Any way to make Reconstruction more successful and have African-Americans stay as a voting base in the South? What kind of impact would this have on America? Would race relations in America be healthier today?
Last edited:
Some on our site have argued that the North got what it wanted by preserving the Union, and because of war weariness, wasn't going to do much more than it did.. . . and have African-Americans stay as a voting base in the South? . . .
Some on our site have argued that the North got what it wanted by preserving the Union, and because of war weariness, wasn't going to do much more than it did.
I've been thinking about the reconstruction lately for my own TL over in ASB, thinking about this very issue. I'm wondering if the north had implemented a 19th century version of the Marshall Plan (that was used to rebuild Europe after WW2) how much different things would have been.
After reading several threads about reconstruction, I've become convinced that we learn poorly from history, even on a forum dedicated to history, albeit, alternative in nature. There are those who seem to think a harsher more violent reconstruction against Southerners somehow would bring about a better world today. If this thinking were true, then World War II would never have happened. It would not surprise me to learn that Georges Clemenceau, Prime Minister of France during and after world war I saw the economic devastation and punitive taxation policy practiced against the south and thought something similar could work in punishing Germany for losing WW1. We saw how well that worked out.
A truly reformative Reconstruction would have required a federal government willing to give the poor sharecropper and tenant farmer a better alternative than that which existed following the Civil War, which would have required more banking options than that which was allowed by the Republicans during reconstruction. It would have required a federal government that would have propped up public schools, using federal dollars to decide the curriculum for a couple of generations. It would have required a federal government that would have invested in infrastructure, rebuilding the railroads/canals/ports, creating capital that wouldn't flee north with each quarterly report. In other words a reconstruction that would be better is one that would have creating a rising tide to lift all boats, while educating the children of the South into new ways of thinking about the American Union.
Again, may not even require that much money if we could get the quasi-monopolies off the back of farmers. May a Reconstruction government in the South first tries to regulate railroads, and then just eminent domains one of the worse offenders. The other railroads may see the light. Yes, a military government can do things a civilian government can't.. . . I'm wondering if the north had implemented a 19th century version of the Marshall Plan . . .
Therein lies the rub. But the question posed by the OP was what could have been done/done better. Realistically much of what I listed would never have happened.Why would the government do any of these things alot of these ideas seem like hindsight to me. How do they identify these problems and do they even care enough to deal with them.
I'm all in favor of Lincoln living and breaking up the big estates and giving a better deal to both sharecropping whites and newly freed slaves, but . . .Lincoln isn't shot, planters' estates are broken up and redistributed to poor whites and the freedmen, . . .
This is assuming Lincoln doesn't change his stance once it becomes clear that the South has no intentions to actually afford freedmen their rights as guaranteed by the Constitution. You might recall Lincoln was big on protecting/preserving that. Lincoln will push for as liberal a plan as he think can succeed. That is my read.I'm all in favor of Lincoln living and breaking up the big estates and giving a better deal to both sharecropping whites and newly freed slaves, but . . .
With his ridiculous "Ten Percent Plan," I'm not sure Lincoln would have pulled it off. Yes, really, please look it up.
When 10% of the residents of a state took a pledge of loyalty to the Union, that state presumably got full voting rights in Congress ? ! It had to be one of the most all time generous offers to rebels.
Maybe Lincoln had in mind some complicated good cop-bad cop approach where if there was breaking of the rules such as election time intimidation, that state wouldn't get full representation after all. But assuming this intent on Lincoln's part seems like a real stretch.
Also, how does this effect politics? Republicans would surely be stronger in the South, but what kind of gains would Democrats make in the North, if any?
This is assuming Lincoln doesn't change his stance once it becomes clear that the South has no intentions to actually afford freedmen their rights as guaranteed by the Constitution.
Well, the idea of the Lost Cause goes out the window then, as there is nothing to romanticize except among hardline racists(even for their time) like Lane, the guy in Oregon(the state that banned black people) who illegally had slaves AFTER the War in OTL.How about a more violent end to the Civil War? Instead of Jefferson Davis discouraging guerrilla warfare- he, and the rest of Southern Leadership, plan for it- with the end result being Davis' former cabinet, Confederate Generals, Senators, and Congressmen leading violent and damaging insurrection cells through the South, until finally the Southern Populace grows so weary of the violence they stop supporting them, embrace Northern intervention, activity pursue any remaining Confederate cells, and breathe a sigh of relief when the Federal Government announces Reconstruction to rebuild the entirely shattered, starvation stricken, South?
Lincoln might even be planning a pissed off response the public can easily understand --This is assuming Lincoln doesn't change his stance once it becomes clear that the South has no intentions to actually afford freedmen their rights as guaranteed by the Constitution. You might recall Lincoln was big on protecting/preserving that. Lincoln will push for as liberal a plan as he think can succeed. That is my read.
The Black Codes (especially "Apprenticeship") laws came pretty damn close to trying to reimpose slavery.What rights were those?
At the time of Lincoln's death, the only right they had was not to be slaves - and even that wasn't true everywhere until the 13th Amendment was ratified in Dec 1865. .
Lincoln might even be planning a pissed off response the public can easily understand --
We give you this good a deal, and this is how you pay us back?