English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

what could have been done to make it successful?
Did the South really win, in the long run?

2007-03-26 08:02:50 · 1 answers · asked by Michael A 2 in Arts & Humanities History

1 answers

Reconstruction immediately after the Civil War had as its goal the remolding of the old South. There were many problems but chief among them was that the slaves had to be not only freed but allowed to survive. It is not enough to have people be free if they don't have jobs, food, and places to live.

During the period of Reconstruction it appeared that the freedmen were going to get their "40 acres and a mule" but as so often happen, good intentions were not met by reality. Legally the Federal government could not take land away from plantation owners without due compensation, they had to pay them for it. On the other hand, where were the freedmen to go if not to their own land? Granted, those who found land and housing, jobs and affluence, often also found leadership positions. Many black ministers who were literate and who understood the basics of politics were elected to office.

However, The real test was to come after the period of Reconstrction ended, roughly 1877. Were the changes made in the lifestyles of the freedmen going to be permanent? The answer is clearly 'no'. Once Reconstruction ended all of the best intentions ended with it. Freedmen generally ended up back on their former plantations of near-by plantations but now working under a system called 'sharecropping.' This system provided them with a house and land to farm and they would 'share' their crops with the owner of the land, the former plantation owner. In some ways this was little different than slavery and in some cases it could be worse because there were so few legal protections of the sharecroppers and lynchings were all too common.

2007-03-26 08:49:12 · answer #1 · answered by John B 7 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers