Stevens believed that Reconstruction was a golden opportunity to purge the nation of the legacy of slavery. He said it would and create a "perfect republic," whose citizens enjoyed equal civil and political rights. The Fourteenth Amendment did not fully satisfy the Radical Republicans though.The Fourteenth Amendment was the most important constitutional change in the nation’s history since the Bill of Rights.It did not abolish existing state governments in the South and made no mention of the right to vote for blacks.
The hole reconstruction point was to create the perfect republic. Slavery was to be abolished. The south wanted slavery to be gone. The 14th amendment did not fully satisfy the radical republicans although it did satisfy the north.
Eric Foner was trying to point out the fact that Stevens believed in equal justices for blacks. As the reconstruction was happening, many amendments were included to not have unequal injustice between whites and blacks, but it happened anyway, as the South rejected the 14th and 15th amendment by passing racial laws to re-enact slavery all over again. But over time the republic started to go back and have the meaning of the 14th and 15th amendment interpreted again for equal rights. My opinion in this, is that how can women go through the similar process and in the end still get unequal rights as well, but for blacks at this time get the support of more people and get their rights. That just doesn't make any sense to me. I mean it's great that the blacks got their sufferage, but they got it before women did. And the way that the South ignored the changes, show that they didn't learn anything from the civil war at all.
Stevens believed that the Reconstruction would create the "perfect republic". He wanted everyone to have equal rights. It didn't turn out this way because blacks were not able to vote. Also, women weren't given the same rights as black men. I think that the black people should have gotten their rights before the women because whatever the white men could do, the black men should have been able to do it also.
Eric Foner's point is that Stevens, like other Radical Republicans, thought that Reconstruction was the oppertunity to create the "perfect republic," but they were not satisfied with the 14th amendment, even though it was the most important of the three things to altered the consistution (the others being the 13th and 15th amendments). I think its interesting that after Congress created the 14th and 15th amendment to try and help the people have equal rights, the South just ignored these amendments, and made their own racial system.
yeah, it was ok, umm, He believes that reconstruction was a waste of time seeing as it provided nothing. I must say i agree since MLK had to fight for the same issues in the 1960's
Stevens believed that Rconstruction was a big deal durung this time period. He believed that blacks should have equal justice and equal justice as everyone else. Reconstruction was the whole idea to abolish slavery. The South wanted slavery gone but the North had something else in mind. The 14 admendment was made to try to satisfy both the North and the South, but this did not happen.
Eric Foner was clearly on the blacks' side. He believed that even though new amendments were made they were not fair to the blacks. In my opinion the only reason they made those amendment was because they thought they would "please" the people. But the blacks knew what was going on. They know that no one wanted them to have rights.
Eric Foner described Reconstruction as a major step towards giving the freed blacks equality and forming a stronger republic for the U.S. His point was to emphasize the views of the Radical Republicans, such as Stevens. The Radical Republicans and Foner saw Reconstruction as a waste of time.
I think that the Reconstruction Amendments greatly helped to give blacks rights, political and civil. They did not provide blacks completely equal rights since civil rights are still an issue today. Nevertheless, The Reconstruction Amendments ratified the Constitution which would change the federal laws of the U.S., a big step to equal rights.
Foners point was to show to what extent the Civil War had changed the future of the United States. With the three amendements being past at this time it showed how the Americans were willing to change only up to a certain point stopping at given slaves civil rights. He shows how these "dry documents" have had a life lasting affect on our culture. Because of these documents we, as americans, enjoy more rights and freedoms. I think that reconstruction seen in the eyes of the Americans today was a great thing. It eventually got rid of slavery, which was the main point. I mean seriously what would America be like with slaves like they had back then. Also i enjoy my freedoms very much and wouldn't want to have it any other way. They only thing i don't understand was why Native Americans weren't considered citizens, why didn't they have birth rights?? just a question.
Steven thought that Reconstrustion was the key to success. He wanted to create the "perfect republic" which would include equal rights for all and to get rid of slavery. I think that focusing on the equal rights for blacks was most important. If we gave equal rights to the women first that would have just gave more WHITE women, and the white people more power and make the black people evern more inferior to them.
I think that Eric Foner was on the side of the blacks, and by making those new laws didn't really change the ways that blacks were treated and still made it bad for them because it made more whites get even angrier at them. He thought that even though they said they were making the new amendments to give the blacks equal rights, they really didn't even make them equal to the whites because they ended up segregating them anyway.
The point that Foner was trying to establish was that the period of Reconstruction was a great opportunity for the Radiacl Republicans to give the African Americans rights. He saw this opportunity to bring and create the perfect republic, where everyone was equal. He contributed to the effort to pass the 14th Ammendment, even though his party and him were not fully satisfied with it.
I think that Stevens was very succesful in his fight for equal rights because even though it wasnt very obvious back then, the fact that he helped pass some of the ammendments to give people more rights is very evident today in society.
Besides from talking about the political issues during the Reconstruction Era, the point that Eric Foner wanted to make in his essay was that during one of the most critical event in American history, the Reconstruction Era, American society went through immense changes, and these changes can be seen and reflected through the amendments that were constituted during this era. These amendments included the 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendment. Although these amendments were passed during the era of Reconstruction to give rights to African-Americans who had recently gained their freedom, these rights were taken away from them. The South never took these amendments seriously, and the Supreme Court, dominated by southern conservatives, even reinterpreted the Fourteenth Amendment to take away the promise of equal citizenship. Foner points out that the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments were blatantly violated with the submission of the entire nation not to do anything about these violations until the 1850s. I think that Eric Foner wanted to point out that even today, interpretation of the Constitution is still widely debated, and we should appreciate the Constitution for the rights that it preserve us. I think that as Americans, we take for granted the rights that we have, and by learning about the history of why these amendments came about can make use more aware and appreciative of the Constitution.
Eric Foner wanted to encourage the idea of blacks having the same right. Like Steven he believed that the Recontruction didnt help step towards ending black inequality. His views were like many Radical Republicans.
I think Reconstruction was good in a way. It may not have completly given blacks all the rights they need but it ratified some political and civil rights. It also believed that the state government should have been abolished. To come as a national government they had to agreed as one.
