Transcript Reconstruction Discussion 9

Transcript of ReconDiscussion9 « TodaysMeet

ReconDiscussion9.
test
pt at 19:54 PM, 28 Sep 2011 via web

100% true
El at 19:54 PM, 28 Sep 2011 via web

Reconstruction seemed like a carrot on a
pole. So tauntingly close, yet in reality,
unachievable
SD at 19:55 PM, 28 Sep 2011 via web

Federal government tried to do
something, but it was too corrupt

Did the foundation prevent racism at all?
TT at 19:56 PM, 28 Sep 2011 via web

what about enforcement acts? Did they
not work to enforce the 14th and 15th
amendments if Jim crow laws were later
able to take over?
Ta at 19:56 PM, 28 Sep 2011 via web

They did send in soldiers to try and
protect the rights they granted, is that
not them trying?
CA at 19:57 PM, 28 Sep 2011 via web

Good point -- what happened to
enforcement acts?

I believe it really was just a failed
attempt at trying to achieve racial
http://todaysmeet.com/ReconDiscussion9/transcript[9/28/2011 3:42:28 PM]


equality
CN at 19:57 PM, 28 Sep 2011 via web

The federal government just gave up and
didn't enforce those acts (haha). When
that was enforced, it made a difference

What was Congress?

harpsweek: fed gov't relatively not even
that corrupt

They tried, but the grip of the federal gov
was non-existent in the south

Who controlled Congress?

House and senate

The republicans I think

Yup

The republicans did during the Radical
Reconstruction
JP at 19:59 PM, 28 Sep 2011 via web

Was it a failure of Congressor Fed gov't?

At this point, congress is federal
government



A constant struggle for power between
the Radical Republicans and Democrats.
At first, the 'radicals' controlled the
majority of their recon
Z at 20:00 PM, 28 Sep 2011 via web

What???? If recon. Wasn't for racial
equality then what was it?

Putting the union back together
Ehw at 20:00 PM, 28 Sep 2011 via web

It also was to rebuild the union

Then what was the Freedmans Bureau
for then? It was for hel

ping the blacks

Stabilizing post war America
KK at 20:01 PM, 28 Sep 2011 via web

Just because the govt created something
to help blacks doesn't make it altruistic.
If blacks were educated and could vote,
they would vote r

Helping blacks get an education, labor,
land, etc... Helping them adjust

Epublican. It was to their political
advantage



By educating blacks, the northern
republicans would ge their vote

*get

Military intervention was fairly
successful in 1871-1872.
GH at 20:04 PM, 28 Sep 2011 via web

Sharecropping, black codes, KKK = "new
slavery"

How did they take action? Because the
kkk didn't follow the law anyways

Bingo, so recon. was a joke

They tried to circumvent the black
suffrage legislation

What do mean by that?

you*

KKK was the law, actually. Sheriffs,
judges, state and federal representatives.

It wasn't a joke, it just wasn't perfect
KK at 20:06 PM, 28 Sep 2011 via web

Recon. Wasn't a joke, it lacked a


collective effort but its ideas were strong

How did the KKK do that you mean?
They brutalized republican supporters
and boycotted black business

Was the law or was abiding by the law

Regardless if motives were influenced for
political reasons, the steps in achieving
equality still remain as crucial steps in he
Civil Right

They were by mo means abiding by it,
they were made up of people who
enforced the law.

*no

No, they were the law -- in positions of
authority, charged with enforcing law,
but more loyal to racism than laws.

Title the discussion.

Yes, but the Kkk was created in order to
prevent blacks from voting, which was a
right that had been given by the fifteenth
amendment.



Both parties wanted to eliminate
sucession though

Also to propogate white supremacy

Yep

The real goals of recon.

Well Reconstruction would be he ONLY
time possible to address the issue of
equality.

