Wednesday, November 6, 2013

Too much too soon?

Many of you in your posts from last night agree that the more radical Reconstruction policies (i.e. enfranchisement, black officeholders, etc.) may have shocked the South into a social system that dramatically differed from their antebellum condition.  Perhaps a more gradual Reconstruction policy--one that laid the foundation for racial equality but did not do so overnight--would have been an easier pill to swallow.

After all, white southerners were suddenly faced with an alternative reality, one where their black counterparts walked freely among them, despite the fact that just a few years earlier they had been bound into lifelong servitude.  A revolution in policy, for better or for worse, will likely instill resistance, and it is not a surprise that many of the more radical Reconstruction policies fizzled out when the violent counteractions of the white South became a daily reality. 

So, if we seem to agree that Reconstruction was a failure, we must face the difficult question--what was the alternative?  How could we revisit Reconstruction as a political, economic, and social possibility?  Would there be any way for the defeated South to accept terms that were handed down by the Union (largely Republican) government?  Yes, this is an impossible question to answer in hindsight, but still....what if we could truly do it all over again?

13 comments:

  1. As i said yesterday, i think that the entire reconstruction process (attempt) would have been a lot more successful had it been introduced to the country more gradually instead of all at once. The country had just gone through a complete divide, a war, and an assassinated president. These events put a lot of stress on the country and had reconstruction been introduced more slowly, it would have been easier for the country to accept it. After Lincoln got assassinated, The vice president at the time, Johnson, who had many different views than Lincoln had a completely different reconstruction plan that eventually got him impeached. In hindsight, had Lincoln's reconstruction plan been followed through with, i think that the country would have progressed further, faster.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I believe that if Lincoln had not been assassinated, Reconstruction would not have been such a failure because the vice-president did something completely different than the plans that Lincoln had. The north lost their leader and the person that was supposed to guide the Reconstruction. Reconstruction was being such a failure that the KKK appeared and they started to attack. The fact of seeing the black people inferior to whites was still present all over the South in particular after the war. As I said yesterday Southerners were having a hard time seeing black people that could had been their own slaves a few weeks ago walking on their streets as equal as them (the hard time that they were having surprises me a lot).
    I can't really think of an alternative because the South was very stubborn because of the liberation of slaves and the assassination of Abraham Lincoln was inevitable.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Again, Reconstruction was a failure because it was something rushed into rather than a slow and progressive process. There was a lot going on. The American people as a whole were just recovering from the Civil War, a conflict that left the South in shambles. The people of that region couldn't be expected to quickly adapt to a new lifestyle completely different from one they'd known for ages.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Overall, reconstruction was doing more damage than good it sounds like from what happened with the KKK clan attacks. Maybe if Lincoln hadn’t been assassinated the idea of reconstruction wouldn’t have failed as bad as it did. Although violence was still going on in the Union and Confederate way before they all became one country again. I think that the alternative was to give blacks the same rights that white people get instead of freeing them of slavery. However I think that many southerners didn’t like the idea that the people that they have enslaved to work for them are going to get the same rights as them because then they won’t have total control anymore. Overall, it doesn’t really matter what conditions the north gave the south, in less the north gave the south no conditions and told them that they didn’t have to free their slaves, the south is still going to have a hard time accepting that they lost the war.

    ReplyDelete
  5. they tried really hard for it to be successful but there were so many factors that stopped reconstruction from being successful. Like people have said, Lincoln getting assassinated, The KKK, and basically all the violence still erupting. But it would of went a lot easier if the confederacy just admitted defeat and moved on with it. Then moving on meant giving up slavery, as hard at it was for people, they needed to face the facts and that they have to change not matter what.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I believe that even if Lincoln had not been assassinated the Reconstruction effort would have still been a failure. The reason for this was Lincolns approach to begin with, he just basically wanted to get all the states to rejoin the Union and then work out all the kinks afterward. The problem with this was that he just let all the problems between him and the South bubble and begin to blow out of proportion, he also did not set strict enough regulations and necessities for the Southern states to rejoin the Union. The ten percent act forever, was too easy asking for ten percent was nothing for them to rejoin the Union. In the beginning he was not demanding enough and towards the end he was too demanding. Clearly the states are still resentful because they had lost the war and had lost "their chance for independence". Then, right after three amendments were added to the constitution. This caused shock and resentment which made them even more rebellious and less likely to abide by these new amendments. It was because of this quick transition that the South did everything in its power to not break the law, but to go around it. Clearly, no matter what happened the South would have been resentful but perhaps if Lincoln had taken a slower approach to making these changes and had set more regulations to make sure these amendments would have been more of a success.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Reconstruction failed because it was such a rushed process, i agree with everyone else in that if everyone had taken reconstruction slower and didn't rush it as much as they did everything would have turned out much more differently than it did. Especially Lincoln getting assassinated, since he was credited so much for the efforts in the war and the freeing of the slaves, the fact that he was assassinated threw everyone completely off. The fact that he was assassinated made the South want to keep their stand even though they had already been defeated.

