In describing vital events in American history that shaped the freedom of the American people, Foner uses characters that include Thomas Jefferson, Margaret Sanger, Franklin D. Roosevelt, Elizabeth Cady Stanton, and Ronald Reagan. If one has not read this book, judging by the range of characters included it would reveal how interesting it must be. Based on the events of the 1930, 1940s and 1950s, it must be said that these interesting events accounted for in this book play a vital role on the achievement of freedom during the civil rights movement. The descriptions of the civil rights movement which had its base in the preceding decades not only includes the prominent characters but also other less prominent ones in Foner’s book. These include former slaves who are in search of the real meaning of freedom, freedom riders, and women's rights advocates of present times. Hence, the range of characters selected for this book is fantastic, as it ensures a variety of perspectives. Regarding the civil rights movement in the 1960s, these were essential to give the reader a good idea of what people other than himself thought.

The achievement of freedom in the civil rights movement, as described in Foner’s work, exposes what the people of that time thought regarding the manner in which the Americans fought for the freedom of other nations and yet had not given the African Americans their deserved rights as equal citizens.

THE ROLE OF LAW IN SHAPING AMERICAN FREEDOM
The laws made and followed since independence right down till the 1960s did not see to the equal opportunities required by all members of American society. This segregation was the tool of the white man to keep the power and all the opportunities his hands. It was these laws that had to change to realize what freedom actually is. Foner asserts that the liberty and freedom that the Americans grant outsiders should also have been granted to their own people completely. The freedom for outsiders that the Americans had fought for was the Second World War and the Korean War. If America was willing to go to lengths such as military action abroad why couldn’t they grant freedom to their own people (The African Americans)?

It is because of the segregation that unjust laws facilitated, which oppressed groups like the African Americans could not better their position in society. They virtually had no mobility in society because of the unjust laws made against them. Black children could not mix with other children and couldn’t even attend the schools and other social institutions that other children went to. In short, the main aim of Martin Luther King was to force the governing bodies to change the way that society created and sustained segregation on the basis of race. He wanted the whole country to be united under one flag and hoped for integration of all people in the United States, which would stand for freedom for all people. But the main means to achieve freedom and peace that Martin Luther King wanted was through passive resistance. Perhaps he believed in it because of the fact that American had already proved that they stand for freedom of the individual through their efforts inside and outside the US. The last step that was required to achieve freedom for the African Americans was through resistance and reminding America of how it emerged. A good reminder of the fight against intrusion was the response that America gave Japan after the bombing of Pearl Harbor. Besides the African American freedom struggle that is well based in the 1940s and 50s, the rights of women, labor and immigrants in American society was also a major issue. It appears that since America had taken an all out stance against the oppression of the individual on foreign soil, individuals in the United States at that time began to realize that they were also entitled to their freedom.

In presenting the story of American freedom for the individual, Foner has succeeded in describing American history as an important story of accomplishment and failure, instead of as a mythic saga. Here, it must be said that success and failure are essential in any fight for freedom and its sustenance, as American history is an account of people with active crucial ideas and a deep political culture.

Throughout Foner’s work the political culture is clearly visible, and entwining this is an unemotional account of the meaning of liberty. This approach is one that lasts throughout the book, depicting the idealistic glory, the self-serving motives as well as the failure of America.

The framework that Foner has selected to write this story is one that corresponds to historical events as they occurred through time. This chronological framework that Foner has used is one that is practical and easy to follow, though he has referred to different events through time.
In addition to the chronological framework applied, reading and understanding the author’s work is further simplified because he has used each chapter to cover the various epochs in American history. This in particular refers to the epoch of the civil rights movement, which is the period that began in the 1930s and lasted till the 1960s and 1970s.

Foner’s work in his historical account is one that gives a clear idea of how the civil rights in the 1960s came to pass. It appears that the whole transition was a step-by-step process that began in the 1930s and 40s. Since there were several groups in American society that suffered oppression during these decades, they all aided one another involuntarily in striving together for freedom.

RACISM, CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT AND AMERICAN FREEDOM
Racism that one witnesses in contemporary times in the United States is in fact a legacy that has tailed Americans over generations. The manner in which many people still look down upon the African Americans in contemporary times is a direct result of the manner in which the slaves were treated when they were brought to America. Prior to the Civil War, slavery was a common practice in most Southern states. In these states, the African slaves were treated worse than any master or mistress would treat his or her animals. However, the Civil War marked a period in American history after which Africans were granted freedom and allowed to live as equal citizens to the whites. Describing this period is Anna Dickinson’s book ‘What Answer?’. This book describes the political setting in America after the war, with some detail of the manner in which African American individuals were treated. Similar to this book is William Craft’s ‘Running a Thousand Miles for Freedom’ which describes the manner in which African individuals were treated in America prior to the war. Craft’s and Dickinson’s books though apparently different, address issues that relate directly to the lives of people who were directly affected by slavery and racial discrimination. Though the African Americans were given freedom after the war, in areas where slavery was still not eliminated racial discrimination was common. This discrimination was in fact the replacement of slavery, which was carried on for coming generations. It must also be noted that in spite of further resistance to this discrimination, which was marked by the Civil Rights movements in the 1960s, it is still carried on till today. The manner in which African Americans today still fall victim to the white man’s insults, is reflected through the manner in which Dickinson points out how these notions never actually changed after the Civil War.

