of the lesbians in the United States in a society that was seen to be intolerant to lesbianism despite its increasing popularity among some women.

The pro-porn feminists were determined to liberate women who had sexual orientation considered abnormal by society, then from constant stigmatization. Their main targets were the lesbians- some of whom were forced to lead double lives- and women who acted in pornographic films. According to Duggan and Hunter (39)^xi, a large number of women were forced to have husbands and biological children, just to be considered normal, but practiced lesbianism in secrecy. Those who acted in pornographic films were considered outcasts and were shunned in society. The movement was strongly against this, as its members felt that women should have the freedom to choose their sexual orientation and practices without any form of intimidation from members of society. In order to fight what they considered social injustice against female sexual orientation and freedom, a group of scholars, lesbians, and their sympathizers among other pro-porn feminists started a network of pro-porn feminists to fight for what they described as the liberation of women from censorship. This was a network of women that were focused on what they viewed as social injustice directed towards women in the society^xii. The movement was well-organized, with these organizations being registered and having a membership that represented the affected women in various forums.

According to Bronstein, although in the United States, there were no clear laws that censored pornographic materials among adults, there was strong stigmatization against the usage of such materials, especially by women.^xiii The wave of anti-porn feminists’ activities was felt in the United States, where the groups organized public rallies to champion their course. Despite the divided opinion among American society towards the usage of pornographic materials by women, the pro-porn feminists succeeded in convincing the society that women had the right access to these materials. They argued that it was unfair to put restrictions on the usage of such materials on a specific gender. In fact, Herbert^xiv argues that if these materials have existed before without raising controversies, then restricting women from using it would be a discriminatory act in a society where people cherish freedom.

The research by Jeffreys focuses on the work of pro-porn feminists towards fighting for the rights of American lesbians.^xv American sex-positive feminism had laid massive emphasis on the need for lesbian’s rights to be protected by society. As long as other’s rights are not violated by the act of lesbianism, there is no basis for discriminating against lesbians in society. The pro-porn feminists realized that they had to fight as a team. For this reason, they tied the rights of lesbians to that of every other woman in the country. They gave the image that they were fighting for the rights of all women in the United States. In fact, most of their campaigns were expected to win the hearts of other women in society to support their course. When talking about pornography, this movement was very keen because it was aware that many women had a low opinion about it. For this reason, they mentioned that men in society were at liberty to use pornographic materials without police harassment, a right that was not common among women. They had to find a way of creating a common course for all the women in the society, including those who were strongly against lesbianism and pornographic materials.

Their arguments were more inclined to empowering women and allowing them to enjoy their rights, other than liberalizing pornographic materials.^xvi The group managed to instill the spirit of rebellion in many women, and pornography was largely viewed merely as an object in this rebellion. This way, it was easy to bring in more women to the course, including those who did not share the same sexual orientation with the lesbians. For this reason, many women viewed it as a lesser social evil as compared to the discrimination they faced in public. Many contended that if pornography could be used to liberalize society and free women from bondage, then it was an acceptable social evil. This saw many women make contributions in newspaper articles and public rallies criticizing the censorship of pornographic materials in the country. This group is believed to be still active in the country. This helped the pro-porn feminist to champion their rights in American society. Although the anti-porn feminist movement remained strong in this country, the pro-porn feminist also managed to gain popularity among many women who felt that they were fighting for a just course.

Feminists for Free Expression

In late 1989, there was a group of women who were thinking of forming a group that would be more vibrant in supporting the rights of women to express their sexuality without feeling intimidated. This group was that the Lesbian Sex Mafia was not fighting for the rights of a section of women, especially the prostitutes within various cities in the United States. As its name suggests, the Lesbian Sex Mafia was also viewed as a society for lesbians. Most of their activities also showed more inclination towards lesbianism other than overall protection of rights and freedom of women’s sexuality. As a result, some of these women felt that their views were not fully represented in the ongoing feminists’ wars. This formed the basis of the formation of this new organization in late 1989. The founders of these groups included Candida Royalle and Veronica Vera, who were human rights champions. In the past, they had come out strongly to champion the rights of a prostitute and a time when mentioning a world about prostitution by women was considered taboo in this society. They argued that this new organization would be focused on fighting for the interests of all women in society, irrespective of their profession, religion, sexual orientation, or social status.

According to Nestle, this organization attracted a high number of prostitutes within the City of New York. In fact, many thought that it was specifically meant for prostitutes, a fact that made some women shun it during its inception. However, the founders were able to convince pro-porn feminists that this organization was focused on fighting for the rights of all women. It only happened that prostitutes formed part of the women in society, and therefore, they were rightfully presented in the movement. During its early days, the society had a slogan which stated, “Let us stop hypocrisy by legalizing abortion.” Veronica Vera criticized Andrea Dworkin and her group, saying that prostitution was not unique to the United States. She was against the criminalization of prostitution in society that made prostitutes look like criminals. According to her, men were hypocritical by stating that prostitution should be legalized, while the truth is that they form 100% of the market for prostitutes. For a crime of prostitution to be committed, there must be the presence of a prostitute and the client. If prostitution is a crime, then both parties are liable and should be answerable for their actions. However, this is not the case. Some states have criminalized prostitution, making the lives of prostitutes in those states unbearable.

According to Vera, criminalizing prostitution does not bring the action to an end but only makes the process more complex for women. For instance, the report by Barton ^xvii observes that prostitutes, who practice in the states where prostitution is illegal, suffer a lot in the hands of the law enforcers. Some come to their joints, not to arrest them because of their crime, but to harass them and demand sexual favors. In this regard, the law does not help to protect women from molestation from men. On the contrary, it takes away power from women, leaving them vulnerable to sexual abuse from men.

The law enforcers know that these prostitutes have no ability to report them for molestation because their business is criminalized. This makes them commit such atrocities without a second thought. For this reason, this group believed that prostitution should be decriminalized in order to hand over power to women. Prostitutes should be treated just like laborers or physiotherapy and probably allowed operating with a license that would see them pay tax. According to Nestle, there is always an irony when it comes to criminalizing acts such as prostitution or the use of hard drugs. It makes it more attractive to the youth who are rebellious in nature. It also eliminates the ability of the government to levy a tax in that sector. It becomes a black market. Burns says that black markets are always thriving because they do not have to operate under the strict laws of the state. This society argued that this is what is making prostitution even more popular and dangerous in society. It is done without regulation, and some of the main players involved are the very law enforcers who are expected to arrest the prostitutes.