In Foner’s article, his point is that the amendments such as the 13th, 14th, and 15th is widely interpreted in many different ways during reconstruction era.. Foner pointed out that radical Republicans such as Stevens believe that reconstruction was a perfect time to create a country of equality. Although the 14th amendment was pass to help the slaves, the south ignored it. The Supreme Court interpreted the 14th amendment in a different way. The south put forward a new radical system on blacks. I think that although the reconstruction era was perfect, it took a big step toward civil rights and equality for everyone. I think that people will always have a different interpretation of the amendment and there will always be something that to fix upon. I believed that although the constitution is not perfect, it has done a lot of good things for everyone.
politThaddeus Stevens, the racical Republican, believed that Reconstruction was the prefect period in creating a purify country. He saw it as a time where the "perfect republic" can rise and all citizens within the nation will have equal rights.
It seems to me that the racical Republicans are power hungry. I'm sure they, (the racical Rep.), won't be able to create the "perfect republic" because of the Democrats in the South. Why do the racicals even have democratic views? Equal rights; they forgot about the women.
Thaddeus Stevens was an advocate for civil rights. With his help, the Fourteenth Amendment was approved in the House. Though the amendment didn't allow blacks to vote, it said that all men born or naturalized in the United States was a citzen. That was a big step in civil rights. The Fifthteenth Amendment was later passed which alllowed black men to vote. These two amendments changed America forever. Stevens who help cause this changed will always be known as one the greatest civil rights activist ever.
Stevens basically saw the Reconstruction as a good thing because it was a time for the blacks to get what they truly deserve, a spot in the government. He thought that by reconstructing, the nation was going to create, in a sense, a perfect republic.
It seems to me that all the radicals of the north had the right idea about giving blacks more power but on many levels it seemed as if they only wanted the power themselves. It's like the dunning article we read in class when there was the line that read that the northerners were trying to go after the benefits of the reconstruction. The more black people they had on their side the more power they could have. The northern whites where in a situation where they either join with the south or find some kind of group to latch onto and in this case it was the free black population of the United States. I mean I'm sure a good chunk of radicals were really in it for the cause of racial equality but there's always going to be corruption somewhere, right?
Stevens was trying to prove that all men are thet same regaurdless of your color. Even though stevens did a good thing in pushing the fourth amendment there were areas and thinigs that he did not cover. IF the blacks were not able to vote were they really free? I think that it was great that we have these consitutions and amendments but do they really mean anything if people are still beong treated unfairly and there rights constantly abused.
Foner advocated that the 14th amendment was a good contribution to the constitution that allowed other effects to occur eventhough it didn't solve what it was suppose to.I believe that it could have contributed some influences in the rights of people now.
Ohe point of this article is to show how the freedmen gained more right over time during the reconstruction period. The 13th, 14th, and 15th amendments were established to faciliate black rights. Then the reconstruction act of 1867 was passed which gave blacks the vote. Another point of this article is that it points out that women still didn't have equal rights. This article shows how America passed amendments and acts in order to try to better and construct a unified republic. However, even though steps were being taken to try to take care of current issues, more issues such as women's rights were in the rise.
I think that it was good that this article brought up women's rights as well because even though it was not the main issue being debated at the time, it was soon going to have to be delt with.
i think steven accomplished alot in that little period of time, even thou these accomplishments did not last for that long but the 14th amendment helped African Americans get their rights later on.
In this article is seems as if Thaddus Stevens was a profound leader of the reconstruction period. He believe that everyone should have equally rights, no matter race, education, or economic status. Stevens wanted to change society in to the " Perfect Republic". In my opinion Stevens made a enormous revolutionary change during his time, even though women didn't have the right to vote when the 14th amendment was passed with his help.
Reconstruction in the U.S was supposed to be something like the Reinesance in Europe. Things were supposed to change for the better and all people were supposed to be considered Equal. The 14th amendment was added to aid this dream in becoming reality,but it didn't exactly please every one because although the main purpose of this amendment was to ratify civil rights, this amendment neither mentioned blacks and womens right to vote or abolished existing state governments in the south. I think the whole idea of reconstruction was easier said then done.
Recostruction was supposed to help abolish slavery and create a "perfect republic." It seems like things were expected to change once reconstruction started,but didn't. It took longer than hoped.People had different opinions about slavery.
Eric Foner says that Stevens says that he had an intention of creating a "perfect republic" which didn't happen. It was a start and he had good intentions, but too bad it didn't work. The Fourteenth Amendment helped by enforcing the Thirteenth Amendment but it didn't mention anything about blacks voting. I think that since he wanted equal rights for everyone that, that should have included women as well. At this time there was no satisfying everyone? No matter which way you look at it at least one group wasn't going to be happy. And I think Steven's was trying to do his best to come to a reasonable compromise for everyone.
Eric Foner's main point of this article was that Steven's main idea was to create a "Perfect Republic" where everyone was equal, kind of like a utopian world, which didn't happen. He wanted civil rights and equal rights for all blacks. I think that it of course was a good idea but that it didn't work because we are still struggling to this day with equal rights.
In the article "Reconstruction" Eric Foner points out the thing that T. Stevens did for the African American slaves. He talks about the idea of a "perfect republic" where people are equals and seen as such. This still isn't the case ntil this day and time, so obviously his expectations were a little far-fetch. He addresses the 14th amendment as a improtant thing. I guess because of what it leads up to. But it doesn't seem as important to me because of how he even says it left out blacks rights and it left them vulnerable to the ideals of the black codes. F
In this document Steven showed that he supported Reconstruction and was for civil rights. Stevens wanted blacks to have equal rights and because of this he did all he can to have the amendment passed. He also expressed that he would like a "perfect republic." During the time of reconstruction, they set up different amendments that would give the freedmen rights. These amendments were changed so it can limit the power of the freedmen. The south wasn't satisfied with freedmen having power and so they changed the amendment to where blacks werent able to vote and they didnt have the rights as a citizen. While all this was happening women were also tripping because they also didn't have all their rights as a citizen.
Eric foner's view about reconstruction is that it was a good thing, they had good intentions but it was short lived. He said that these ammendments were often taken advantage of and are pretty much just glanced over during this time. I believe that reconstruction was a good thing and I think that if they would have just stuck with it and really made it work, that it would have saved everyone alot of trouble.
The 14th amendment was the most important of the amendments during reconstution but did not satify every one. It didn't satisfiy the south or the radical reconstructionists; the south found it torture and the radicals were upset because they found reconstruction to be an opportunity to create the Perfect Republic and this amendment wasn't strict enough. Overall the 14th Amendment served to satisfy the North's minimal purpose.
