Thesis statement
Albeit the difficulties endured, the merits which were realized after the Reconstruction period override the weaknesses. This paper will explain the views which the sharecroppers had about the Reconstruction.
The American civil war was specifically among the States of America. It was between the states which supported slavery and those which had denounced it. After the war had been ended, a Reconstruction of the nation had to be initiated in order to improve the living standards of the Black people and make America a better place to live. The main aim of the Reconstruction program was to enable the freed slaves get absorbed to the normal social systems of the States. However the emancipated slaves had to wait a little longer to be at liberty. They had labor in farms under strict conditions with an agreement that they would be paid one third of the produce. Therefore they shared with contactors the crops produced, hence the term sharecropping (Brody et al 470).
However, as much as there were other advantages of having the Reconstruction programs, many challenges were experienced by the sharecroppers. American Express writes that slavery was merely reintroduced in another form. Since emancipated slaves had no place to settle in, they had to work in the farms owned by the White contactors and their agents, with the understanding that the profits realized from the produce would be to be shared after deductions of all the costs. Sharecropping method had to be adopted as a way of recovering the economy and fostering growth among the Blacks but the Sharecroppers were not appalled by the whole setting. When farmers in the South experienced shortages of manpower, they made use of sharecropping as an alternative (Foner and Mahoney 475).
Essentially, sharecropping was when the Blacks mortgaged their labor since they did not have enough money to settle on their own. They had to work in the farms belonging to White Americans in the South. As reparation, the Blacks would access foodstuffs and other basic things advanced by the farms' management. During the pay day, most of them would end up in debts with the farm owners. To repay the amount owed and save for the anticipated resettlements in the future, they would continue working under the same arrangements. This repeated itself and eventually led to a vicious cycle of poverty. They came to be known as the sharecroppers (Foner and Mahoney). American Express writes that the sharecroppers were a bitter group of disenfranchised Blacks who were immersed in abject poverty with absolutely no chance for their own as well as their future generations' survival. They finally resorted to escaping to the North where opportunities for good prospects awaited them. The North and South states had warred on this matter(5).
In the view of the Sharecroppers, the whole Reconstruction, in as much as it was a bargained liberty and means of re-engagement between the Blacks and Whites in the South, it had a lop side with intricate realities especially in the farms. As others slaves migrated to urban areas, they stayed behind. Those who stayed behind wanted to be landowners while the White counterparts saw a need to be in command of the slave labor. The sharecropping agreements, as a program of the Reconstruction, failed dawning on the Sharecroppers that it was a result of a concession (Foner and Mahoney 474).
In conclusion, the sharecroppers had realized that the Reconstruction programs were transitory and shallow. The supremacy which cotton had as a common crop, lack of credit for the Blacks together with the poor state of the economy worked against the sharecropping idea. The political games which followed were finally able to overcome the major problems and the feuding states amalgamated to become the dominant United States of America. The economy is doing well and it is now referred as a super power. It is justified to conclude that the Reconstruction period was worthwhile given the gain that African Americans have made so far.