Feminists for Free Expression did not restrict its programs to fighting for the rights of prostitutes. It was also vocal in fighting for the rights of women who decided to act in pornographic films. Their message was very clear on pornography. To them, pornographic materials may pollute the minds of those who are aged below 18 years. For this reason, children under the age of 18 years should neither participate in the production of pornographic materials nor be allowed to watch the materials. However, adult women, just like men, should be allowed the freedom to choose whether they want to participate in the production of the films or not.

During the first forum they held in 1989 when they were still largely seen to be part of the Lesbian Sex Mafia, Candida stated that they were strongly opposed to criminal gangs that kidnapped women and young girls and subjected them to prostitution against their wishes.^xviii To them, this constituted a crime that should be prosecuted in a court of law. She also stated that using any form of force, whether financial or psychological, to force women to act in a pornographic film was illegal, and they rejected it as a vice that degrades women. However, she was very categorical that most women in this industry were acting out of their own free will. In fact, some of them even had websites where they sold their pornographic films, in which they were the main actors. It is wrong to claim that such individuals are forced into the act.

Developing legislation that prohibits pornography would render these women jobless. It is their wish to be in this industry, and they believe that they are making decent earnings out of it. It would only be fair to have laws that would protect them as they do what they consider appropriate. The group was also critical of the laws that prohibited the consumption of pornographic materials by adults. Although it did not have direct links with the British Feminists against Censorship society, it shared their views about the consumption of such materials. The group became very active in the 1990s when it became apparent that it had broken away from Lesbian Sex Mafia.

Criticism towards Sex-Positive Feminism

According to Bronstein^xix, although the sex-positive feminism movement received massive support among American women, especially the lesbians and their sympathizers, it also received a considerable amount of criticism from a section of society. Massive criticism was leveled against this movement by the anti-porn feminism, who felt that Susan Bright and her group were fighting a lost course. The works of Catherine MacKinnon focused on prostitution as one of the worst ways through which the rights of women are violated. According to Duggan and Hunter^xx, prostitution is a direct violation of the rights of women. Its very existence is a sign that women are inferior to men. Unlike the argument put forth by pro-porn feminists, who say that women have the right to choose whether or not they want to engage in prostitution, Bronstein argues that prostitution turns women into objects of satisfaction.^xxi

This scholar heavily criticizes the works of Susan Bright, who argues that women should be given the liberty to choose whether or not they should engage in prostitution. A large percentage of clients in the industry of prostitution are men. It is a fact that some of the commercial sex workers engage in the vice out of their own will. However, it is also a fact that a section of the women engaged in the practice was abducted and forced into it. Young girls are abducted from various parts of the world and forced into the trade, and given the massive number of clients willing to pay for the young girls; this vice has led to a direct violation of the rights of these girls all over the world. Bronstein says that it is ironic for the pro-porn feminists to claim that they are fighting for the rights of women while still supporting prostitution.^xxii Prostitution has led to direct humiliation of the rights of women not only in the United States but also in various other parts of the world.

According to Herbert, the pro-porn feminists have failed to critically analyze issues surrounding the production of pornographic materials.^xxiii This scholar says that the production of pornographic films is one of the worst ways through which the rights and dignity of women are always abused by producers who are only interested in money. Just like in the case of prostitution, the majority of those who consume pornographic materials are men. They delight in seeing women in compromising positions. This gives a redefinition of what sex should be in society. It also emphasizes the fact that women are just tools that are used by men to generate satisfaction. Bronstein gives an example of sadomasochism, popularly known as BDSM, to demonstrate how the production of pornographic materials abuses the rights of women.^xxiv Sadomasochism involves acts that have direct harm to the actors, especially if it is not conducted properly. In fact, some of the professional actors have confessed that they have sustained serious injuries because of it, a clear sign that armatures suffer even greater pain.

The problem is that sometimes women present themselves to act normal pornography, only to be forced into BDSM without prior consent. Because of their desire for the money, they will accept to act, even if they feel cheated by the actors. This is why anti-porn feminists have been critical of the message given by the pro-porn feminists. The problem gets magnified when the material is released to the market for consumption. When young men- who were not aware of the context under which the film was produced- watch such films, they will develop the desire to practice it because of the misleading conception that it is the best way of generating satisfaction. Without their knowledge, women would get into the trap of men who are interested in experimenting with what they watched in the films. Sometimes even married men would try such acts, a fact that has resulted in physical injury on women. What men fail to realize is that what they see in the films is done by professionals who have taken months or even years to perfect their art as a way of minimizing any injuries. They then force women who have never had any practice on the act, believing that it shall work.

What makes this worse is that the person who bears all the pain is the woman who the pro-porn feminists claim to protect. It is true that some of the female actors were willing to act, mostly because of the income they were generating from the industry players. However, they fail to realize that once they act, the film will influence several people who will watch it, and they may try to practice what they see. In the end, the person who bears the pain will be the woman. This makes the campaign strongly put by the pro-porn campaigners not only irrelevant but also counterproductive in the fight to liberate women^xxv. In Bronstein’s words, the pro-porn campaigners have engaged in a campaign that is meant to oppose the positive gains made by human rights activities that have been fighting for the rights of women.^xxvi This scholar says that the pro-porn campaigners have largely been supporting the producers of pornographic materials than the rights of women.

Another major criticism that has been leveled against feminist pro-porn campaigners is that they have widely focused on the fight against the anti-porn crusaders without necessarily understanding specific issues that are affecting women during the production of pornographic materials. According to Bronstein, the pro-porn feminists believe that their fight is meant to liberate women. They believe that they are fighting to make women gain the freedom to choose their sexual orientation and how to engage in sexual activities without any form of criticism from members of the society. However, the approach they take in this fight is completely wrong, according to Bronstein. One of the ways through which the rights of women are commonly abused in this country is through pornography. It seeks to emphasize the position of women in society as that which is meant to offer satisfaction to men. This is explained in their roles, as seen in many of the films they produce. The words they are forced to say, the manner in which they are treated by men, and the submissiveness they are expected to express shows that their position is secondary to that of men in the process of gaining satisfaction from sexual acts. This is the direct opposite of what fighting for women’s rights should entail. This is what the anti-porn feminists were fighting against.

