Category: Uncategorized

The term “American reconstruction” refers to the period in American history from 1866 to 1877 when the Confederacy and slavery were both abolished in an attempt to resolve the Civil War’s legacy. Reconstruction addresses issues such as how the southern states re-join the union, the citizenship of the Confederacy’s leaders, and the legal status of the Black Freedman.

In Eric Foner’s “The Makings of Radical Reconstruction,” Eric investigates the growing influence of radical Republicans on reconstruction policies. Despite the best efforts of the northern Radical Republicans, Eric Foner’s Reconstruction theory is right in claiming that southern whites were more concerned with re-creating the past than with renovating a new civilization.  However, it may be said that reconstruction was a success and that the South attempted to change, but was hampered by the presence of freedmen.

“Before the war, three-fifths of the slaves had been included in the calculation of Congressional representation; now, as free persons, all would be counted. Since Republicans were not prepared to force black suffrage upon the South, they offered white Southerners a choice-enfranchise the freedmen or sacrifice representation in Congress. “(pg114） According to this section of the reading, civil rights become the foundation of the 14 amendments, which establish the notion of citizenship for all Americans born in the United States and enable the federal government to protect their rights. The amendment prohibited states from limiting citizens’ rights to privileges and immunities or denying them equal protection under the law. As a result, future congresses and federal courts were able to give meaning to this promise of legal equality. This is one way for modern and radical republicans to compromise, but the amendment did not grant black suffrage. This shows that the 14th amendment creates a great conflict between the parties because the republicans are against the idea of letting black people vote to keep the replication. 

The authors underline that African Americans were emancipated from the bottom up, not the other way around. While the importance of white political leaders and a few black radical thinkers are frequently acknowledged, the political strength of ordinary and unknown black slaves is sometimes overlooked.

 

Before the Civil War, Eric Foner explains, the Republicans celebration was once upon a time of increasing federal authority over states. During the conflict and then the reconstruction, a robust central authority was seen as essential to outlining the phrases by which the defeated southern states should return to the union and to implement those conditions. Eric Foner shows how the growth of federal authority at the time was radical thinking and the wing of the Republican Party that recommended it at times at odds with average and conservative party members. For example, in an article by Eric Foner, he shows that reconstruction radicalism was primarily a bourgeois ideology based on the definition of American citizenship. There was an independent or uniform radical position on the economic issues of the time (Eric Foner 106). This quote illustrates that the idea that reconstruction radicalism is the main idea of ​​American citizenship. Also about the radicalism of rebuilding American citizenship. Radical Republicanism, for example, had a social and economic vision, but one that derived from the ideology of free labor rather than a range of business interests (Eric Foner 106). The section on the fourteenth amendment has enhanced my knowledge of the various clauses in the amendment. The first clause does not allow states to curtail anyone’s equality. The second allows all men to vote, so the southern states benefit from greater representation. The male part of the clause did not help the feminist and felt betrayed.

“The Making of Radical Reconstruction” details both the concerns raised and the initiative prompted by the American government, or more specifically, the Radical Republican party, towards the development of policies that would serve as beneficial towards the reconstruction of the South and the reunion of a divided U.S. following the Civil War in the mid to late 1800’s. In extension to this, the author, Eric Foner implies that, despite much effort having been made in an unified front in such a process as lengthy and thought provoking as the literal reforming of a society that has been built on the very institution it no longer can legally maintain, members of the same congressional party (that is, the Radical Republicans) were  bound to experiencing some internal conflict or differences that interfered with the pacing of the overall establishment of reconstruction in the South. For instance, “The preeminent Radical leaders, Thaddeus Stevens and Charles Sumner, differed in personality and political style…On the economic issues of the day no distinctive or unified Radical position existed. Stevens,…favored an economic program geared to the needs of aspiring entrepreneurs, including tariff protection, low interest rates, plentiful greenback currency, and promotion or internal improvements. On the other hand, Radicals like Charles Sumner… attuned to orthodox laissez-faire economic theory, favored a low tariff, the swift resumption of specie payments, and minimal government involvement in the economy”(Foner, 105-106). Due to their own varying individual and collective interests regarding the vision they had of the future of the economic (and assumably social and political) atmospheres of the South, as well as the fact that majority of them, the, “Congressional Radicals viewed economic issues [—of both the North and more particularly,—the South] as secondary [concerns] to those of [the general issues regarding] Reconstruction” (Foner, 106). It can be inferred that the policies that would otherwise address the future of the labor force, economic system and/or overall economy in terms of the reconstruction of the South were left unattended for a time.