I agree with the document that the reconstruction was to be a simple, peaceful and non offensive act to try to better teh United States into a a country of equality and perserverance. but so many people lost siht on what this period ws suppose to be. to many people were focused on what they wewre goinbg to lose an indidvidual and not as a group to make something good. people looking out for themselvs and not the country causing mixed signals. the revision of the 13, and 14 admendment should have been simple in the reconstruction period but instead many people(southerns and Northerns)felt that either it was against their beliefs or the law was just riht, but it wasn't. the war was faught for equal rights for all in the united states. the descision was made as soon as the North Declared victiory. this is simply a bad case of bad sportsmanship.
In this article Eric Foner uses Stevens as an example to show the efforts of the Radical Republicans. He used him to show the efforts of the Northerners to force the south to come back into the Union. Foner explains the amendments that came out of the reconstruction. He also explains that without proper enforcement, the south will not abide by the laws put out by the Constitution. I agree with him because the south did not want to treat blacks fairly. They did all they could to get around the laws like creating the Black Codes to restrict black civil rights.
Stevens thought that Reconstruction was going to free America from slaverly in my mind. He didn't like Slaverly in the American name because it ruined it like chocolate on a white tee. He thought it would create a perfect rebublic but it really didn't. Whites would not stand for blacks having the same equal rights as them. The 14th Amendment was an idea on paper because it did not garuntee the rights of black male sufferage. The south is some stuck up white Crackers in the American Peoples soup of life.
steven believe in the "Perfect republic" HE thoght that the reconstruction was the best way to tell the nation about alavery and it wrongs. This "perfect republic" wha supposed to have equal civil and political right s for the people. BUt he did not get this because the blacks were still not able to vote and do other things. The 14 amendment did not satisy them, even thos its the most important thing since the bill of rights and it shapes or life today. The south didnt exept the fifthteenth either so they made up there own sytem to take control which was the kkk.
quietgirl--sorry im late Reconstruction was to make a better republic while in the same time the south wanted to have slavery stopped. The congress drew up the 14 amendment which did not make the republicans the happiest so they rejected this and the 15th .-but satified the north. Stevens believed that blacks should be equal. I think that the reconstruction time was a good period because ratified some political and civil rights but would have been better if rights were considered equal long before they were.
I agree with Eric Foner in that the Constitution can be interpreted in different ways. Everyone has their own way of thinking and thus no two interpretation is going to be the same. It will also depend upon the the time in which the issue is discussed. Also, Reconstruction has supposedly ended but I don't think it will ever be complete or done because the Constitution will never be perfect because of the different interpretations.
His point is that reconstruction would create a perfect republic and can give everyone equal. it can give black the same right as white. i think instead of just giving black rights they should have gave women rights too.
Stevens believed that Reconstruction was a golden opportunity to create a “perfect republic,” whose citizens enjoyed equal civil and political rights, secured by a powerful and beneficent national government. I think reconstruction is a good thig and is beneficial to all people no matter what the race.
his point was basically that all blacks should be treated equal as the whites. But whites weren't ready for blacks to be an equal to them because they might take away what whites thought were rightfully theirs. If you think about it shouldn't everyone who wanted to b treated equal to the white men not just black but women also.
Foner's point was to tell us how stevens felt about reconstruction. foner let us know what the 13, 14, and 15th amendment was about. He stated that women rights werent satisfied but those of African-Americans were. I agree with everything said in this article. Reconstruction did give rights to African-Americans but denied those of women. I do think that women rights should have satisfied as well.
Foner's clearly presented point was that struggles based on discrimination are all the same: One group "inferiorizes" another group. Together as a world of students, we must rember the history and see that we must not oppress people or ideas or be oppressed by peoples or ideas. We must look out of the box and see gay people and straight people as two people in love, and see people for there qqualities and characteristics not for their skin color, we must see economic oppression as our current capitalistic system and most importantly, WE MUST WORK TOWARDS POSTIVIE CHANGE AND NOT LET HISTORY REPEAT IT'S SELF.
Eric Foner's point is that the main effects of the Reconstruction and especially the 14th ammendment were 1) to give rights to blacks and make things more equal for all races and 2) to change America's political system into one where the Constitution was used to protect individual rights at the expense of states' rights. The national government became able to override state laws in order to protect people's rights, as opposed to states having more autonomy, ostensibly to protect the rights of their own people. So, the reconstruction both made America a country of more equality and made the Constitution a document whose job was to ensure equality.
I think Foner is right. Some of the major changes in political parties are about states' rights against the federal government, and the Reconstruction changed things so individual rights became the business of the national government and not the states. I also think it's disappointing that the 14th and 15th Ammendments, which were so clearly intended to extend equal rights to more people, were ignored for so long. Apparently, even getting equal rights codified in federal law doesn't guarantee they'll last very long. There has to be a different way of ensuring equality.
Eric Foner talks about reconstruction and how Stevens was for equal rights for blacks. He goes on talking about how the south rejected the 14 and 15 amendments by passing laws like the black codes inorder to keep the southern economy going. in my opinion that the new amendments should of included women becausewomen had it before the blacks
eric foner is pointing out that stevens was an advocate for black rights during the reconstruction. he wanted a "perfect republic" where everyone would be treated euqal civilly and politically. however, this dream was not fulfilled. the reconstruction amendments did not meet expectations. blacks were still not being treated euqally. while the reconstruction was impotrant at the time, it was short-lived and wasnt strong enough to grant equal rights to all people in the country.
i think that the amendments should have included all people to make this "perfect republic" that everyone "wanted." if a perfect republic was the intended goal, then i think that more would have been done to ensure that this goal was to come ture. i dont think that this "goal" is ever going to be achieved based on how our counrty is now; especially with the president attempting to restrict the rights of certain groups of people.
Radical republicans viewed the future as a perfect egalitarian society. They were not satisfied with the reform they made and wanted more and more. They overlooked the fact that they were just words with no force behind them.
A utopia is impossible. The way the US is, is probably the freest that people will ever be.