Conclusion

The discussion above shows the path that the feminist pro-porn campaigners took in order to fight for the rights of women to choose their sexual orientation and how to engage in sexual acts. The feminist sex wars of the 1970s and 1980s sharply divided women into two factions. These two factions had sharply contrasting opinions about how the issue of pornographic materials and prostitution should be addressed in society in order to ensure that the position of women in society is upheld. The first faction was the anti-porn feminists who were opposed to pornography and prostitution in society. The group argued that pornography, where women were treated like slaves or sex objects, was detrimental to the fight for equity and social freedom for women that was gaining pace during this period.

These feminists stated that the way these women were treated in such films was the same violent way some men were treated in real-life scenarios. After watching such materials, men would try to implement them on their wives and girlfriends. They also argued that prostitution was a clear demonstration that women were objects meant to offer men sexual gratification. For these reasons, the law should be established to criminalize pornography and prostitution. On the other hand, the pro-porn feminists championed for the decriminalization of pornography and prostitution, arguing that women who were in this field had made their own choices as adults. They argued that the law should only focus on protecting children and women who were forced into the industry against their own free will. To them, these laws would only limit the freedom of women. The women who had considered the pornographic industry or prostitution as the best means of earning their income should not be criminalized in any way. The impact of these wars is that there has been increased pornography and prostitution in society. It is evident that the pro-porn feminist women the war as many countries around the world became more liberal on the issue of pornography and prostitution.

Bibliography

Barton, Bernadette. Stripped: Inside the Lives of Exotic Dancers. New York: New York University Press, 2006.

Bronstein, Carolyn. Battling Pornography: The American Feminist Anti-Pornography Movement, 1976–1986. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2011.

Burns, Lynda. Feminist alliances. Amsterdam: Rodopi, 2006.

Cossman, Brenda. “Pornography, Feminism, and the Butler Decision.” Bad Attitudes 3, no.2 (1994): 54-135.

Duggan, Lisa and Hunter Nan. Sex Wars: Sexual Dissent and Political Culture. New York: Routledge, 2014.

Herbert, Walter. Sexual violence and American manhood. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2002.

Hewitt, Nancy A. No Permanent Waves: Recasting Histories of U.S. Feminism. New Brunswick, N.J: Rutgers University Press, 2010.

Jeffreys, Sheila. The lesbian heresy: a feminist perspective on the lesbian sexual revolution. Melbourne: Spinifex, 1993.

Juffer, Jane. At Home with Pornography: Women, Sex and Everyday Life. New York: New York Univ. Press, 1998.

Lishinsky, Rose. “On Our Backs Porn.” Off Our Backs 15, no. 3 (1985): 29-121.

Lyndon, Neil. No More Sex War: The Failures of Feminism. London: Sinclair-Stevenson, 1992.

Martindale, Kathleen. Un/popular Culture: Lesbian Writing After the Sex Wars. Albany: State Univ. of New York Press, 1997.

Meika Loe. “Feminism for Sale: Case Study of a Pro-Sex Feminist Business.” Gender and Society 13, no. 6 (1999): 705-732.

Nestle, Joan. The persistent desire: a femme-butch reader. Boston: Alyson Publications, 1992.

Susie, Bright. “Welcome to OnOurBacks: The Best of Lesbian Sex.” On Our Backs 1, no. 4 (1985): 1-75.

Notes

1. Duggan, Lisa and Hunter Nan, Sex Wars: Sexual Dissent and Political Culture (New York: Routledge, 2014), 46.
2. Kathleen, Martindale, Un/popular Culture: Lesbian Writing After the Sex Wars (Albany: State Univ. of New York Press, 1997), 87.
3. Sheila, Jeffreys, The lesbian heresy: a feminist perspective on the lesbian sexual revolution (Melbourne: Spinifex, 1993), 35.
4. Ibid, 32.
5. Lynda, Burns, Feminist alliances (Amsterdam: Rodopi, 2006), 110.
6. Joan, Nestle, The persistent desire: a femme-butch reader (Boston: Alyson Publications, 1992), 39.
7. Walter, Herbert, Sexual violence and American manhood (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2002), 48.
8. Loe, Meika “Feminism for Sale: Case Study of a Pro-Sex Feminist Business” Gender and Society 13, no. 6 (1999): 732.
9. Ibid, 56.
10. Ibid, 27.
11. Ibid, 90
12. Jane, Juffer, At Home with Pornography: Women, Sex and Everyday Life (New York: New York Univ. Press 1998), 49.
13. Bronstein, Carolyn. Battling Pornography: The American Feminist Anti-Pornography Movement, 1976–1986. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2011.
14. Herbert, Walter. Sexual violence and American manhood. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2002.
15. Ibid, 112.
16. Rose, Lishinsky “On Our Backs Porn” Off Our Backs 15, no. 3 (1985): 29
17. Bernadette, Barton, Stripped: Inside the Lives of Exotic Dancers (New York: New York University Press, 2006), 54.
18. Bright, Susie, “Welcome to OnOurBacks: The Best of Lesbian Sex” On Our Backs 1, no. 4 (1985): 45.
19. Ibid, 67.
20. Ibid, 28.
21. Ibid, 89.
22. Ibid, 10.
23. Brenda, Cossman, “Pornography, Feminism, and the Butler Decision” Bad Attitudes 3, no.2 (1994): 78.
24. Ibid, 31.
25. Neil, Lyndon, No More Sex War: The Failures of Feminism (London: Sinclair-Stevenson1992), 63.
26. Ibid, 102.

Introduction

Civil society organizations in Cambodia started in the 1990s. Various agencies that brought about the civic societies in the country include the UN Transitional Authority (UNTC). What followed was a quick expansion of media outlets such radio, foreign, and opposition newspapers. Since then, the country has been experiencing a sharp rise of the CSO community. The primary factors that were attributed to the fast growth included flexibility of the CSO rules and regulations and external funding. The primary functions of civil society organization involve dissemination of health information, societal integration and progression, social authority, and development of marginalized regions among others. This paper explores the rise of the civil society in Cambodia.