John Brown was an abolitionist during the mid-1800s. However, he differed from other abolitionists because he believed that if there was blood to be shed, then one must do everything in their power to make this happen. In other words, violence was something he supported. This allows any intellectual to question whether Brown’s tactics and beliefs are ones to support, as violence was something that was typically looked down upon when attempting to abolish slavery. Thus, this shows that Brown’s point of view was unique and that these differences that he possessed only makes him that much more important.

 

Inevitably, there were members of society who fully supported the works of John Brown. “Some Yankees professed to admire Brown for daring to strike the slave power that was accustomed to pushing the North around with impunity” (page 210). A few liked his ideas so much as to have created a group that was known as the secret six. Brown came up with a plan to raid the South and was funded by this secret group. Because this group had been formed, this represents how many other members of society were also in support of Brown’s beliefs. This raid also shined light on the idea of the white southerners and their confusion between act and motive. Many republican leaders also feared any political damage, thus rejecting Brown.

 

From the beginning, even when “Passions ran high in Virginia, where mobs clamored for Brown’s blood” (page 206), Brown never gave into giving up on what he believed in. All in all, Brown wanted a revolution and he, himself, allowed this to happen. He believed in action over discussion, which I, too, support. Although violence may seem to be the wrong direction, as long as action takes place, change will occur. If members of society simply discussed and never acted upon the discussion, it would be considered a waste of time. All talk and no act is something Brown wanted to avoid. Because of this, John Brown became a hero to many people and stuck by his beliefs up until the date of his death.

Eric Foner analyzes the influences of “The Making of Radical Reconstruction” that Radical Republicans had which contoured Congressional policy. In this reading, he has a section that talks about the Fourteenth Amendment. Initially, I felt that the Fourteenth Amendment was nothing more than an amendment that made all people born in the U.S., citizens, as well as have equal protection from the law. The Fourteenth Amendment to me was made to protect the rights of freed African Americans and established the Due Process Clause that gave the right to privacy for women and abortion rights because of Roe vs. Wade. But I never understood why the amendment mashed both these things together.  After reading Foner’s interpretation on Reconstruction, and how the amendment relates to Radical Reconstruction I learned a couple of new things and realized I was wrong in my understanding of the Fourteenth Amendment.  Foner mentions how the Republicans tried to put into the constitution their interpretation of the Civil War. As Foner states, “assembled in December 1865 to confront the crucial issues of Reconstruction: Who would control the South? Who would rule the nation?  What was the status of the emancipated slave?” (Foner. Pg. 104).  These questions mentioned by Foner show us concerns going on during the Civil War.  He mentions how Republicans outnumbered Democrats in both houses which we see later on how Republicans use this to make a more permanent law for free slaves with the Fourteenth Amendment.  Many issues were brought up during this Radical Reconstruction, questions such as if Southern states should be entitled to representation, status on the African American Suffrage, the protection of Civil Rights for newly freed slaves, and how to keep ex-confederates out of political power.  

After doing a little more research on the Fourteenth Amendment I found out that John Bingham was the lead author of writing the rights that the freed slaves would have similar to how the Civil Rights Act is written.  But Bingham felt that it was important to create something that would also take into consideration future problems and problems that weren’t as critical now but could potentially be a problem later on.  This is why the Fourteenth Amendment has statements of general principles that would need to be interpreted instead of written rights like the Civil Rights Act. This connects to what Foner said in the reading, “For more than a century, politicians, judges, lawyers, and scholars have debated the meaning of this elusive language.” (Foner, pg. 115). It is crazy to think how thought out the Fourteenth Amendment was before it was put into place. Foner mentions the three-fifths compromise that totally slipped my mind when realizing what changes occurred once slaves were emancipated.  Now that slaves were free, instead of only three-fifths of African Americans being counted now all would be counted. 

I also found a fault in my understanding of the Fourteenth Amendment. I had always thought the Fourteenth Amendment was created to make everyone equal and the Due Process Clause was created to protect the rights to privacy for women to choose if they want an abortion or not, but I never took into consideration the date on which the Amendment was created.  I realize now that the Fourteenth Amendment says nothing about abortions, it is just an interpretation of the Amendment.  Additionally, I found out that the Fourteenth Amendment left many feminist leaders feeling betrayed. Women’s rights activists Susan B. Anthony, Elizabeth Cady Staton, and many others spoke up about the Fourteenth Amendment’s second clause which used the word “male”.  As Foner quotes from Staton, “‘must not put her trust in man’ in seeking her rights.” (Foner, pg. 115).  Because of this, feminists criticized Congress on how sex similar to race was not an acceptable reason for “legal distinctions among citizens” (Foner, pg. 115).  After reading what Foner had to say about Radical Reconstruction, I wonder if there were problems when these Radical Republicans were trying to create legislation for these newly freed slaves.  At this time there probably wasn’t any African American politician power so how did they figure out how to rightfully represent the African American community?

