WI Reconstruction Succeeded?

Actually there were repeated incidents of violence against blacks and republican officials who some racist groups felt were not 'their' officials because part of their electorate was newly freed black men. Murder, riots, lynchings, burning down buildings were common in this period. If it had been done today the entire south would have been an militarized occupied zone. You guys really should read up on the Reconstruction. The KKK started out as a social club for ex Confederate soldiers. Get it? They were the same people. Getting what they couldn't get by military force by terrorism against a civilian population. And no the freedman weren't obligated to arm themselves to the teeth and kill any white man who disses them. That's what civilization is supposed to be about. Unfortunately the federal government failed to act. The OP wanted to know what it would take for the Reconstruction to have succeeded. Given the behavior of the south it would have had to have been pretty drastic as I said.
 
Actually there were repeated incidents of violence against blacks and republican officials who some racist groups felt were not 'their' officials because part of their electorate was newly freed black men. Murder, riots, lynchings, burning down buildings were common in this period. If it had been done today the entire south would have been an militarized occupied zone. You guys really should read up on the Reconstruction. The KKK started out as a social club for ex Confederate soldiers. Get it? They were the same people. Getting what they couldn't get by military force by terrorism against a civilian population. And no the freedman weren't obligated to arm themselves to the teeth and kill any white man who disses them. That's what civilization is supposed to be about. Unfortunately the federal government failed to act. The OP wanted to know what it would take for the Reconstruction to have succeeded. Given the behavior of the south it would have had to have been pretty drastic as I said.

And given that the North had achieved everything it really wanted, and would retain the fruits of its victory for generations even after the "failure" of Reconstruction, there was simply no incentive to make the effort that protecting Black rights would have required.
 
It's not "just" protecting the rights of the freedmen though, it's defining the very character, economic and political, of the South for generations to come; industry and railroads to build and protect, schools to socialize a new generation (of whites as well as blacks), Republican legislators to get elected, etc.
 
It's not "just" protecting the rights of the freedmen though, it's defining the very character, economic and political, of the South for generations to come; industry and railroads to build and protect, schools to socialize a new generation (of whites as well as blacks), Republican legislators to get elected, etc.

None of which was of the slightest interest to Northern pols except the last. And even that was of doubtful value as Northern voters got increasingly fed up with "the annual autumnal outbreaks in the South". Holding on to, say, SC, MS and LA was of no value if it resulted in the loss of Ohio, which had more electoral votes than all of them put together.
 

raharris1973

Gone Fishin'
Donor
Monthly Donor
And given that the North had achieved everything it really wanted, and would retain the fruits of its victory for generations even after the "failure" of Reconstruction, there was simply no incentive to make the effort that protecting Black rights would have required.


Only thing that might have provided that motivation for racial revolution, would have been if reconstruction failed, as in, the southern states tried later armed secession attempts just for funzies.
 
How does that lead to a more racially progressive outcome than OTL? Backlash to Johnson led to the most Radical Reconstruction measures and the amendments later used, lapsed and then used again for civil rights.
And Johnson himself emboldened resistance to Reconstruction and even the mildest of civil rights; when the President of the US is voicing support for domestic terrorism, you're going to see more domestic terrorism. (And great, now typing that last bit in our current context has made me sad :()
 
How does that lead to a more racially progressive outcome than OTL? Backlash to Johnson led to the most Radical Reconstruction measures and the amendments later used, lapsed and then used again for civil rights.
Given that the white population on the south was determined to push the freedmen back into virtual slavery it would have taken a generation to do it allowing time for the older generation to die off. And in that time either the feds or the blacks themselves would have had to protect themselves against the majority white population. Since the Black Codes made it difficult for poor blacks to purchase or afford the weapons they needed for self protection that left the feds. They made the same mistake the Cherokees made, thinking the 'great white father' in Washington would protect them if they lived civilized law abiding lives. Forget about progressive holding hands kum bye ya. Fundamentally this was about power. Who had it and who wanted it.
 
Top