Composition of Cambodia Civil Society

The NGO Forum in Cambodia reveals that the principal aims of the existence of the civil society in the country are provision of policy advices, delivery of services, advocacy, facilitation of dialogues, and promotion of social consciences such as human rights (Marston 54).

Agencies such as the Cooperation Committee of Cambodia (CCC) collaborate with various NGOs and donors with a view of monitoring and ensuring the progress of activities such as social welfare and development. Other organizations collaborating with CSOs in the country include the health sector’s MEDICAM that comprises 115 active CSOs and the Cambodian Human Rights Action Committee (CHRAC), which is made up of 21 CSOs dealing with democracy, human rights, and the rule of law in the country (Marston 31).The Cambodia Grassroots People’s Assembly (CGPA) organizes all informal grassroots networks. The informal group comprises diverse members of the society including activists, artists, singers, farmers, and singers among others (Marston 37).International donors fund CSOs in the country. The donors are international NGOs, foundations, or governments (Ung 76).

The Government and Civil Society

The government of Cambodia has a dominant influence on the activities of the country. Due to the significant magnitude of influence, the constitutional laws governing the democratic rights of people do not have full power (Ung87).According to Marston,Cambodia has no legislations governing the operations of CSOs(54). However, the constitution recognizes civil organizations. Despite their legal recognition, no proper guidelines and processes have been set up for registering civil organizations (Marston 54).

Operations of the Civil Society

Some of the recent movements and activities of CSOs and NGOs include calls for NGOs to work in city slums that they described as improper living zones. They are also concerned with excluding the urban poor, women rights activists storming the National Assembly and Cambodia People’s Party (CPP) headquarters demanding for female representation in National Election Committee, pressure to discuss NGOs law in the National Assembly, and the quest for human rights protection among other functions (Marston 23).

However, a significant shortcoming in Cambodia is that people are deprived of various privileges such as autonomous expression of their needs. Marston reveals that the ruling bodies exercise free power over the country’s media outlets (36). The government has also been undermining democracy and constitutional laws through social injustice, land right violations, and killing of activists among others (Marston 37).

Ung posits thatthe influence of the media has been impactful on instigating political and democratic reforms in the country (89). In 2012, the number of Social Media users was 740,000. This figure comprised a large percentage of Facebook users. According to Marston, there are approximately 24 million phone and computer users in Cambodia (56). This situation has facilitated information sharing without government control. For instance, voters share information concerning their political views freely. Moreover, people can mobilize others in an attempt to address social issues such as poverty, democracy, and security among others.

Despite the stringent policies exercised by the CPP, its current state of political influence in the country is declining. This situation is clearly depicted in the increasing popularity of the opposition; Cambodia National Rescue Party (CNRP).This state of play has forced the CPP to form a coalition government with CNRP. However, issues of vote rigging emerged with many Cambodians seeking investigations of the elections (Marston53).A majority of the members who initiate change in the country’s politics are the youth and urban dwellers. Those seeking change raise issues of poverty, corruption, land grabbing, nepotism, and democracy. Their efforts are seen to bear fruits from the remarkable changes in the country’s politics and sprouting democracy (Ung 200).

CSOs in Cambodia and the Democratic Process

The 1993 constitution stipulates the procedural standards that should guide the democratization process in Cambodia. However, the trends in the country’s politics since the end of the civil war indicate a regression as far as attaining a fully operational democracy is concerned. Electoral rigging, impunity and gross abuse of the freedoms of association, expression, and peaceful demonstrations characterize the Cambodian Peoples’ Party’s rule in the country.

As pointed out by Landau, the civil society in Cambodia was foreign donor-led in the recent past (248). Therefore, it was considered to be substantially incapable of exerting pressure on the ruling party. However, things changed with time and the civil society in Cambodia currently has what it takes to pressurize the party and contribute to the consolidation of democracy in the country.

Recent Activities of CSOs in Cambodia

Through the help of the country’s NGOs and the Cooperative Committee for Cambodia (CCC), the civil society in Cambodia has been involved in coordinated action which indicates that the sector is capable of impacting change in the political spheres. As such, the society has been involved in activities aimed at handling the concerns raised by the Cambodian people over issues of good governance and land-related problems.

As pointed out by Frewer, the Cambodian civil society has been exerting a considerable amount of pressure to the government to ensure accountability and to prohibit the anti-democratic policies of the Cambodian People’s Party in the recent past (99). For instance, the civil society played a significant role in putting pressure on legislators to vote against a potentially undemocratic law against the country’s NGOs.

The operating environment of CSOs in Cambodia

The current CPP government has had a reputation of intimidating the country’s civil society through the use of the law and other extra-judicial measures. Victimization, harassment, and intimidation of the civil society members remain rife under the current CPP government (Frewer 98). 2012 was considered the year in which the country experienced the worst human rights record in the recent times. Ever since, the environment for civil society operations has deteriorated reaching a climax in 2013 after the highly disputed elections that saw Hun Sen re-elected as the country’s prime minister keeping him in power since 1985 (Sen 7).

International observers, the civil society, and the opposition raised concerns over serious malpractices and irregularities during the elections. Ever since, the civil society has been at loggerheads with the government over the manipulation of democracy and has been at the center of all the major protests taking place in the nation. Together with the media and the opposition, the civil society in Cambodia has been criticizing the government through protests, strikes, and a political deadlock (Landau 247).

The ruling party is accused of the increasing civil, social, and political problems in the country. Corruption is rampant in Cambodia and CPP manipulates key institutions such as the royal family and the judiciary. Forced evictions of citizens following land grabbing by influential private developers in the very watch of the government add to the list of grievances raised by the civil society in Cambodia. Despite that the 1993 constitution protects the freedoms of association, expression, and assembly, the CPP government has been undermining them considering the treatment they accord to the country’s civil society.