 

In A Short History of Reconstruction by Eric Foner the passage he talked about topics that impacted the reconstruction. For example the Fourteenth Amendment that granted citizenship to all persons born in the United States including former enslaved people. He also states the origin of civil rights and radical republicans. He is illustrating that the reconstruction affected everyone and had a significant impact in many ways. 

The section on the Fourteenth Amendment expanded my knowledge of the different clauses within the amendment. The first clause does not allow states to shorten someone’s equality. The second allows all males to be able to vote so that southern states benefit from having more representation. The “male” part of the clause did not help feminist and felt betrayed. 

I personally never thought about what politicians had to do to keep peace. But Foner mentions that there wasn’t a national police force or permanent military to keep the rights of former slaves. Southern blacks and white loyalists tried to convince Congress that they can not trust Southern states to solve their problems without federal oversight. Former slaves feared that southern states would find loopholes to try to stop former slaves from having their rights. Something that was interesting was President Andrew Johnson. He “had” to veto any bill that had to do with reconstruction because he needed to keep his support between the north and southern states. He knew that the Freedmen’s Bureau would upset white southerners. Foner also states that Johnson believed “giving blacks citizenship was discriminating against whites.” Johnson has obviously picked a side and many northerners are not happy that he was blatantly racist. Foner pointed out major events and topics that were significant to the reconstruction era. At the end everything connected and it seems like there was a domino effect with Johnson trying to keep his support but ended up losing support.

Throughout the past few weeks my knowledge on the reconstruction era has immensely increased but also my interests on it. In the reading by Joshua Brown, “Reconstructing Representation, 1866-1877,” from Beyond The Lines I got to see that the reconstruction era also known as “America’s Unfinished Revolution” has way more to it than I initially thought. Of course I believed it was just like any other “ordinary” history event that had its ending but this one was different. It was interesting to see that it wasn’t as simple as I thought. In class we learned several things that were new during this time period like the 14th and 15th amendment, and the black codes. This reading showed me a different approach to this era. This reading really goes into depth of how bad this era really was despite the “changes” being made. Families would have a hard time getting basic necessities because of these changes , “The father of the family, a strong, athletic man whose labor could bring means to support his family in comfort, sits idly by his cabin-door.. While his hard working wife and almost starving children gather around the oven.. Wondering where the next supply of food may come from,” (Brown 132-133). Learning that there was a labor strike was really interesting to me because it gave a new approach in seeing the effects of the reconstruction era. “The bitter “Long Strike ” during winter of 1874-75,” (Brown 132) shows that although a lot of essentially good changes were being made they weren’t good enough especially. Families were struggling to keep up with basic necessities after the reconstruction era as well as during the start of the Gilded Age (given that this strike was during the 1800s). We also see that there were specifically strikes with coal mining, miners in general which was really interesting to know the specifics. This is similar to life today because although changes are being made in our country slowly, there are still major things that need change. Like seen in this text, poverty and labor is still an issue today that needs solving today.

In “the revolution of 1860_from battle cry of freedom” by McPherson, the author is talking about John Brown, an American abolitionist. Brown, unlike most abolitionists, didn’t believe in nonviolence and his favourite religious passage that he believed in the most was “Without shedding of blood there is no remission of sin”. He also believed that the only solution for the change they needed was a revolution. Enduring what was happening in the 1850s, some abolitionists shared the same viewpoint of Brown. The text explains how Brown held a secret anti-slavery convention in Canada

There was a group called “the secret six”; a group of white men who secretly funded the 1859 raid and backed John Brown’s scheme to invade the South. The six of them supported the free-state activists in Kansas. The plan was that Brown rented a farm in Maryland under a false name. He intended to seize the US armory and arsenal in the area and distribute the weapons to the slaves who joined him. Five black males and seventeen whites, including three of Brown’s sons, made up Brown’s shock troops for this reason. Brown wanted Douglass to be a part of his plan but  he refused, he didn’t believe in what Brown wanted to do. Also some other black recruits didn’t show up which disappointed Brown but he decided to continue with what he had. During clashes, eight of Brown’s men got shot and two of them were Brown’s sons. Three of the townsmen were killed too. Seven people could escape at this time but two of them got captured later. The next day Brown was captured and here he knew that his campaign to free the slaves had come to an end. He got accused of treason, murder, and fomenting insurrection so the judge dentenced him to a death by hanging and later it was discovered that he’d left a carpet bag full of documents and letters at the Maryland farmhouse, some of which revealed his relationship with the Secret Six. Sanborn refused a summons from the Mason committee but Howe and Stearns went to Washington and faced the Mason committee . the author then said that The South’s reaction to Brown’s raid brought to light a contradiction at the heart of slavery. On the one hand, many whites were terrified of slave revolts. Southern whites, on the other hand, believed that slaves were well-treated and happy in their servitude.