Recon confusion
Zd at 20:10 PM, 28 Sep 2011 via web

Purpose and effectiveness of
reconstruction

Goals and effectiveness of the federal
gov't

Missed opportunities -- indeed. Think of
the list of missed opportunities

A hostile president really inhibits
congress power
CMN at 20:13 PM, 28 Sep 2011 via web

Did they really have the support or



resources to reinforce the amendments?
LK at 20:14 PM, 28 Sep 2011 via web

Congress did not really care they were
anti slavery but not radical
AC at 20:14 PM, 28 Sep 2011 via web

Does this mean that reconstruction as a
whole was a failure?
SG! at 20:14 PM, 28 Sep 2011 via web

Depends on what you interpret the goals
are
OZ at 20:14 PM, 28 Sep 2011 via web

No hard to stop homegrown defacto
miltary groups

They certainly had the resources if they
mobilized the army
MH at 20:14 PM, 28 Sep 2011 via web

Just because congress had the power
doesn't mean that the government, all 3
branches, worked as a cohesive unit
sv at 20:15 PM, 28 Sep 2011 via web

Do you see ANY positives that came from
reconstruction?
PO at 20:15 PM, 28 Sep 2011 via web

Why do you believe they lost interest?

Superior force would not have
necessarily been effective



Does the disussion's emphasis on what
"congress" did rather than what "the gov"
did show that congress abused checks
and balances?
BH at 20:15 PM, 28 Sep 2011 via web

That is why Aryan war continues

Afghan*

Were radicals really a "majority"?

Were radicals really a "majority"?

I don't think that congress abused their
power until they tried to impeach
Johnson

one could say that having a powerless
president (in the face of congress) is a
failure of government and shows that
checks and balances did






1877 compromise demanded Feds to
reclaim soldiers from south and
relinquish support to republicans in
South






I agree, the system of checks and
balances, and working together as one
unit, kind of failed during recon

No, I would argue that they did an
excellent job of ensuring that the
President did not violate those
parameters.

I agree, the system of checks and
balances, and working together as one
unit, kind of failed during recon

having a president that was powerless in
the face of congress shows a failure of
checks and balances and thus a failure of
gvt

having a president that was powerless in
the face of congress shows a failure of
checks and balances and thus a failure of
gvt

Like a new confederacy almost

No, I would argue that they did an
excellent job of ensuring that the
President did not violate those



parameters.


sorry about the double posts

The 1877 bargain was corrupt -- trade
one of the most "forgettable presidency's
for Home Rule"

Was military occupation even
constitutional?

How could the KKK have been
suppressed by the federal government
without military intervention?

Idk south did secede

Is that why the "lack of progression" was
evident? Because of Hayes and Grant
"being tired"?

How likely was full military occupation
after 4 years of war?



Did they think that (heavy) military
occupation and strict enforcement was
'too much too soon' after the civil war?

Goal of recon- rebuild ties!
MSS at 20:21 PM, 28 Sep 2011 via web

A battered economy and populous would
stop them from seceding

What would the south have done if the
fed govnt went with full military
occupation? Would the south have
attempted to rebel again? Too weak?
Ar at 20:21 PM, 28 Sep 2011 via web

But wasn't lack of rights due to across the
board racism?

Too weak and devastated

The kkk were terrorists within our
country and therefore needed to be
supressed militarily
Jw at 20:21 PM, 28 Sep 2011 via web

Does allowing racist miltants to terrorize
black voter qualify as a good wat to stop
bashing the South?

South was totally devestated after CW
they didn't have the manpower



Did personal gain drive the tactics during
the Reconstruction?

How do you stop racism?

You cant
Ac at 20:22 PM, 28 Sep 2011 via web

the south would have been too weak to
fight and would have known they'd lose
again. and military occupation could
have been used under the

Also, during the recon era most of the
leaders of the equal protecting/abolition/
etc. Were dead or ou of politics. Maybe
that's why the eff

Can u stop it?

Can u stop it?

Civil rights act 1963

Title the discussion


Congress' State of Mind



excuse of a war act or helping reform a
broken nation


Can u stop it?

You can't stop racism, but you can stop
race riots

Civil rights act 1963

And without a strong cotton industry
their economy was too weak to sustain
war too

You can't stop racism, but you can stop
race riots

The Change of Constituent Desires


Also, during the recon era most of the
leaders of the equal protecting were
dead/ ou of politics Maybe that's why the
effort died out...



Transcript Reconstruction Discussion 9

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Featured

Featured (20)

Transcript Reconstruction Discussion 9