Foner is saying that he is on the side of the blacks. He says that by making those new laws, nothing really changed the ways that blacks were treated. I think that the lives of the black population may have even been worse because of the increased anger coming from the whites. Even though new amendments were put into action to help give blacks their equal rights, it did not prevent them from being segregated from the rest of the people and once again made the whites seem like the superior race. What's even worse is that women didn't have equal rights either. They weren't even mentioned or thought about.
I actually now know more about Stevens and I feel he was a good man fighting for a good cause but almost alone. It's unnecessary to have so much violence and constitutional changes or amendments made for people to have equal rights. I don't see why society would have to do that. It's sad that it took so long for something to actually be done and followed. It's disappointing that there are still problems after all the deaths and work. It's even more disappointing that people are taking things for granted now such as voting, education, and presented opportunities.
Eric Foner was trying to present Steven's as a radical republican who believed in equal rights for blacks. During the reconstruction period after slavery many ammendments were adminstered which gave equality to black but each act or ammentdment was rejected by the south for they had began to make their own acts such as the black codes.Reconstruction? It was more like destruction b/c more problems added to previous problems...also blacks were still in slavery in a sense b/c they couldn't read or write, all they knew was how to work in the fields which they had been forced o do as a last result in order to survive.
Stevens believed in equality between blacks and whites. He wanted to create the "Perfect Republic." However, he knew that no one wanted to give voting rights to blacks. I am very surprised white women never got the right to vote before black men, because you would think they would consider the women higher than black men because after all they were white. I agree with amanda ware, if we would have given white women the right to vote before black men it would have given more power to the white population.
This article is an acount of how important Stevens was like many others of the time in his attempt to secure rights and freedoms of the people, the actual outcomes of this period of reconstruction are in question, were they really effective or was there just a lot of new laws and regulations, Stevens was really fighting for a chance to make this country a better place
Eric Foner basically thought that blacks should have equal rights and wanted it known that people such as Stevens fought during reconstruction for equality for blacks even though it did the opposite.
Foner talked about how important Thaddeus Stevens and other radical Republicans were at this time. They wanted equal rights for blacks, still forgeting about women, and passed bills and amendments to attempt to do so. They do, however, forget about the fact that no matter how many laws or rules you pass, there will be people who break them. The sad truth is that you are not breaking the law until you are caught and enforcement at that time was shoddy. I think the idea of their egalitarian, even utopian, system was not possible at that time, too many whites found themselves superior. A utopia will never exist, but the democracy that we have here, is as close as it will get. Josh Heron hr 3-4
I feel that reconstruction was a chance to change the social and political ways of America. Stevens believed in equal opportunities for black people. During this period reconstruction was seen as a big big. I feel that it could have changed and made life better for blacks(and whites) if it was used to the full advantage.
Steven's was all for helping the slaves after the civil war. He say it as a chance to create the "perfect republic". He said that the 14th amendment really transformed the Constitution. The Radical Republicans were not fully happy with this amendment but the north really was. I think that Eric Foner wrote this to show that there some normal people out there defending the slaves and thought that it was wrong. I personally think that the 14th amendment did help black move towards freedom. Even though they became slves again it showed that it can happen. I think if it wasn't for the strong people in the 1960's that there might be more slavery now. I like that Stevens was for helping slaves.
I think that hes trying to make a perfect republic and give EVERYONE equal rights. It would give blacks the same rights as whites and also give women the same rights and everyone else.
I think that the reconstruction idea was a great idea. Even though this is so there were holes in the concept that brought many problems. Such as trying to creat a perfect society when many people know that couldnt happen.
What is his point?--Foner's point was to say that Reconstruction had some benefits for Black people. It was to show that some good came out of Reconstruction. It was to show that people actually did actually change...even if it was for a short period of time. What do I think?--I think that the best point Foner made was at the end of the reading. The 'perfect republic' will never be here b/c the utopia gov't ideal is different for everyone. Everyone has their own idea for what the perfect government is and when it will come.
Foner's point was that he thought that stevens believed in justice for blacks. during reconstruction there wasn't supposed to be unequal right for whites and blacks, but that wasn't the case. The Black Codes oppressed blacks once again and prevented them from owning much land. Eventually the 14th and 15th amendment were reevaluated for their position on equal rights for all and the south was forced to accept them and pledge allegiance to the union. (majority vote). I think a big step towards equal rights was taken because the Reconstruction Amendments ratified the Constitution and helped black to achieve some equal rights.
so seth...you think mlk woulda wanted us out of school and using illegal substances on his day? or maybe in school learning?
Foner's point was that he thought that stevens believed in justice for blacks. during reconstruction there wasn't supposed to be unequal right for whites and blacks, but that wasn't the case. The Black Codes oppressed blacks once again and prevented them from owning much land. Eventually the 14th and 15th amendment were reevaluated for their position on equal rights for all and the south was forced to accept them and pledge allegiance to the union. (majority vote). I think a big step towards equal rights was taken because the Reconstruction Amendments ratified the Constitution and helped black to achieve some equal rights.
so seth...you think mlk woulda wanted us out of school and using illegal substances on his day? or maybe in school learning?
Foner's point is to show how Thaddeus wanted to create a perfect utopian like society. Of course everyone knew that this was impossible. By ending slavery, he thought that a perfect nation would be molded. Even thought the fourteenth amendment passed, Steven's still didn't think this good enough. He felt that black's still didn't have all the rights recognized by the Constitution. Stevens was a fool for thinking that a perfect society could be created, but at least he advocated it.
Stevens he wanted everyone to be equal. He was firm believer and equality. He beleieved he could use the reconstruction period as a time to get back at the South for treating the slaves the way they treated they did. He wanted to have a perfect society where everyone equal and were citizens.
Eric Foner says that reconstruction is a step towards building a stonger republic and emphasizing rights for freed blacks. his point was to show that Radical republican thought the reconstruction was a waste of time. i think reconstruction was a big step towards equal rights includeing black rights. reconstruction amendments ratified the constitution and this provided us with federal laws that affect society, even today.
if life wasnt the way it was then i would argue with you but who cares about it, ok it happened great but the point is IT HAPPENED already you can talk all you want bout its not going to change. Thats why its called histiry its the past, so really who cares about that stuff besides people who think they can understamd it. You cant you will just find more stuff that contridick the other stuff and you will never no. So fuck history and al sharption
70 comments:
Stevens believed that Reconstruction was a golden opportunity to purge the nation of the legacy of slavery. He said it would and create a "perfect republic," whose citizens enjoyed equal civil and political rights. The Fourteenth Amendment did not fully satisfy the Radical Republicans though.The Fourteenth Amendment was the most important constitutional change in the nation’s history since the Bill of Rights.It did not abolish existing state governments in the South and made no mention of the right to vote for blacks.