The author talked about how emotional and important the day of hanging Brown was. On the day of Brown’s execution, several northern communities witnessed extraordinary events and the editor of republican wrote “the death of no man in America has ever produced so profound a sensation. A feeling of deep and sorrowful indignation seems to

possess the masses” which shows how the death of Brown affected the population. And young William Dean Howells said that “Brown has become an idea, a thousand times purer and better and loftier than the Republican idea”

In conclusion, John Brown’s raid was a very important step for abolishing slavery, and during his raid, he was able to kill one slave owner and freed 11 slaves and then he was hanged. After he was killed, northern conservatives staged big anti-Brown rallies to assure the South that Brown sympathizers were a vocal minority.

John Brown is a very brave man who sacrificed his life and his sons lives to feed others who’re not even related to him and his campaign was a big mark in history.

Even earlier than the Civil War, Eric Foner explains, the Republican celebration was once in a duration of increasing federal authority over the states. During the conflict and then Reconstruction a robust central authority used to be viewed fundamental in order to outline the phrases on which the defeated southern states ought to return to the Union and to put into effect these terms. Eric Foner shows how the growth of federal authority was once a radical thinking at the time and the wing of the Republican Party that recommended it was occasionally at odds with greater average and conservative celebration members. For example, in Eric Foner article he shows “Reconstruction Radicalism was the first and foremost a civic ideology, grounded in definition of American citizenship. On the economic issues of the day on distinctive or unified Radical position existed”(Eric Foner 106). This quote illustrates that the idea that reconstruction radicalism is the main idea of American citizenship. Furthermore, about the reconstruction radicalism of American citizenship. For example, “Radical Republicanism did posses a social and economic vision, but one that derived from the free labor ideology rather than from any one set of business interests”( Eric Foner 106). This quote illustrates that the radical republicans on the topic of free labor ideology they put the focus on businesses.

All in all Eric Foner thought that with nothing has been more important to the development of American society and politics than the Civil War and Reconstruction. And until in the 1960s, there is more influential scholars conceived of the era as a sad departure from America’s grand march of progress toward political liberty and economic plenty.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  The reading “ The Revolution of 1860” by James McPherson opened a new idea for me that I didn’t know of before. I’ve gained significant knowledge about John Brown and his role during the Civil War era. John Brown was a white abolitionist who believed that violence is the only way to end slavery. The author, James McPherson, starts the reading by describing what Brown’s position was and why exactly he thought that way. John Brown was a strong believer that we needed action in order to finally put an end to slavery. He knew that there was no other way and he didn’t notice any change happening, so he took the matters into his own hands. The phrase that inspired him the most was, “Without shedding of blood there is no re- mission of sin,”which came from his favorite New Testament Passage. His main goal was to convince everyone that this has all happened because of violent and selfish kidnappers (slave owners), and that enslaved people should use that same strategy to gain their freedom back. Many started to believe him, and had also concluded that slave power had lived by the sword, so it should die by the sword. That is why Brown and his men created an abolitionist group called the “Secret Six”, where everyone considered Brown ideal leaders that would lead the slaves straight to freedom. However, there were some other significant people who did not support Brown on his attack mission. For example, Fredrick Douglass, who was an old friend of Brown’s, refused his proposal of teaming up with Brown because he was sure that Brown was up for a suicidal mission that would only make matters worse. However, Brown proceeded on his mission. During his mission on the Harper’s Ferry, many of his men were captured and killed, including his two sons, and eventually Brown was caught as well. This put an end to Brown’s mission of freeing the slaves. The state of Virginia tried Brown and convicted him of murder and fementing insurecction, which later on resulted in a death sentence by hanging. The news of Brown’s death caused fear for many whites of slave insurrections. But for many others, Brown’s death date was only a celebration of how good of a man he was. Church bells rang, guns fired, and many honored who Brown was, and his purpose in freeing the slaves. John Brown became a hero in many people’s lives, and changed the way majorities thought. On his hang date, he made sure to let everyone know that he is proud for what he is drying for, and that many others should fight as hard as he did.