The government has been steadily neglecting the need for discussions with the civil society as far as its policies are concerned. Through restrictive laws passed by the government, the activities of civil society members remain greatly threatened. For instance, as claimed by Frewer, the recent Laws on Associations and NGOs (LANGO) present new avenues for the government to continue intimidating the members of civil society organizations (102). The autonomy and independence of these organizations are significantly threatened as the legislation accords the government oversight powers over both the registration and the activities of the civil society organizations. As such, the abilities of the civil society to criticize the ruling party in the future are likely to be significantly hindered.

The internet presented an important platform on which the civil society in Cambodia organized its activities and mobilized citizens during protests. This privilege was interfered with in 2012 after the government introduced its cyber law. The law was aimed at controlling people’s use of the internet and social media especially when it comes to critical expressions. The government cited that the purpose of introducing the law was to prevent the spread of malicious information through the internet although it was a mere scapegoat (Sen 6). The drafted law remained totally out of public domain until it was passed.

As a way of disenabling the operating environment for civil society groups in Cambodia, CPP has also been employing extra-legal methods to silence the civil society organizations. Abduction of protest leaders, torture, and forceful migration of people are some of the tactics that the government currently employs. Even though, the civil society in Cambodia has been exerting pressure on the government despite the disenabling environment it has existed in since 2012. The desperation portrayed by CPP in enacting restrictive legislation is proof that the critical voice of the civil society in Cambodia is being heard by the government.

Conclusion

In reality, the growth of the civil society and NGOs working for democracy has posed a significant threat to the ruling party. The impact of media has also contributed to the situation immensely. Although the government seeks to control the flow of information to citizens, it is only limited to TV and radio stations. Most Cambodians have embraced the media due to the increased number of internet and mobile subscribers. The measures have initiated a political and democratic reform. Therefore, there is a probability of changing some of their stringent policies that undermine the constitutional laws on human rights and democracy due to the mounting pressure on CPP.

Works Cited

Frewer, Thomas. “Doing NGO Work: The Politics of being ‘Civil Society’ and Promoting ‘Good Governance’ in Cambodia,” Australian Geographer, 44. 1, (2013), 97-114. Print.

Landau, Ian. “Law and Civil Society in Cambodia and Vietnam: A Gramscian Perspective”, Journal of Contemporary Asia, 38. 2, (2008), 244-258. Print.

Marston, John. Anthropology And Community In Cambodia: Reflections On The Work Of May Ebihara. Victoria, Australia: Monash Asia Institute, 2011. Web.

Sen, Vin. “Social Capital in an Urban and a Rural Community in Cambodia,” Cambodia Development Review, 16. 3, (2014), 6-10. Print.

Ung, Loung. First They killed My Father: A Daughter of Cambodia remembers. New York, NY: Harper Perennial, 2006. Web.

Introduction

Many political events characterized the crisis that precipitated the Civil War (1861-1865). In the early 1850s, the Kansas-Nebraska Act was enacted giving the former colony sovereign power to decide on whether to abolish or allow African slavery (Kelly 91). This single event turned Kansas into a battlefield pitting the proponents of slavery against abolitionists mainly from the North. Northerners wanted the territory to become a free Kansas state while the Southerners wanted it to retain slavery bringing to the fore the ideological differences between the Union and the Confederate. Besides slavery, the North and South differed in their economic models.

The North was industrializing fast while the South maintained the social order. The stark differences and disagreements over slavery, tariffs, the subjugation of individual rights, and federal/state powers precipitated the Civil War (Guelzo 55). This paper examines the issues central to the Civil War, its causes, and its effects on the Union.

Research Question

Although ending African slavery was the primary goal of the Civil War, some Northern soldiers fought on moral grounds while others battled to preserve the Union. This paper examines the research question: was the Civil War fought to end slavery, preserve the unity, and entrench individual rights or was it a struggle for equity? It is no doubt the conflict was a defining moment in American history coming after the Revolutionary War of the 1770s and the Constitution of the Republic. Its critical milestone was that it ensured Americans not only remain united but also enjoy the civil liberties enshrined in the Constitution and an inclusive economic system. Though particular challenges, such as racism, threaten the unity and civil rights, the War shaped American society during the Reconstruction era and our unity and values in the modern era.

The Incompatible Economic Interests

The discussion of what caused the Civil War to break out primarily focuses on African slavery, individual freedoms, and state sovereignty. However, it can be argued that deeper issues related to socioeconomic disparities between the two regions precipitated the conflict. The rift between the North and the South has its roots in the colonial era where the slave trade thrived as a source of cheap labor to the plantations owned by white settlers. The antipathy between the North and South grew after the Republic was formed because the two regions pursued economic models that were largely antithetical.

According to Fleming, the North and South differed in industrialization levels and demands from the government (73). The North was attracting thousands of working immigrants and women seeking to work in new industries in main urban centers. The availability of cheap labor fueled industrialization in the North forcing entrepreneurs to lobby the government to protect them from cheap European imports (Fleming 77). In this view, the demands of the industrialized North were strikingly different from the agricultural South.

Fleming further contends that after the Revolution, the South became a cotton empire with huge tracts of arable land supporting plantations of tobacco, cotton, and rice for export (96). Therefore, the South reliance on slave labor is founded on economic prosperity argument. The prospect of the North dominating Congress and passing laws to raise tariffs caused fear among Southerners, which forced John Calhoun, the V.P., to insist that the region would annul any federal law considered unfair by the South (Fleming 97). It is evident that the Southerners held the belief that the area’s economic prosperity and African slavery were inextricably linked and could go to great lengths to protect their interests.

A standard argument was that a universal abolition of slavery across the Republic could ruin the Southern economy (Fleming 77). In fact, one of the justifications adduced by the South for the expansion of slavery was economic prosperity (Fleming 78).

The defenders of the slave system cited other slavery systems that drove the economies of Greece, Egypt, and Rome forward (Fleming 78). They further stated that the slavery system offered a civilized environment to African slaves making them better people than the savages in Africa. Therefore, unlike the North, the South could not do away with slavery sooner for fear of unknown economic repercussions. Even after the Proclamation of Amnesty, the Southern states retained African Americans as the serving class, which was a temporary economic measure (Guelzo 59). It could be argued that the economic interests of the South and the belief that abolishing African slavery would ruin the economy were at the center of the war between the factions.

