The Significance of Radical Thought and Attitudes in the Civil War Period

Folk who rebelled against the British colonial rule and held beliefs of republicanism; after the war, they were people who strongly supported the development of the new country

The French Revolution was a time of great social, political and economic tumult in the closing years of the Eighteenth Century. The motivators pushing French citizenry toward revolution are varied in scope and origin. They range from immediate economic woes to an antiquarian class structure. Modern historians still debate the value of the changes that the revolution brought to modern society. The middle class made gains that would never be rescinded, but do revolutions always end in tyranny? In the years before the revolution citizens were rigidly constrained by the estates of the realm. These social strata had been in place since the medieval ages. The people were divided into three groups; clergy, nobility and everyone else. The clergy

The rebellions that occurred during the reign of Edward VI were mainly of a religious origin- Asses the validity of this view.

Pollard)"crushing foreign policy failures" (Matusiak, 2005, p.32) striking in congruence with popular rebellions, occurring at a greater rate than had occurred in the whole rest of the Tudor era. Some of the most devastating (The Western Rebellion 1549, Ket's rebellion 1549 and Wyatt's Rebellion 1554) having been struck in Southern England; the centripetal seat of Tudor power. The impact of these incursions on the politico-administrative continuity of Tudor dominance was magnified by their concurrence with foreign war, escalating into the vacuum of localized administration exacerbated not only by ubiquitous famine and religious turmoil but also by the absence of a sufficiently strong magnate presence in several key counties. Despite this deficiency in localized administrative rule these factional conflicts, far from being the catalysts of a political crisis were indicative of the extent of dominance and stability of central authority; the effective suppression of civil rebellion illustrates that monarchical supremacy was sufficiently internally fortified against the "many-headed monster" (Matusiak, 2005, p. 35) of social insurrection directed at subverting

During that time, the populist movement in 1874-76 ‘Going to the people’ failed as villages as the peasants saw the middle class as outsiders, showing the vast gulf between the intelligentsia and the peasants. As a result, Populism became more radical, with the creation of the secret organisation of Land and Liberty in 1876, using terrorism and organising the assassinations of leading figures.

After the Civil War there were many factors that contributed the changes that occurred in farming in America. Among them was the drive for the South to renew and regain what had been lost due to the war. Leaders saw it as a time to diversify and turn towards industrialization. The Industrial revolution was underway and with it brought many new inventions that would lead to growth in the farming industry. The wide open space between the East and the West called “The Frontier” was open for homesteading. New immigrants with their farming knowledge and ability were flooding the East and West gates of the U.S. This was a time in American history when Americans

The eighteenth century revolutions predate the Marxist framework which would ultimately changed the way in which revolutions are understood; as highly participatory mass-moments which sought to change some kind of social order. Gordon Wood acknowledges this as he states; “The social distinctions and economic deprivations that we today think of as the consequences of class divisions…were in the eighteenth century usually thought to be caused by abuses in government.” Skocpol also acknowledges the difference between modern and what the “liberal revolutions” of the eighteenth century. She writes that all revolutions that occur within the modern capitalist systems accomplish nothing but a more concentrated and centralized state bureaucracy. However Skocpol’s analysis takes a retrospective structuralist approach to understanding these eighteenth century social revolutions. Her analysis does not rely on the deprivation hypothesis nor any kind of ideology, but instead highlights the importance of the “revolutionary moment” where elites and peasants unite (through an “equal powers” negotiation) against the state (Stevens 10/16/17). By applying Skocpol’s model to the French, Haitian, and American Revolutions, we can see how well it holds up when applied to these various intertwined 18th century revolutions despite their drastically different outcomes.