    ReplyDelete
  8. when you lose a war there are reparations to pay only thing is is the south didn't have to do that. all they had to do was swear allegiance like there supposed to and give equality to the very race that built that region. this is one the easiest trials that a losing force has to pay admittance to recreate the powerful nation that america was becoming. and all you have to do is receive funds to rebuild and create for those who you've spent centuries enslaving. reconstruction was a failure because the south to this day doesn't except the fact that it was wrong. there is no other action that could have made reconstruction smoother than it already was. when you lose a war there is a heavy price to pay the south didn't have to do that, they actually received money. reconstruction didn't work because the south didn't want it to work.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Because Lincoln was assassinated, Reconstruction had been a failure. When Lincoln passed the 10% plan after pocket vetoing the Wave Davis Bill, he must have thought that just getting the states readmitted into congress would not do anything not only gradually but also temporarly. It would only lead the reconstrctuion into failure since reconstruction would just become a process of appeasing the South. However, when Lincoln died, Andrew Johnson, who was racist, took the office as a president and therefore what Lincoln did just became a mess. Because reconstruction was overall a rushed process, radical violence group, who could not accept the fact that African Americans have rights, such as KKK started to appear.

    ReplyDelete
  10. I see a lot of blog posts above me are blaming the vice-president Andrew Johnson, saying the reconstruction would be a lot better if Lincoln was not assassinated. I agree with that Lincoln would have reconstruct better than president Andrew Johnson did but it doesn't mean that the way he did it was wrong and ineffective. Two presidents are suppose to have different plans and ideas. Reconstruction was not an easy game. What were deeply in Southern white people' heart could not be changed by policies. So if I could re-do the whole thing again, I would do what Lincoln did. And also I would prevent Lincoln from getting assassinated.

    ReplyDelete
  11. I don't think that the South would have accepted any terms from the Republican Congress, even the most lenient ones. The fact is that the Southerners were not ready to abolish slavery, as is clearly shown in the many examples of KKK attacks. Even today the South has not entirely gotten over the Civil War. Many still call it the War of Northern Aggression, or have Confederate flags plastered on their trucks. And the vestiges of resentment against the African-Americans has not gone away either. Racism still runs rampant among Southerners and they even have segregated Proms in the 'Deep South.' That goes back to the witness testament about a KKK assault in which the clan members tortured and killed an African-American man for sleeping with white women. If these attacks, and the continuing racism show anything, it is that the Southerners would have accepted nothing less than the continuation of slavery, especially after fighting a war for the same reason. Perhaps if Reconstruction was administered a little bit more slowly, and the rights of the former slaves were better protected, than maybe it would not have failed so badly. Also it didn't help to have illiterate former slaves appointed into office simply over principle and not ability. It was the same as how during Iran's Islamic Revolution, extremely unqualified people would get important jobs simply because they followed the Islamic code.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Reconstruction was a failure for many reasons. One reason was because it was very rushed and there was not a lot of time for them to do what they wanted. Another reason was because the vice president was in charge now since Lincoln was assassinated. This is a huge change that caused many things to go wrong in reconstruction. It was very difficult for reconstruction to take place because the south was VERY poor after the war, and almost everything was destroyed. There was nothing that they could do about the funds and this caused reconstruction to be a disaster.

    ReplyDelete
  13. I think blacks could've integrated into society immediately. By immediately i mean like a couple generations. If the kids of former slaves and so one were just sent to good schools as well it would set up a foundation of success for the rest of their lives. Think about china where the government pays for your elementary and middle school. The easiest way to have total influence over your citizens is at a young age before they develop any other type of thinking. Brainwashing a smaller scale. The american government could've used this standpoint and gotten the idea that there should be standard education for every single child. Start with those born after a certain year and just continue this. A good point to further argue that this would work would be bringing up the fact that some slaves that were brought up with the white kids of the masters had the capability of being just as smart, speak other languages, be writers etc. (as seen in django unchained)

    ReplyDelete