In her book ‘What Answer?’, Dickinson describes the manner in which African American individuals were subject to be judged on the basis of their color in spite of their professional capabilities. This is exemplified in the way that problems begin to surface for ‘Office Private’, ‘Franklin’ when one of the workers in his organization instigate superiors.
The basis for instigation was simply Franklin’s color. Since he (Franklin) was an African American there were whites who were jealous of him. They somehow didn’t feel comfortable that he was in a position that held a seat in an office for him. They probably would not have had any objection to him being a “runner” an “errand boy”. These were job categories that Franklin was certainly over-qualified for, and as a result he was rightly offered a position that would assist the main boss. Since Franklin had access to all the books and knew what the white workers got on “Saturday Nights”, they (the whites) were burned up over it. In addition to this, the workers threatened to quit their jobs if immediate action was not taken. The action that they wanted taken against Franklin was that he should be fired from the organization (Dickinson, 1868).

Considering the period in which Franklin’s situation is described, Dickenson has succeeded in relating to readers the manner in which injustice and racial discrimination were the side-effects of slavery being abolished in America. Society after the Civil War was supposed to be unbiased and one that provided equal rights to all. However, by abolishing slavery freedom for the African Americans was difficult to come by, as there were several whites who were hell-bent on adhering to their beliefs in white superiority. Since there were many entrepreneurs who could employ workers, they could still easily deny the African Americans their rights. This is precisely what ensued the Civil War, which means that the African American struggle for freedom was not over even after slavery had been abolished. In relation to this denial of freedom, one can see that William Craft’s novel ‘Running a Thousand Miles for Freedom’ describes a similar scenario.

Craft in his novel reinforces Dickinson’s description of the manner in which freedom is still far from one’s reach even if one appears to be free. William and Ellen are the two main characters that are on the run. Though they are free from shackles, they are still not as free as they would want to be. They were free as long as they could walk by everyone unnoticed. However, their freedom would disappear as soon as anyone spotted them as Africans on the run. Similar to this is Dickinson’s description of the freedom that people like Franklin had when he worked as assistant to his boss. ‘Franklin’ was free as long as no one pointed a finger at him. However, his freedom comes into question in spite of slavery being abolished, and this is quite similar to the way that William and Ellen felt when they were on the road hiding from those who oppressed their kind. The manner in which details are described by craft in his novel is alarming, and he has certainly explained the situations the characters are in as graphically as possible. Clearly, it appears that this novel is one that aims at making the reader sit up and realize how severe the crisis of slavery really was. Certainly, the situation was severe, as it is mentioned in the novel that the whites “had the power to tear from our cradle the new-born babe and sell it in the shambles like a brute, and then scourge us if we dared to lift a finger to save it from such a fate” (Craft, 1860). This description is certainly one that makes one realize the gravity of the slaves’ plight in those days. However, it must not be forgotten that the African Americans still did not get the kind of freedom they would have liked after the Civil War.

It can be seen that Dickinson has also approached her appropriately, considering the way that the African Americans were still being treated. She has been unbiased in her descriptions of the times that she wrote this novel, as she describes the manner in which Jim complains about the ‘Franklin’ while the management saw nothing wrong with him doing his job. Through this scenario, Dickinson manages to expose the way that when business people may have wanted to stay out of racial discriminatory issues, they were dragged into it. However, it must also be asserted that not all business people would stay clear of these issues. This may be said because of the fact that racial discrimination continued through private organizations after the Civil War.

Conclusion: American freedom is complex, multi-faceted, and filled with ironic twists and turns. The concept of freedom has proven sufficiently malleable to accommodate both (or all) sides to virtually every significant historical controversy. The tension between positive and negative conceptions of freedom, and between a conception grounded in individual zones of autonomy and a competing conception rooted in the right of political majorities to democratic self-governance, virtually ensures that all contestants will carry their own freedom banner into battle. This is not to say that all claims to freedom will be equally convincing. It is to say that any particular claim must be adjudicated on the merits of the posited freedom, rather than on whether the claim satisfies the criteria for a valid freedom argument.