The hole reconstruction point was to create the perfect republic. Slavery was to be abolished. The south wanted slavery to be gone. The 14th amendment did not fully satisfy the radical republicans although it did satisfy the north.
Eric Foner was trying to point out the fact that Stevens believed in equal justices for blacks. As the reconstruction was happening, many amendments were included to not have unequal injustice between whites and blacks, but it happened anyway, as the South rejected the 14th and 15th amendment by passing racial laws to re-enact slavery all over again. But over time the republic started to go back and have the meaning of the 14th and 15th amendment interpreted again for equal rights. My opinion in this, is that how can women go through the similar process and in the end still get unequal rights as well, but for blacks at this time get the support of more people and get their rights. That just doesn't make any sense to me. I mean it's great that the blacks got their sufferage, but they got it before women did. And the way that the South ignored the changes, show that they didn't learn anything from the civil war at all.
Stevens believed that the Reconstruction would create the "perfect republic". He wanted everyone to have equal rights. It didn't turn out this way because blacks were not able to vote. Also, women weren't given the same rights as black men. I think that the black people should have gotten their rights before the women because whatever the white men could do, the black men should have been able to do it also.
Eric Foner's point is that Stevens, like other Radical Republicans, thought that Reconstruction was the oppertunity to create the "perfect republic," but they were not satisfied with the 14th amendment, even though it was the most important of the three things to altered the consistution (the others being the 13th and 15th amendments). I think its interesting that after Congress created the 14th and 15th amendment to try and help the people have equal rights, the South just ignored these amendments, and made their own racial system.
yeah, it was ok, umm, He believes that reconstruction was a waste of time seeing as it provided nothing. I must say i agree since MLK had to fight for the same issues in the 1960's
Stevens believed that Rconstruction was a big deal durung this time period. He believed that blacks should have equal justice and equal justice as everyone else. Reconstruction was the whole idea to abolish slavery. The South wanted slavery gone but the North had something else in mind. The 14 admendment was made to try to satisfy both the North and the South, but this did not happen.
Eric Foner was clearly on the blacks' side. He believed that even though new amendments were made they were not fair to the blacks. In my opinion the only reason they made those amendment was because they thought they would "please" the people. But the blacks knew what was going on. They know that no one wanted them to have rights.
Eric Foner described Reconstruction as a major step towards giving the freed blacks equality and forming a stronger republic for the U.S. His point was to emphasize the views of the Radical Republicans, such as Stevens. The Radical Republicans and Foner saw Reconstruction as a waste of time.
I think that the Reconstruction Amendments greatly helped to give blacks rights, political and civil. They did not provide blacks completely equal rights since civil rights are still an issue today. Nevertheless, The Reconstruction Amendments ratified the Constitution which would change the federal laws of the U.S., a big step to equal rights.
Foners point was to show to what extent the Civil War had changed the future of the United States. With the three amendements being past at this time it showed how the Americans were willing to change only up to a certain point stopping at given slaves civil rights. He shows how these "dry documents" have had a life lasting affect on our culture. Because of these documents we, as americans, enjoy more rights and freedoms. I think that reconstruction seen in the eyes of the Americans today was a great thing. It eventually got rid of slavery, which was the main point. I mean seriously what would America be like with slaves like they had back then. Also i enjoy my freedoms very much and wouldn't want to have it any other way. They only thing i don't understand was why Native Americans weren't considered citizens, why didn't they have birth rights?? just a question.
Steven thought that Reconstrustion was the key to success. He wanted to create the "perfect republic" which would include equal rights for all and to get rid of slavery. I think that focusing on the equal rights for blacks was most important. If we gave equal rights to the women first that would have just gave more WHITE women, and the white people more power and make the black people evern more inferior to them.
I think that Eric Foner was on the side of the blacks, and by making those new laws didn't really change the ways that blacks were treated and still made it bad for them because it made more whites get even angrier at them. He thought that even though they said they were making the new amendments to give the blacks equal rights, they really didn't even make them equal to the whites because they ended up segregating them anyway.
The point that Foner was trying to establish was that the period of Reconstruction was a great opportunity for the Radiacl Republicans to give the African Americans rights. He saw this opportunity to bring and create the perfect republic, where everyone was equal. He contributed to the effort to pass the 14th Ammendment, even though his party and him were not fully satisfied with it.
I think that Stevens was very succesful in his fight for equal rights because even though it wasnt very obvious back then, the fact that he helped pass some of the ammendments to give people more rights is very evident today in society.
Besides from talking about the political issues during the Reconstruction Era, the point that Eric Foner wanted to make in his essay was that during one of the most critical event in American history, the Reconstruction Era, American society went through immense changes, and these changes can be seen and reflected through the amendments that were constituted during this era. These amendments included the 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendment. Although these amendments were passed during the era of Reconstruction to give rights to African-Americans who had recently gained their freedom, these rights were taken away from them. The South never took these amendments seriously, and the Supreme Court, dominated by southern conservatives, even reinterpreted the Fourteenth Amendment to take away the promise of equal citizenship. Foner points out that the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments were blatantly violated with the submission of the entire nation not to do anything about these violations until the 1850s.
I think that Eric Foner wanted to point out that even today, interpretation of the Constitution is still widely debated, and we should appreciate the Constitution for the rights that it preserve us. I think that as Americans, we take for granted the rights that we have, and by learning about the history of why these amendments came about can make use more aware and appreciative of the Constitution.
Eric Foner wanted to encourage the idea of blacks having the same right. Like Steven he believed that the Recontruction didnt help step towards ending black inequality. His views were like many Radical Republicans.
I think Reconstruction was good in a way. It may not have completly given blacks all the rights they need but it ratified some political and civil rights. It also believed that the state government should have been abolished. To come as a national government they had to agreed as one.
In Foner’s article, his point is that the amendments such as the 13th, 14th, and 15th is widely interpreted in many different ways during reconstruction era.. Foner pointed out that radical Republicans such as Stevens believe that reconstruction was a perfect time to create a country of equality. Although the 14th amendment was pass to help the slaves, the south ignored it. The Supreme Court interpreted the 14th amendment in a different way. The south put forward a new radical system on blacks.
I think that although the reconstruction era was perfect, it took a big step toward civil rights and equality for everyone. I think that people will always have a different interpretation of the amendment and there will always be something that to fix upon. I believed that although the constitution is not perfect, it has done a lot of good things for everyone.
politThaddeus Stevens, the racical Republican, believed that Reconstruction was the prefect period in creating a purify country. He saw it as a time where the "perfect republic" can rise and all citizens within the nation will have equal rights.
It seems to me that the racical Republicans are power hungry. I'm sure they, (the racical Rep.), won't be able to create the "perfect republic" because of the Democrats in the South. Why do the racicals even have democratic views? Equal rights; they forgot about the women.
opps..cross out "polit" in front of Thaddeus Stevens. sorry.
Thaddeus Stevens was an advocate for civil rights. With his help, the Fourteenth Amendment was approved in the House. Though the amendment didn't allow blacks to vote, it said that all men born or naturalized in the United States was a citzen. That was a big step in civil rights. The Fifthteenth Amendment was later passed which alllowed black men to vote. These two amendments changed America forever. Stevens who help cause this changed will always be known as one the greatest civil rights activist ever.
Stevens basically saw the Reconstruction as a good thing because it was a time for the blacks to get what they truly deserve, a spot in the government. He thought that by reconstructing, the nation was going to create, in a sense, a perfect republic.
It seems to me that all the radicals of the north had the right idea about giving blacks more power but on many levels it seemed as if they only wanted the power themselves. It's like the dunning article we read in class when there was the line that read that the northerners were trying to go after the benefits of the reconstruction. The more black people they had on their side the more power they could have. The northern whites where in a situation where they either join with the south or find some kind of group to latch onto and in this case it was the free black population of the United States. I mean I'm sure a good chunk of radicals were really in it for the cause of racial equality but there's always going to be corruption somewhere, right?
Stevens was trying to prove that all men are thet same regaurdless of your color. Even though stevens did a good thing in pushing the fourth amendment there were areas and thinigs that he did not cover. IF the blacks were not able to vote were they really free? I think that it was great that we have these consitutions and amendments but do they really mean anything if people are still beong treated unfairly and there rights constantly abused.
Foner advocated that the 14th amendment was a good contribution to the constitution that allowed other effects to occur eventhough it didn't solve what it was suppose to.I believe that it could have contributed some influences in the rights of people now.
Ohe point of this article is to show how the freedmen gained more right over time during the reconstruction period. The 13th, 14th, and 15th amendments were established to faciliate black rights. Then the reconstruction act of 1867 was passed which gave blacks the vote. Another point of this article is that it points out that women still didn't have equal rights. This article shows how America passed amendments and acts in order to try to better and construct a unified republic. However, even though steps were being taken to try to take care of current issues, more issues such as women's rights were in the rise.
I think that it was good that this article brought up women's rights as well because even though it was not the main issue being debated at the time, it was soon going to have to be delt with.
i think steven accomplished alot in that little period of time, even thou these accomplishments did not last for that long but the 14th amendment helped African Americans get their rights later on.
In this article is seems as if Thaddus Stevens was a profound leader of the reconstruction period. He believe that everyone should have equally rights, no matter race, education, or economic status. Stevens wanted to change society in to the " Perfect Republic". In my opinion Stevens made a enormous revolutionary change during his time, even though women didn't have the right to vote when the 14th amendment was passed with his help.
Reconstruction in the U.S was supposed to be something like the Reinesance in Europe. Things were supposed to change for the better and all people were supposed to be considered Equal. The 14th amendment was added to aid this dream in becoming reality,but it didn't exactly please every one because although the main purpose of this amendment was to ratify civil rights, this amendment neither mentioned blacks and womens right to vote or abolished existing state governments in the south. I think the whole idea of reconstruction was easier said then done.
Recostruction was supposed to help abolish slavery and create a "perfect republic." It seems like things were expected to change once reconstruction started,but didn't. It took longer than hoped.People had different opinions about slavery.
Eric Foner says that Stevens says that he had an intention of creating a "perfect republic" which didn't happen. It was a start and he had good intentions, but too bad it didn't work. The Fourteenth Amendment helped by enforcing the Thirteenth Amendment but it didn't mention anything about blacks voting. I think that since he wanted equal rights for everyone that, that should have included women as well. At this time there was no satisfying everyone? No matter which way you look at it at least one group wasn't going to be happy. And I think Steven's was trying to do his best to come to a reasonable compromise for everyone.
Eric Foner's main point of this article was that Steven's main idea was to create a "Perfect Republic" where everyone was equal, kind of like a utopian world, which didn't happen. He wanted civil rights and equal rights for all blacks. I think that it of course was a good idea but that it didn't work because we are still struggling to this day with equal rights.
In the article "Reconstruction" Eric Foner points out the thing that T. Stevens did for the African American slaves. He talks about the idea of a "perfect republic" where people are equals and seen as such. This still isn't the case ntil this day and time, so obviously his expectations were a little far-fetch. He addresses the 14th amendment as a improtant thing. I guess because of what it leads up to. But it doesn't seem as important to me because of how he even says it left out blacks rights and it left them vulnerable to the ideals of the black codes. F
In this document Steven showed that he supported Reconstruction and was for civil rights. Stevens wanted blacks to have equal rights and because of this he did all he can to have the amendment passed. He also expressed that he would like a "perfect republic." During the time of reconstruction, they set up different amendments that would give the freedmen rights. These amendments were changed so it can limit the power of the freedmen. The south wasn't satisfied with freedmen having power and so they changed the amendment to where blacks werent able to vote and they didnt have the rights as a citizen. While all this was happening women were also tripping because they also didn't have all their rights as a citizen.
Eric foner's view about reconstruction is that it was a good thing, they had good intentions but it was short lived. He said that these ammendments were often taken advantage of and are pretty much just glanced over during this time. I believe that reconstruction was a good thing and I think that if they would have just stuck with it and really made it work, that it would have saved everyone alot of trouble.
The 14th amendment was the most important of the amendments during reconstution but did not satify every one. It didn't satisfiy the south or the radical reconstructionists; the south found it torture and the radicals were upset because they found reconstruction to be an opportunity to create the Perfect Republic and this amendment wasn't strict enough. Overall the 14th Amendment served to satisfy the North's minimal purpose.
I agree with the document that the reconstruction was to be a simple, peaceful and non offensive act to try to better teh United States into a a country of equality and perserverance. but so many people lost siht on what this period ws suppose to be. to many people were focused on what they wewre goinbg to lose an indidvidual and not as a group to make something good. people looking out for themselvs and not the country causing mixed signals. the revision of the 13, and 14 admendment should have been simple in the reconstruction period but instead many people(southerns and Northerns)felt that either it was against their beliefs or the law was just riht, but it wasn't. the war was faught for equal rights for all in the united states. the descision was made as soon as the North Declared victiory. this is simply a bad case of bad sportsmanship.
In this article Eric Foner uses Stevens as an example to show the efforts of the Radical Republicans. He used him to show the efforts of the Northerners to force the south to come back into the Union. Foner explains the amendments that came out of the reconstruction. He also explains that without proper enforcement, the south will not abide by the laws put out by the Constitution. I agree with him because the south did not want to treat blacks fairly. They did all they could to get around the laws like creating the Black Codes to restrict black civil rights.
Stevens thought that Reconstruction was going to free America from slaverly in my mind. He didn't like Slaverly in the American name because it ruined it like chocolate on a white tee. He thought it would create a perfect rebublic but it really didn't. Whites would not stand for blacks having the same equal rights as them. The 14th Amendment was an idea on paper because it did not garuntee the rights of black male sufferage. The south is some stuck up white Crackers in the American Peoples soup of life.
steven believe in the "Perfect republic" HE thoght that the reconstruction was the best way to tell the nation about alavery and it wrongs. This "perfect republic" wha supposed to have equal civil and political right s for the people. BUt he did not get this because the blacks were still not able to vote and do other things. The 14 amendment did not satisy them, even thos its the most important thing since the bill of rights and it shapes or life today. The south didnt exept the fifthteenth either so they made up there own sytem to take control which was the kkk.
quietgirl--sorry im late
Reconstruction was to make a better republic while in the same time the south wanted to have slavery stopped. The congress drew up the 14 amendment which did not make the republicans the happiest so they rejected this and the 15th .-but satified the north. Stevens believed that blacks should be equal.
I think that the reconstruction time was a good period because ratified some political and civil rights but would have been better if rights were considered equal long before they were.
I agree with Eric Foner in that the Constitution can be interpreted in different ways. Everyone has their own way of thinking and thus no two interpretation is going to be the same. It will also depend upon the the time in which the issue is discussed. Also, Reconstruction has supposedly ended but I don't think it will ever be complete or done because the Constitution will never be perfect because of the different interpretations.
His point is that reconstruction would create a perfect republic and can give everyone equal. it can give black the same right as white. i think instead of just giving black rights they should have gave women rights too.
Stevens believed that Reconstruction was a golden opportunity to create a “perfect republic,” whose citizens enjoyed equal civil and political rights, secured by a powerful and beneficent national government. I think reconstruction is a good thig and is beneficial to all people no matter what the race.
his point was basically that all blacks should be treated equal as the whites. But whites weren't ready for blacks to be an equal to them because they might take away what whites thought were rightfully theirs. If you think about it shouldn't everyone who wanted to b treated equal to the white men not just black but women also.
Foner's point was to tell us how stevens felt about reconstruction. foner let us know what the 13, 14, and 15th amendment was about. He stated that women rights werent satisfied but those of African-Americans were. I agree with everything said in this article. Reconstruction did give rights to African-Americans but denied those of women. I do think that women rights should have satisfied as well.
Foner's clearly presented point was that struggles based on discrimination are all the same: One group "inferiorizes" another group. Together as a world of students, we must rember the history and see that we must not oppress people or ideas or be oppressed by peoples or ideas. We must look out of the box and see gay people and straight people as two people in love, and see people for there qqualities and characteristics not for their skin color, we must see economic oppression as our current capitalistic system and most importantly, WE MUST WORK TOWARDS POSTIVIE CHANGE AND NOT LET HISTORY REPEAT IT'S SELF.
Reconstruction was horrible for the south but it benefited the north
Eric Foner's point is that the main effects of the Reconstruction and especially the 14th ammendment were 1) to give rights to blacks and make things more equal for all races and 2) to change America's political system into one where the Constitution was used to protect individual rights at the expense of states' rights. The national government became able to override state laws in order to protect people's rights, as opposed to states having more autonomy, ostensibly to protect the rights of their own people. So, the reconstruction both made America a country of more equality and made the Constitution a document whose job was to ensure equality.
I think Foner is right. Some of the major changes in political parties are about states' rights against the federal government, and the Reconstruction changed things so individual rights became the business of the national government and not the states. I also think it's disappointing that the 14th and 15th Ammendments, which were so clearly intended to extend equal rights to more people, were ignored for so long. Apparently, even getting equal rights codified in federal law doesn't guarantee they'll last very long. There has to be a different way of ensuring equality.
Eric Foner talks about reconstruction and how Stevens was for equal rights for blacks. He goes on talking about how the south rejected the 14 and 15 amendments by passing laws like the black codes inorder to keep the southern economy going. in my opinion that the new amendments should of included women becausewomen had it before the blacks
eric foner is pointing out that stevens was an advocate for black rights during the reconstruction. he wanted a "perfect republic" where everyone would be treated euqal civilly and politically. however, this dream was not fulfilled. the reconstruction amendments did not meet expectations. blacks were still not being treated euqally. while the reconstruction was impotrant at the time, it was short-lived and wasnt strong enough to grant equal rights to all people in the country.
i think that the amendments should have included all people to make this "perfect republic" that everyone "wanted." if a perfect republic was the intended goal, then i think that more would have been done to ensure that this goal was to come ture. i dont think that this "goal" is ever going to be achieved based on how our counrty is now; especially with the president attempting to restrict the rights of certain groups of people.
Radical Republicans wanted to make a perfect republic but nothing backed up what they did to try and make it that way.
I agree entirely with Foner.
Radical republicans viewed the future as a perfect egalitarian society. They were not satisfied with the reform they made and wanted more and more. They overlooked the fact that they were just words with no force behind them.
A utopia is impossible. The way the US is, is probably the freest that people will ever be.
Foner is saying that he is on the side of the blacks. He says that by making those new laws, nothing really changed the ways that blacks were treated. I think that the lives of the black population may have even been worse because of the increased anger coming from the whites. Even though new amendments were put into action to help give blacks their equal rights, it did not prevent them from being segregated from the rest of the people and once again made the whites seem like the superior race. What's even worse is that women didn't have equal rights either. They weren't even mentioned or thought about.
I actually now know more about Stevens and I feel he was a good man fighting for a good cause but almost alone. It's unnecessary to have so much violence and constitutional changes or amendments made for people to have equal rights. I don't see why society would have to do that. It's sad that it took so long for something to actually be done and followed. It's disappointing that there are still problems after all the deaths and work. It's even more disappointing that people are taking things for granted now such as voting, education, and presented opportunities.
Eric Foner was trying to present Steven's as a radical republican who believed in equal rights for blacks. During the reconstruction period after slavery many ammendments were adminstered which gave equality to black but each act or ammentdment was rejected by the south for they had began to make their own acts such as the black codes.Reconstruction? It was more like destruction b/c more problems added to previous problems...also blacks were still in slavery in a sense b/c they couldn't read or write, all they knew was how to work in the fields which they had been forced o do as a last result in order to survive.
Stevens believed in equality between blacks and whites. He wanted to create the "Perfect Republic." However, he knew that no one wanted to give voting rights to blacks. I am very surprised white women never got the right to vote before black men, because you would think they would consider the women higher than black men because after all they were white. I agree with amanda ware, if we would have given white women the right to vote before black men it would have given more power to the white population.
This article is an acount of how important Stevens was like many others of the time in his attempt to secure rights and freedoms of the people, the actual outcomes of this period of reconstruction are in question, were they really effective or was there just a lot of new laws and regulations, Stevens was really fighting for a chance to make this country a better place
Eric Foner basically thought that blacks should have equal rights and wanted it known that people such as Stevens fought during reconstruction for equality for blacks even though it did the opposite.
Foner talked about how important Thaddeus Stevens and other radical Republicans were at this time. They wanted equal rights for blacks, still forgeting about women, and passed bills and amendments to attempt to do so. They do, however, forget about the fact that no matter how many laws or rules you pass, there will be people who break them. The sad truth is that you are not breaking the law until you are caught and enforcement at that time was shoddy. I think the idea of their egalitarian, even utopian, system was not possible at that time, too many whites found themselves superior. A utopia will never exist, but the democracy that we have here, is as close as it will get.
Josh Heron hr 3-4
I feel that reconstruction was a chance to change the social and political ways of America. Stevens believed in equal opportunities for black people. During this period reconstruction was seen as a big big. I feel that it could have changed and made life better for blacks(and whites) if it was used to the full advantage.
Steven's was all for helping the slaves after the civil war. He say it as a chance to create the "perfect republic". He said that the 14th amendment really transformed the Constitution. The Radical Republicans were not fully happy with this amendment but the north really was. I think that Eric Foner wrote this to show that there some normal people out there defending the slaves and thought that it was wrong. I personally think that the 14th amendment did help black move towards freedom. Even though they became slves again it showed that it can happen. I think if it wasn't for the strong people in the 1960's that there might be more slavery now. I like that Stevens was for helping slaves.
I think that hes trying to make a perfect republic and give EVERYONE equal rights. It would give blacks the same rights as whites and also give women the same rights and everyone else.
I think that the reconstruction idea was a great idea. Even though this is so there were holes in the concept that brought many problems. Such as trying to creat a perfect society when many people know that couldnt happen.
What is his point?--Foner's point was to say that Reconstruction had some benefits for Black people. It was to show that some good came out of Reconstruction. It was to show that people actually did actually change...even if it was for a short period of time.
What do I think?--I think that the best point Foner made was at the end of the reading. The 'perfect republic' will never be here b/c the utopia gov't ideal is different for everyone. Everyone has their own idea for what the perfect government is and when it will come.
Foner's point was that he thought that stevens believed in justice for blacks. during reconstruction there wasn't supposed to be unequal right for whites and blacks, but that wasn't the case. The Black Codes oppressed blacks once again and prevented them from owning much land. Eventually the 14th and 15th amendment were reevaluated for their position on equal rights for all and the south was forced to accept them and pledge allegiance to the union. (majority vote). I think a big step towards equal rights was taken because the Reconstruction Amendments ratified the Constitution and helped black to achieve some equal rights.
so seth...you think mlk woulda wanted us out of school and using illegal substances on his day? or maybe in school learning?
Foner's point was that he thought that stevens believed in justice for blacks. during reconstruction there wasn't supposed to be unequal right for whites and blacks, but that wasn't the case. The Black Codes oppressed blacks once again and prevented them from owning much land. Eventually the 14th and 15th amendment were reevaluated for their position on equal rights for all and the south was forced to accept them and pledge allegiance to the union. (majority vote). I think a big step towards equal rights was taken because the Reconstruction Amendments ratified the Constitution and helped black to achieve some equal rights.
so seth...you think mlk woulda wanted us out of school and using illegal substances on his day? or maybe in school learning?
Foner's point is to show how Thaddeus wanted to create a perfect utopian like society. Of course everyone knew that this was impossible. By ending slavery, he thought that a perfect nation would be molded. Even thought the fourteenth amendment passed, Steven's still didn't think this good enough. He felt that black's still didn't have all the rights recognized by the Constitution. Stevens was a fool for thinking that a perfect society could be created, but at least he advocated it.
Stevens he wanted everyone to be equal. He was firm believer and equality. He beleieved he could use the reconstruction period as a time to get back at the South for treating the slaves the way they treated they did. He wanted to have a perfect society where everyone equal and were citizens.
Eric Foner says that reconstruction is a step towards building a stonger republic and emphasizing rights for freed blacks. his point was to show that Radical republican thought the reconstruction was a waste of time. i think reconstruction was a big step towards equal rights includeing black rights. reconstruction amendments ratified the constitution and this provided us with federal laws that affect society, even today.
the constitution is gay and stevens and america at that time
fghrfj
if life wasnt the way it was then i would argue with you but who cares about it, ok it happened great but the point is IT HAPPENED already you can talk all you want bout its not going to change. Thats why its called histiry its the past, so really who cares about that stuff besides people who think they can understamd it. You cant you will just find more stuff that contridick the other stuff and you will never no. So fuck history and al sharption
Post a Comment