The And Its Effects On America 's Reconstruction

In hindsight it is sometimes claimed that Reconstruction was a failure. Although there was some good that came out of the Reconstruction it was mostly just a relentless uphill battle against Southerners and immoral politicians that were here to delay change and keep racism alive. Reconstruction brought the Ku Klux Klan who displayed great resistance, and poverty that swept the South once the blacks were freed. The freedom of these black slaves led to discriminatory legislatures such as the Black Codes and the Jim Crow laws to keep the blacks constrained from actually being free. The South was then encountered with corruption and high property taxes, as a rebuild was in order to reestablish the war torn part of the nation.

1. The war in 1862 was only more than a year old and the people in both the Union and Confederate sides didn’t anticipate it would last that long, but it is going to go on. Close to the end of the summer in this same year, the Union has made huge progress in claiming confederate lands, winning some major battles. They have put the confederacy in the defensive. They have taken over New Orleans, with even black troops major on the ground of New Orleans. They have taken Missouri and are working hard to take over the Mississippi Valley and maybe even Richmond itself. Bruce Catton puts it this way in The Civil War, “Except for guerrilla activity, Kentucky and Missouri has been swept clear of armed confederates, Western Tennessee had been reclaimed, there was a Yankee army in Cumberland Gap, another one was approaching chattanooga, and a third was sprawled out from Memphis to Corinth, preparing to splice down through Mississippi and touch hands with the Union occupation forces in Baton Rouge and New Orleans” (85) So not only that they Union had taken over regions, they are advancing as well, but they did not win the way this year for some reason. Firstly, because they did not have generals and army heads capable of taking them to victory. General Halleck, chief of the Union Armies and Pope in charge of one of the Union armies in Virginia, were major examples of this.

Historians are right to call Reconstruction one of the “darkest” times in American history. Nobody was sure of anything. After the Union victory over the Confederacy, politicians were tasked with trying to mend a nation divided down the middle. It was a time of many questions (Independence Hall Association in Philadelphia, 2008).

why was did the destruction of the reconstruction happen and who's fault was it north or the south. The process of rebuilding the south after the civil war. The reconstruction happened after the civil war and after the slaves were freed they were trying to rebuild the south and almost everyone wanted that except the KKK and the south gave up on them because of their resistance. Who from the nation destroyed the process of reconstruction. The south resistance destroyed reconstruction of the United States by the resistance from the KKK and the north's neglect of the south's problems.

The Reconstruction effort that occurred after the Civil War from 1865 - 1866 had both positive and negative effects on the nation. Leading up to the Reconstruction attempt, there was developing regional differences between the North and South. Slavery was the issue of the decade. North argued that it was inhumane, while the South was quick to point out that many Northerners benefited from slavery. The Presidential election of Lincoln lead to the succession of the South. They believed that the United States was becoming too tyrannical, much like Great Britain before the Revolutionary War. The Southern attack on Fort Sumter started the long and bloody civil war. After the Battle of Antietam, President Lincoln issued his Emancipation

Over the course of America’s existence, it has acquired many successes and failures. Over time there have been a large number of accomplishments that have made the world a greater good, but there have also been phases of turmoil and tragedy. The Reconstruction period after the Civil War is a prime example of a complete failure. The Reconstruction period consisted of many goals and ideas that Americans planned to achieve in their country after being torn apart from the Civil War. One of the main objectives was to rejoin all of the states to the union to help rebuild the South and help African Americans come back into society. It soon came to an end and was a complete failure since Southerners would not abide by the laws of rights to former slaves and the introduction of segregation soon began.

