President Abraham Lincoln's Reconstruction: Similar Or Different?

Lincoln’s plan for reconstruction was intended and proposed to unite the states that had seceded back into the Union, alliviate the war hatred between the North and South, to end the separation of democracy in the government and abolish slavery. In order to pose a hypothetical discussion to “if President Abraham Lincoln had lived, would his Reconstruction been different?” If we look back to Lincoln’s life, his accomplishments, ideals, understanding of people and his association with government, we can recognize his strengths and weaknessess. As a child witnessing a slave auction was his first knowledge of human bondage which he found to be unfair and disturbing. Mainly self-taught he became a lawyer. As he staying abreast of the developments in corporation, he became an excellent lawyer for the supreme and federal courts. His political background consisted of losing a nomination in a city government position to holding elected and re-elected office in the legislature and congress.
In the legislature he wrote declarations that slavery was “founded on both injustice and bad policy.” It was his kindness, honesty and self-betterment
His opening speech began: “A house divided against itself cannot stand, I believe this government cannot endure a half slave and half free.” He lost the election for senate but went on to become president, First in 1860 and re-elected in 1864. In both terms Lincoln was faced with the states seceding from the Union, his desire to end slavery, and then the Civil War. His political attributes of keeping the issue of slavery in the forefront, along with a divided union, his repeal of a section of the Missouri Compromise, the Emancipation Proclamation and his ideals of democracy, justice, fairness, the understanding of government funds appropriation and the knowledge of politics and the players allowed President Lincoln to strategically accomplish what was best for the people and the