Essay On Radical Reconstruction
History/125
2012
Reconstruction
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? After studying the evens of the late 19th century I would have to agree with the historians that state the radical reconstruction was not radical enough. I think that the intention of these changes were to change the general cultural belief system in the south and make the region more like the north. Unfortunately with the constant changes and fighting between the different branches of the federal government did not allow for the reconstruction to be as radical or successful as the …show more content…
In what ways did it succeed in reinventing itself? In what ways did it fail? The post-civil war south better known as New South did succeed in many ways. To start the list the south became known for the railway system that has now become the standard for railway development. With the expansion of the railway system, in the south, came the urbanization of southern cities and the growth of the iron industry which the south saw as the central means to compete with the north in industry, and expanded the industry seventeen fold in the 1800s. Now then as for the ways the south failed. The main failure was the expressed contributions of the African-American community. Many of the white people in support and design of the new south had said that the African Americans would be vital to rebuilding the south, although by this time no black southerners were still allowed to work in the industrial field. Often poor whites were far more likely to be employed by rail yards, iron, or textile factories, and often resisted the integration of the black community. The new south had only really improved in areas bettered by whites, and their way of life this also brought on the dark time in our nation history known as segregation and the civil right
2012
Reconstruction
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? After studying the evens of the late 19th century I would have to agree with the historians that state the radical reconstruction was not radical enough. I think that the intention of these changes were to change the general cultural belief system in the south and make the region more like the north. Unfortunately with the constant changes and fighting between the different branches of the federal government did not allow for the reconstruction to be as radical or successful as the …show more content…
In what ways did it succeed in reinventing itself? In what ways did it fail? The post-civil war south better known as New South did succeed in many ways. To start the list the south became known for the railway system that has now become the standard for railway development. With the expansion of the railway system, in the south, came the urbanization of southern cities and the growth of the iron industry which the south saw as the central means to compete with the north in industry, and expanded the industry seventeen fold in the 1800s. Now then as for the ways the south failed. The main failure was the expressed contributions of the African-American community. Many of the white people in support and design of the new south had said that the African Americans would be vital to rebuilding the south, although by this time no black southerners were still allowed to work in the industrial field. Often poor whites were far more likely to be employed by rail yards, iron, or textile factories, and often resisted the integration of the black community. The new south had only really improved in areas bettered by whites, and their way of life this also brought on the dark time in our nation history known as segregation and the civil right