The Constitution and Slave System

The U.S. Constitution in many ways accommodated the interests of the slave owners in the South. Slavery, as an institution, contributed immensely to the country’s economy, especially in the Southern states. McPherson writes that while black suffrage was not allowed, the Constitution allotted each slave three-fifths of a vote to boost the Southerners’ numerical strength in Congress (114). This statute enabled the South to have more influence on Federal matters than they could have based on the number of slaveholders.

The Reconstruction sought to expand the political freedoms of the freed slaves. The Southern states’ ratification of the Fourteen Amendment to the Constitution and the introduction of black suffrage epitomize the Reconstruction era (Foner 44). Radical Republicans were the proponents of the bill passed by Congress to enfranchise the African slaves. Thus, it could be argued that it is through the bill that the political rights were formally entrenched in the Constitution.

The Constitution was also not expressly clear on the status of slavery in the Republic. Article IV allowed fugitive African Americans to be integrated into society while Article I held that the complete abolition of the slave system would happen after two decades (Foner 64). Thus, the place of slavery in the Southern states was not clear in the Constitution upon the expiry of the 20 years in 1808. One can argue that the failure of the Constitution to indicate the place of slavery was meant to cushion the South from possible economic repercussions of an abrupt end of slavery. The vagueness of the Constitution on the issue of slavery was one of the factors fueling the war because it was prone to different interpretations by the factions.

Although the Reconstruction Acts and the Fourteenth Amendment conferred equal rights to freed slaves, the exclusionary practices in the South, such as excluding African Americans from the justice system and imposing severe penalties on black offenders was an attempt to maintain the socioeconomic order (Foner 82). Other legislative and economic measures, such as poll tax and the Ku Klux Klan’s violent attacks, aimed at reversing the black suffrage and individual freedoms (Foner 71). One can contend that one of the successes of Reconstruction was the direct Constitutional measures taken to abolish slavery in the new states. In this view, the legislators and policymakers resorted to exclusionary practices and violence in a bid to preserve the pre-Reconstruction political and socioeconomic status.

The States’ Rights

The issue of the rights of the states to permit or prohibit slavery was meant to protect the economic system of the slaveholding territories from possible repercussions of abolitionism. During the Westward expansion, some newly acquired territories became slave states while others joined as the Free States. Compromises such as 1850 Missouri Compromise gave rise to Free states (Maine) and slave states (Missouri) (Catton 56).

Congress also disallowed slavery in states to the South of the Missouri border (Catton 61). It would appear that the decision to keep some states free and others bondage might have been driven by the need to pacify tensions and promote unity. However, a more plausible explanation could be that the compromises, including the Fugitive Slaves Act, were enacted to give the slaveholding state’s transition to an industrial economy.

The Wilmot Proviso, which prohibited slaveholding in states freed by Mexico, was formed out of fear that slavery would disadvantage an average worker against a slaveholder (Catton 72). Therefore, the dominant view was that abolishment was necessary to give non-slaveholders in the North a fair chance in the country’s economy. Proponents like James K. Polk believed that the act would quell the hard-line positions on the slavery issue during the western expansion (Catton 67). It would appear that the economy was the dominant issue shaping the debate on permitting or prohibiting slavery in the new states. Though slaveholding was a divisive issue between the North and the South, some compromises had to be made to protect the economy of the states formed from the western territories.

The idea of popular sovereignty further strengthened the states’ power for self-determination. The Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854 gave the citizens of new states the right to allow or disallow slaveholding (Fleming 157). It can be argued that the reasoning behind this act was to preserve the unity, but most importantly to appease Southern settlers who favored slave labor for economic reasons. As a result, the pro-slavery groups fought to retain slave labor in Kansas.

Northerners led by the likes of John Brown had to battle with the pro-slavery faction to free the states (Fleming 158). Therefore, the antipathy between the two factions was fueled by differences in philosophical inclinations on the slavery issue and economic models. While the Northerners raised moral questions over slaveholding, the South fought to protect their way of life. Northern abolitionists like William Garrison considered Southerners as uncivilized, fueling the conflict (Catton 92). The 1863 proposal for gradual emancipation by Abraham Lincoln underscores his desire to protect the Southern economy from potential shocks.

The Self-preservation Position

One of the positions held by the pro-slavery sympathizers was self-preservation, which explains why they fought to retain slavery. They feared a race war if the slaves were freed. Sympathizers like Thomas Jefferson who openly denounced slavery as an immoral institution could not avoid pointing out its necessity (Fleming 118). Thus, though freedom-loving slaveholders might have wanted to free the slaves, the fear of reprisals forced them to oppose abolition. They were aware that the whole master-slave relationship was degrading to the black population but could not let go of enslaved men, especially after the Nat Turner revolt.

The enslaved African American, Nat Turner, inspired by the Bible, mobilized about 70 rebels to launch an attack on their masters killing 60 whites in 1831 (Kelly 29). In retaliation, local white militiamen caught and killed 56 slaves (Kelly 29). One can argue that this revolt entrenched fear the idea of self-preservation in the South, which bred the modern gun culture in America.

Slaveholding became the necessary evil the South needed to advance its economic welfare despite the moral and security issues involved. Therefore, at the center of the idea of self-preservation was the economics of the region. As Catton writes, the typical position in the South was that the economy would fail if slave labor were to be abolished (76). The Reconstruction Plan introduced industrialization and new technologies after the termination of slavery when the states ratified the 13^th Amendment (Catton 85). Thus, the complete abolishment of slavery was achieved through legislative and economic measures.

The compromises made also underscored the self-preservation position of Southern states. The Missouri Compromise during the westward expansion was meant to balance between free and slaveholding states (Kelly 53). The Missouri state, which applied to join the Union, wanted to keep its slaveholding practices (Kelly 53). Thus, the issue of slave/free states was both political and moral. From a political standpoint, the parity between slave and free territories could be seen as a strategy to preserve local interests, which were primarily economic. Other states, such as Maine, joined as free territories. It could be argued that Southerners supported the idea of self-preservation even as the nation expanded westwards.

