Week 1 - Reconstruction

Week 1 - Reconstruction

Jonathan Figueroa

Question 2:

Some historians argue that Radical Reconstruction was not radical enough. After studying the events of the late 19th century, defend whether or not you agree with this position. What are the long-term implications?

The Radical Reconstruction era of 1867-1877 had done some great things for the country. After going over the events during this time in our history, I would have to disagree with historians and their position in that it was not radical enough. I feel like people jump to criticize others too easily. While historians might have knowledge and evidence from past historical events, they do not truly know what it was like because they were not around during those times. So it is easy for historians to stand there and say, “it was not radical enough”, but it does not mean they are right. I feel like maybe not everything was perfect, but there were some key points during the Radical Reconstruction that had an impact and made a difference. During this era, the Radical Republicans made some great moves that really helped former slaves, African Americans, and the country itself. The Radical Republicans were the “Wing of the Republican party most hostile to slavery.” (HIST2, Volume 2, Ch16, 2013) This party wanted to push for slaves to be free; in fact, they wanted emancipation even before President Lincoln got around to issuing it. They believed that freed slaves and African Americans held the right to have rights. During the same time, President Johnson, who had no interest in helping African Americans, was intent on finishing his proposed ideas for reconstruction. Meanwhile the Radical Republicans were doing what they needed to protect the interest of the African American population. During the Radical Reconstruction, the Radical Republicans wanted to increase the role of the Freedmen’s Bureau to help freed slaves and other African Americans. They also wanted to pass one of the most important acts...