Nearly all of the reasons for agrarian discontent in the late 19th century stem from three areas: land, transportation, and money. The farmers were fighting the perceived threats posed by monopolies and trusts, railroads, and the demonetization of silver. The American farmer during this period already had his fair share of problems which, compared to the success of the industrialized businessmen, resulted in much of the animosity between the two groups. The fact of the matter was farmers had entered a viscous cycle. Wheat and cotton, once the staples of American agriculture were selling at such low prices that it was almost impossible

After the Civil War, many ideologies developed into the United States of America. Some of these ideologies included the free labor ideology and the producerist ideology. Free labor endorsed the belief that by removing slavery, or any other kind of barrier, everyone had an equal chance to try to get wealth (Farless). The producerist ideology tried to stay to the customary view of society and it stressed the importance of viewing the community instead of an individual (Farless). With these two ideologies, they had an impact on labor. By believing in the producerist ideology, people would be staying with tradition, and that leaves no change for our world. Many laborers wanted change, which led to problems for the laborers.

Despite the vast amount of land available for agriculture, industry was created regardless, in order to become more independent from Europe. Machinery was developed that would eliminate the need for actually laborers, but at the same time this machinery needed laborers to work it6. Thus the Proletariat formed. This class was negatively viewed by the Federalists as they believed that any one who was dependent upon others was not virtuous and thus not a proper citizen. The condition of the proletariat class was also poor, and the Federalists believed that the poor were more prone to indecent behavior and unpredictability7. Kerber quotes Federalist Philip Barton Key, who stated that men and boys in workshops were not expected to have the same stable constitution as those who were in charge of their own salaries and independent in their lives8. What is meant is that those who are rich and assured of their social and economic standing are not going to rebel. They have influence in what matters to them politically, unlike those who are poor, who would have more reason to start an uprising.

The fastest growing country in the world, during the reform era from 1820 to 1860, was the United States. Technology and the innovations provided from it brought a dream of prosperity for all races and creeds. As the northern middle class grew, so did the reform movement. This growth in the middle class and growth of immigrants coming into America caused some individuals to change their outlook of schools, slavery, and women’s rights. Though great strides were started in this time period, it was met with a lot of hostility and resentment. It was an uphill journey when it came to the institutional changes necessary to cause reform.

The Industrial era, starting after the Civil War and ending at the end of the 19th century, was a significant time in American history. To determine the discontent of farmers, all aspects of the Industrial era must be analyzed. Socially, the farmers represented the widening of the classes taking place at the time. Economically, they were the embodiment of the struggling lower and middle class. Politically, the farmers discontent did not go unnoticed as the two party system was disrupted by a surging new third party, the populists. The farmers discontent affected many parts of the American society at the time, and had a major effect on politics.

Over the past seven centuries, there has been a change of power triggering the change in values, culture and politics. These changes benefited some people while it isolated, alienated others. This feeling of alienation sparked the flame to various rebellions. In this essay, I am going to argue how alienation, caused by shifts in value, culture and political, caused specific rebellions during the colonial era, the antebellum era, post antebellum and the civil rights movement.

England, France, Russia, America, and countries all across the world have housed many different rebellions in the form of riots, strikes, massacres, protests, and debates. It has been stated that there are two constants to a revolution: they begin moderate then turn radical, and no one is more conservative than a successful revolutionary. The French Revolution is the perfect archetype of this. What began as a want for a constitutional monarchy due to economic and political issues, soon turned to a ruthless massacre of nobility at the guillotine with the rise of Jacobins. With the dawning of Enlightenment, came criticisms of absolute monarchy. Along with this, the strain of finance after the American revolution led to issues of taxation and contributed to the mistreatment of the poor (ABC-CLIO). However, not all rebellions involve the shedding of blood. In England, the industrial revolution was one without bloodshed. The industrial revolution fought for new innovations to better many people’s lives. In a way, it rebelled against the old ways in order to

As the Civil War ended, conflict, that was much less violent, arose. The matter of putting the country back together laid heavily upon the shoulders of the government. Questions of rights to power emanated. Discrimination grew steadily more powerful. This period of time was not as radical as events such as the Revolutionary War that began the country, but the many parallels to it brought it awfully close. Through questioning of the central and state government power levels, heavy constitutional observation and interpretation, and morality based decision making, it is fair to call the period between 1860 and 1877 nothing short of revolutionary.