The spread of the abolitionist movement also forced the Southerners to develop a more robust defense for slaveholding. Initially, the justification for slavery focused on state rights and economic considerations. However, the abolitionists cited scriptural verses on conscience to attack the integrity of slaveholders. The Southerners justified their actions by saying that the Bible approves natural slavery and requires servants to obey their masters (Guelzo 55). However, the justification could be construed as serving the interests of the slaveholders, which explains why they were afraid of a revolt.

How the War Shaped America

Although during the Reconstruction era slaveholding was not completely out, the period saw America undergo significant social, political, and economic transformations. The Southern figures such as Hansel Beckworth battled to preserve the existing social order (Guelzo 112). Ultimately, the war changed the social system not just for the South but also in the North. One of the successes of the abolitionists of the North is the freedom of the enslaved blacks.

By eradicating slavery, the War changed the social and economic systems of the South and established the United States. Arguably, the war unified the states into one indivisible nation by bringing together the two opposing factions. It also eradicated the clamor for secession by Southern states to create America founded on national values. The federal government became the ultimate authority, and the states to the South had to be vetted afresh to join the Union.

The primary reason for going to the war was the emancipation of the enslaved Africans. Besides preserving the Union, as President Lincoln wanted, the war introduced political rights and expanded the freedoms of the African Americans in the South. During the war, the country enacted the Emancipation Proclamation and the Reconstruction Plan with implications on the social and economic systems.

Initially, the goal of the Reconstruction plan was to bring the conflict to an ending (Foner 79). The subsequent Proclamation of Amnesty and Reconstruction restored individual rights to the former slaveholders who committed to ending slavery (Foner 79). It also introduced black suffrage and equality in American society. Thus, the war precipitated legislation that restored individual rights, which we still enjoy in contemporary America.

Freedom meant that African Americans were no longer in bondage. For the blacks, freedom meant that they had equal rights as those enjoyed by the white population (Catton 65). It encompassed individual and institutional independence, whereby whites no longer supervised activities such as learning and worshiping. Thus, the freedom extended to the right to worship and academic freedom.

Although the South experienced a dramatic transformation during the Reconstruction, the North too underwent significant changes. The North went through industrial expansion and socioeconomic changes that favored the growth of capitalism (Foner 156). In fact, the capitalist economy of today has its roots in the Reconstruction era. Sectors such as manufacturing, mining, and lumbering grew tremendously in the North during this period. Major infrastructural and railway projects were established to drive this growth. There were also changes in socioeconomic structure with white-collar employees replacing wage earners in industries (Foner 157). However, the Reconstruction plan failed to stimulate the same economic transformation in the South, which perpetuated the inequalities witnessed even today.

The Reconstruction also entailed the compensation of the slave owners to release the enslaved men. The settlement cost the country up to $2bn in the current rate (Guelzo 49). Further, by allowing serving class in the South, the Union enhanced economic disparities between the races. It can also be argued that the Reconstruction plan did not forthrightly deal with the issue of racial equality. In modern America, racial tensions flare up because the Reconstruction failed to address the slavery issue definitively, which led to racial segregation. It also did little to improve the economic condition of the freed African-Americans in the South.

Slavery also bred racism against blacks. Although the white masters showed paternalism towards the slaves under their care, it could be argued that they considered them an inferior race. As Guelzo points out, the slave owners showed concern, especially to house slaves, and held the belief that they were not responsible for the slaves’ suffering (121). The white slave owners developed the master-slave mentality, which made it hard for them to reconcile with the idea of slave resistance (Guelzo 125). They considered slaves lazy and intellectually inferior to whites, which arguably bred the racist attitudes and social classes we see today.

Conclusion

The Civil War indeed defined the history of modern America. It entrenched unity and the identity of being American and created the rights and freedoms that everyone enjoys today. The Civil War and the Reconstitution era had dramatic political and socioeconomic changes that remain up to today. However, the war also inadvertently entrenched racism and economic disparities in American society. In addition, there are obstacles to achieving racial equity present a challenge to the current generation.

Works Cited

Catton, Bruce. The Civil War. New York: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, 2004. Print.

Fleming, Thomas. A Disease in the Public Mind: A New Understanding of Why We Fought the Civil War. Boston, MA: De Capo Press, 2013. Print.

Foner, Eric. A Short History of Reconstruction. New York: Harper Collins, 2010. Print.

Guelzo, Allen. Fateful Lightning: A New History of the Civil War & Reconstruction. New York: Oxford University Press, 2012. Print.

Kelly, Brian. Best Little Stories From The Civil War. Charlottesville, Virginia: Montpelier Publishing, 1995. Print.

McPherson, James. The War that Forged a Nation: Why the Civil War Still Matters. New York: Oxford, 2015. Print.

Introduction

The advent and use of money have been a revelation in the world. In fact, the significance of money has outweighed its limitations. The use of money has contributed to the development and globalization of the world. Despite many upheavals, money has transcended to become one of the most important means of exchange in the world. Money has been called variously in different countries over the past centuries. These include dough, cash, and bread, among others. This paper will identify and analyze the three most significant events in the history of money. In addition, the paper will reflect on my thinking about money and on how my thinking has changed during the term.

Blowing Bubbles

One of the most important themes in the history of money is the advent of companies. Companies enabled numerous shareholders to pool their resources for a common purpose of investing. The advent of joint-stock corporations, as well as limited liability corporations, spurred the ascent of money. The former refers to a situation where investors own capital while the latter refers to a situation owners are protected in case of failure.

Companies had the affluence to span continents for profits. This created what is known as stock, part of the company that is bought based on its potential. This innovative element ensured companies are run efficiently to increase their stock market prices. Stock valuation ensured that companies are kept on the edge. However, the stock market is also an environment on its own. Decisions that lie with potential investors may vary. Moreover, fear may grip investors when stock prices fall thereby causing them to sell-off.

Uncertainty can lead to the fall of companies, which can also cause financial bubbles. For instance, shares can rise to unsustainable levels thereby causing a crash. In most cases, insider investors reap from naive investors in the event of a financial bubble. The stock market has five main stages namely displacement, euphoria, mania, distress, and revulsion. Only insiders have adequate knowledge of the stage at which the stock of a company can be.

