What Are The Causes Of Reconstruction
Kenneth M. Stampp and Eric Foner both agree to disagree on the outcomes, purposes and causes of reconstruction. Kenneth Stampp, in the article, “The Era of Reconstruction 1865- 1877,” explains how the radical effort to establish and protect Negro civil and political rights had failed but also that in the “long run” it didn’t, therefore agreeing that the reconstruction was a success. He explains how the emancipation of the blacks was more than just a gesture and that getting the 14th and 15th amendment in the federal constitution was a pivotal outcome which was needed if blacks were to truly achieve freedom.
Eric Foner, however, contradicts Stampp’s argument by pointing out that blacks were oppressed no matter how much the information is sugarcoated.
He proceeds to explain in his own article, “The river has its bend” that the freedmen had absolutely no economic opportunities in the South. Despite having the 14th and 15th amendment, they had no say in politics and were denied of federal protection as well as Civil and Political rights. He explains in detail that talks about the failure of reconstruction promoted the idea of racism even more and that although the situation seemed better for the blacks, it was just another way of enslaving them. Both Stampp and Foner make excellent points but I lean towards Stampp’s argument more. I agree with Foner when he says that the blacks were still tyrannized after reconstruction, but it also restored the United States as a nation by settling the battle between States rights and federal rights that had been going for quite some time. All the states had been drafted a new constitution which included the 13th, 14th and 15th amendment which gave blacks their rights, even if it was only on paper for quite some time and although it might not have seemed like a big change, I believe that if the new constitution hadn’t been drafted when it was, the present would be overwhelmingly different.
Eric Foner, however, contradicts Stampp’s argument by pointing out that blacks were oppressed no matter how much the information is sugarcoated.
He proceeds to explain in his own article, “The river has its bend” that the freedmen had absolutely no economic opportunities in the South. Despite having the 14th and 15th amendment, they had no say in politics and were denied of federal protection as well as Civil and Political rights. He explains in detail that talks about the failure of reconstruction promoted the idea of racism even more and that although the situation seemed better for the blacks, it was just another way of enslaving them. Both Stampp and Foner make excellent points but I lean towards Stampp’s argument more. I agree with Foner when he says that the blacks were still tyrannized after reconstruction, but it also restored the United States as a nation by settling the battle between States rights and federal rights that had been going for quite some time. All the states had been drafted a new constitution which included the 13th, 14th and 15th amendment which gave blacks their rights, even if it was only on paper for quite some time and although it might not have seemed like a big change, I believe that if the new constitution hadn’t been drafted when it was, the present would be overwhelmingly different.