Reconstruction is a time period after the Civil War ended in 1877. We view it as something that resembles a transformation, shifts in the southern U.S. after the Civil War. This was when slavery inequality, some political, economic, and social issues were, in some ways, balanced. The categories of issues that arose throughout this “restoration” were aspects such as involving the Confederacy into the Union, abolishing along with figuring out what to do with our free blacks, and addressing conflict between the Confederate leaders and a group of people, which we characterize as “the North.” During reconstruction, there was a challenging goal of incorporating former slaves into our nation as free citizens like everyone else. It looks like this “era” attempted to take out the unfairness of slavery; however, it was successful to a degree. Reconstruction, itself, was successful in fulfilling its goal to a degree because the Freedmen’s Bureau attempted to help former slaves with simple things such as housing, although it “lost its touch” due to deficiency of needed funds along with personnel, and trouble dealing with pressure that was advancing from the so-called white southerners.

The Reconstruction time period definitely left behind a legacy. Some of the effects from that time period still affect us today. Some effects are terrorist groups, the 13th, 14th, and 15th amendments were passed, and the south become industrious.

In the Reconstruction Era, great strides were made towards giving the freed slaves the same freedoms as a white man. Reforms allowed the freedmen to enjoy economic independence, public education, the right to vote and even the ability to hold public office. It seemed that blacks were well on their way toward equality and escape from their former “inferior” status. This changed with the violent rise of the Democratic Party to control every state in the South. They fashioned themselves as “Redeemers”; their platform was white supremacy and subjugation of the black race (Foner 652).

In Peter Singer’s 1972 article titled “Famine, Affluence and Morality”, he suggests that wealthy nations have an ethical duty to contribute much more than they do to other nations who are suffering through a natural disaster, extreme poverty, famine or other issues. In this paper, I will describe Singers objective and give his argument with regards to this issue. I will describe three counter-arguments to Singer’s view which he addresses, and after that reveal Singer’s reactions to those counterarguments. I will explain Singer’s idea of marginal utility and also differentiate how it pertains to his argument. I will compare how the ideas of duty and charity alter in his suggested world. To conclude, I

“A thing that has been rebuilt after being damaged or destroyed” “Comparison between the original and the reconstruction” Reconstruction, a huge event in American history that tipped the nation almost to its wits end. The problems of Reconstruction ranged from gang violence to segregation and gender inequality to radicals. At this point in America’s history the nation was a little more stable than a house of cards, the government trying to keep the nation together, compromise after compromise trying to be crafted, balance trying to be found at every corner but with more issues arising with every try. There were two initial plans for reconstruction:

Reconstruction is a time period in U.S history, the era (1865-1877) that followed the American Civil War. The intent was to rebuild the infrastructure in the former Confederacy and reintegrate the South into the Union. During the Reconstruction era, The U.S government faced many social, political and constitutional problems. First, the most significant outcomes of this period which addressed the issue about the access to citizenship and voting rights were the three constitutional amendments, including the 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments that freed slaves and guaranteed the vote to all men regardless of race. Secondly, in 1865, Congress established the Freedmen’s Bureau to provide assistance to former slaves and poor white in the South. It provided

In this paper I will defend John Arthur’s argument of entitlement and desert against Peter Singer’s theory of our duty to the global poor. We as privileged citizens, living in a prosperous country, do have some responsibility to help the tens of thousands of children under the age of 5 who die everyday from starvation and treatable disease. It seems natural that we as citizens of a first world country have a duty to help the global poor through charity. However that “duty” is vague and is under heavy moral debate. We as privileged citizens, living in a prosperous country, do have some responsibility to help the global poor. However, this rightful duty should not necessarily live up to the extreme and overwhelming expectations of Peter Singer. John Arthur’s argument of entitlement and desert is more realistic, logical, and more applicable to the world we live in today.

Thus, the problem rests in the selfishness of affluent nations who do not distribute their grain to poor nations. By evenly distributing food, human suffering caused by absolute poverty could cease to exist. However, while both utilitarians promote selflessness as beneficial, they do so from different angles. Singer does not advocate unselfishness to increase our happiness, but because it is morally right. While Mill labels selfishness as the root of unhappiness in humans, Singer states instead that absolute poverty is “the principal cause of human misery” (Singer 220). Thus, Mill encourages unselfishness to end the suffering of the one who gives while Singer encourages it to end the suffering of the one who receives.

and in reality it was a demonstration of the failure to make a dependable political