In other words, most speculative buyers lose out. Therefore, these naive investors are usually ripped off indirectly without knowing. The stock market can be interrupted by events such as wars or revolutions. In essence, prevailing political events also affect the stock market as well as company performance. This is possible because prevailing political conditions can raise inflation, which in turn can lower stock prices. However, stocks are much better than bonds.

It has been proven that most governments tend to fail to honor their promises on bonds. On the other hand, companies tend to give dividends to their investors with the probability of a capital increase. Nonetheless, the return on capital is more volatile than the return on bonds. Moreover, companies have higher chances of going bankrupt than sovereign states. The first central bank in the world initiated the stock market in the Netherlands. Nonetheless, after the bubble, the fall of VOC coincided with the fall of the Dutch empire. Moreover, a stock market bubble in France also led to financial catastrophe leading to revolution. Stock bubbles have been witnessed at such a scale that it has contributed to world depression in the past.

Of Human Bondage

The second most significant event in the ascent of money is the creation of bonds. In fact, the advent bond market is considered the second most significant revolution in the history of money after the advent of the credit system. During Clinton’s time as president, the bond was touted as the single most important economic stimulus in the United States. In most cases, multinational corporations or governments borrow money from the public through the issuance of bonds.

Bonds have created a mountain of debt for governments as seen in Japan’s case. Of great concern is the fact that the bond market decides the face value of bonds, which may arise, thereby increasing government debts. Bond issuance began some eight centuries ago in Northern Italy but has evolved to about $18 trillion in international trade. Moreover, the domestic bond has reached high levels of about $50 trillion as observed in Japan’s case.

The bond market affects everyone. For instance, retirement benefits are usually invested in bonds. Additionally, it sets lasting interest rates for countries. That is when prices for bonds decrease then interest rates increase. This can have painful repercussions for citizens. In essence, such a move can lead to a decline in capital as well as an increase in mortgage rates. Essentially, the bond market is the foundation for every other market since it affects the value of every commodity in the market.

Moreover, it influences every fiscal policy in a country with its ability to increase the cost of borrowing. Eventually, the government can opt to raise taxes or default on bonds, or cut expenditures. It should be noted that all these decisions have repercussions on citizens. Essentially, the introduction of bonds helped city-states in Italy to succeed in waging wars between them. Moreover, the bond market helped build Rothschild banks to rank among most the powerful institutions in the world.

Furthermore, the American civil war was a testament to the significance of the bond market. Indecisive actions led to the South’s fall because they could not continue with their cotton-backed bonds. Moreover, the Rothschilds did not invest in their bonds. Ultimately, they lost the war as financial repercussions crept in. Moreover, investing in government bonds to finance the German war ended up in national insolvency. In fact, the notion that the bond market has lost its value is a fallacy since what has reduced inflation in most countries is reduced cost of goods due to technological advances. In essence, the creation of the bond market has transformed the history of money. The bond market is in fact, one of the most significant events in the history of money.

Safe as houses

The third most significant event or theme in the history of money is the advent of property. This term has been utilized spontaneously to mean ownership of assets such as land, homes, or real estate, among others. In the past, property ownership came with big tittles and political mileage. However, those who own properties now have fewer powers and titles. In fact, most property owners are currently from the general population.

Moreover, during aristocracy, male members of the elite owners inherited properties. In the early nineteenth century, landowners chose 370 of the 450 members of parliament in England. It should be noted that although aristocrats do not have political influence in England now, land ownership is still monopolized by few people. For instance, two-thirds of the land in Britain is owned by just 189, 000 families. Property has been seen to entice lenders more than anything else does because it does not disappear. In this regard, a borrower pegs the risk of losing property on salary while the lender pegs risk on the property. This is unfair to borrowers since they have a higher risk of default than lenders.

People like the third Duke of Buckingham owned numerous acres of land yet he still found himself in debt. The Duke’s fall was an indication of a new order, the democratic era in British history where a regular job was considered more important than an inherited title. This was quite clear when the Duke’s son became the chairperson of London and North Western Railway Company despite owning thousands of acres of land.

America is credited with creating a property owner’s policy. The advent of mortgages revolutionized property ownership. Yet it had its challenges especially during depressions that led to auctioning of homes. The FHA did well to revive property ownership by granting insurance cover for mortgage lenders. Moreover, the FHA formulated structures for long-term mortgages. This prospect revitalized property ownership in the United States and the world at large. In essence, the advent of property ownership was a significant event in the history of money.

Reflection

Money has become the most important asset in the world. Almost every meeting or event discusses the use of money. Money has made it possible for the world to become globalized. However, the advent of money has also come with its implications. For instance, the elite has structured ways of swindling the rest of the population. The three main events that have defined the history of money include the advent of the bond market, the introduction of the stock market, and the beginning of property ownership. At the beginning of the term, I thought that money is everything. I also thought that those who have it in plenty do not have loans since they do not need it. However, I have learned that one has to be a better manager of his money to avoid becoming bankrupt.

I have also learned the various dimensions of money. These include bonds, stocks, and property. Out of the three, I have learned that property is the safest. However, I have also learned the risks associated with using the property as security for the loan. Initially, I thought that bonds were issued to benefit society. Now I know that this is not the case. In fact, bonds are issued to help governments or companies that issue them.

That is, they are issued not in the interest of buyers but in the interest of borrowers. Additionally, I have learned that the stock market defines a company’s viability and success just like the bond market defines a country’s interest rates. Additionally, I have learned that the inflation rate is a factor of the stock market while the long-term interest rate is a factor of the bond market. Furthermore, I have learned that recessions come because of poor fiscal policies leading to a fiscal bubble. The study of the history of money has revitalized my thinking about money.

Conclusion

The three most important themes/events in the history of money include the creation of bonds, the instigation of companies (stock market), and the initiation of property ownership. These three themes/events have revitalized fiscal policies in all governments. In fact, they have helped shape international monetary policies across the globe. Nonetheless, it is worth noting that the three have their risks, especially the bond market that is unpredictable due to its high volatility. This course has enabled me to learn important tips on the risks associated with each of the investment methods. Moreover, I have learned to appreciate crucial landmarks made by these events/themes in the ascent of money.