Chapter 22: The Ordeal of Reconstruction 1865-1877 Flashcards
- Could presidential Reconstruction have succeeded if politically skilled Abraham Lincoln instead of politically inept Andrew Johnson had been president?
The ultimate goal of Reconstruction was to reconcile the two sides as well as help elevate former slaves’ status of living. Unfortunately, this goal was extremely difficult to reach, and would have posed just as great a challenge to Lincoln as it did to Johnson. Lincoln’s perspective on reconstruction was that restoration would be simple because the South never legally seceded in the first place. He came up with the “10 percent” reconstruction plan, which declared each state reinstated once 10 percent of its voters in the presidential election had vowed their devotion to the United States and agreed to the terms of emancipation. The establishment of formal state governments would follow. Radical Republican congressmen responded with the Wade-Davis Bill because they were afraid that the Southern planter aristocracy would be restored and the blacks would be enslaved. This bill required a much greater 50 percent of voters to take the oath and put greater standards regarding the recognition of emancipation. Lincoln refused to sign this bill, which greatly upset the Republicans and led to a massive controversy. Some Republican’s agreed with Lincoln’s view that the Southern states had never seceded legally, but others did regard it as a legal secession, and therefore felt that the Southern states should be punished with more severity. Andrew Johnson was one of these radicals, but he surprised everyone by following Lincoln’s 10 percent plan with an addition of his own. His Reconstruction proclamation subjugated men who had been leaders of the Confederacy and called on the wealthy planters of the Southern states to pay off all Confederate debts. Only by following these guidelines would they be readmitted into the Union. In doing so, Johnson made Republicans of both divisions upset. He was carried away by the power he now held over the aristocrats. Because Lincoln died before he could truly tackle the challenge of reconstruction, we will never know if presidential Reconstruction would have succeeded under him, but based on his superior leadership skills, he probably would have done a much better job at it than Johnson did. Lincoln would have upset one group of Republicans, but at least he wouldn’t have alienated both groups as Johnson had.
- How truly radical was radical Reconstruction?
Radical Reconstruction after the Civil war was radical, in some senses. It gave blacks more freedom to former slaves than they previously had, though they were still not truly free. By 1867, African Americans in the South held the vote, but in the North it was not given over until 1870. Once they received the right to suffrage, blacks became very politically involved, taking seats in state senates. This was a major step up from the past, but unfortunately they were subjected to racism and name calling from their former masters and were often used as political puppets. Nevertheless, radical Reconstruction was beneficial in the sense that it passed important legislation and reforms that were desperately needed at the time.
- How did both Southern and Northern racial attitudes shape Reconstruction, and what effect did Reconstruction have on race relations and the conditions of blacks? Did Reconstruction really address the problems of race?
Reconstruction after the Civil War was largely shaped by racial attitudes in both the North and the South. Many racist moderates were reluctant to give African Americans the vote. Once they received the right to suffrage, many became involved in politics and were used as pawns by their white peers. Also, one the first act of the Southern regimes that Johnson sanctioned was to pass the Black Codes, a set of laws that controlled the lives of freed slaves. These codes were meant to keep blacks working in the Cotton Fields, and they would receive serious punishments for failing to do so. In reality, these codes were not much better than slavery. Other racist attitudes further inhibited the progression of social conditions for blacks. One example of this is the Ku Klux Klan, a group of Southern whites that covered themselves in sheets and frightened blacks using theatrics and force. Reconstruction did attempt to address the problems of race by giving blacks a greater place in politics, but socially they were still brutally discriminated against.
- Was Reconstruction a noble experiment that failed, a vengeful Northern punishment of the South, a weak effort that did not go far enough, or the best that could have been expected under the circumstances? What has been the historical legacy of Reconstruction?
Reconstruction was a noble experiment that did not go far enough as well as a punishment of the South. Most Southerners saw Reconstruction in a more negative light than the war because it completely overturned their social and racial system. They saw the new freedoms given to blacks as an insult and were extremely bitter over their loss. Many Republican Northerners intended for Reconstruction to be a vengeful punishment, pushing for greater rights for blacks and a higher bar to allow members of the Confederacy to become states again, as well as full payment of war debts. In the end, these Republican intentions backfired because Reconstruction bestowed few benefits on African Americans and wiped out the Republican party in the South for a century. They failed to recognize the immense amount of work that would be demanded to grand the freedmen their rights in full. The historical legacy of Reconstruction is therefore bleaker than Republicans of the time would have desired, though it did bring about the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments, which are still in effect today. The Fourteenth Amendment addresses equal rights for all citizens, and the Fifteenth Amendment bestows the right to vote on all men, regardless of color.
