Joe-Freddy Francois Us History 1 Final Exam June 20th, 2013 Can Reconstruction prevail by passing laws to force change

and equality? As it is known, there was a Civil War in the United States in 1865 that led to many deaths and sacrifices. The war was initiated because of the disaccord of the country, being separated in two sides that saw things differently, the North and the South. The North was against slavery, while the South was for slavery, and because of this issue, the South seceded away from the country and war broke out between the two sides With the war ending and the North winning, the next chapter was; RECONSTRUCTION. What is reconstruction? The idea is to do over, rebuild, recreate and/or remake. For the U.S, it was deeper than that, because the South needed to change their beliefs and now with the African Americans being free, things needed to be equal. Those were big steps forward to be made by the country. But! The biggest question would always be, is it possible to force change? Lets face it, the Southerners for a century have lived their life one way, have viewed life one way, and now abruptly, they have to change. Now they have to treat African Americans equally, adjust to the new laws the government is throwing at them. Is this adequate? In theory, it will be a no because the Southerners grew angry because of it, and use violence against the African Americans because it. Will that assume reconstruction to be a failure? Well, it is inadequate to force change and equality to emerge through laws. So reconstruction isnt over yet. If a couple can break up and remake, then, the North and South can do the same. How do you remake? You remake by communicating, learning how to endure each others flaws, and helping each other grow. In order words, you collaborate to get things straight. Did the North and South do that after the Civil War... That is one reason why reconstruction is not over yet and why it

is inadequate to force change and equality through laws. In 1866, when the Congress passed the Civil Rights Act (it granted African American full citizenship), president Andrew Johnson vetoed it (History ALive, 2002). When the Congress tried to enact the 14th amendment, president Johnson tried to stop it (History Alive, 2002). Whats the result of these controversies, the Congress impeaching president Johnson (History Alive, 2002). The president and the Congress should always be in the same page, in that encounter that did not seem to be the case. According to Southern politician Howell Cobb, the Congress was punishing the South (Cobb, 1868). Not only that, the South republicans were giving the Northerners fouled nicknames such as scalawags and carpetbaggers ( History Alive, 2002). Do these things improve the relationship of the North and the South? Not if there is no collaboration. It is hard for anyone to endure being changed. It is like being taking away from your own little world or comfort zone. But! Sometimes, it is good to change or changing can lead to good things. In order words, when you are being forced to change, you could be misunderstanding the change and your judgements might be wrong. It is understandable that it was hard for the South to give up their ways of life and change, but if there is lack of both judgment and understanding, then... That is the second reason why reconstruction isnt over yet and why it is inadequate to force change through laws. The 15th amendment made it legal for African Americans to vote, so the Southern Republicans tried to win black voters away from Democrats,but failed, so they started to use legal tricks to keep African American from voting and holding office, that failed, in the end they used terrorism or violence to stop African Americans political lives ( History Alive, 2002). These violence for many African Americans took something deep inside of them (Colby, 1872). The Southern Democrats took an even farther step forward by finding the loophole in the 15th amendment, which in theory did not violate the law (History Alive, 2002). They also drew a line between them and the African Americans, with the fictional Jim Crow laws that declared African

Americans to be separate but equal ( History Alive, 2002). Did these scenarios symbolize hate or racism, or even the fear of change? The last reason why reconstructions isnt over yet and why it is inadequate to force change through laws, is because there is a lot to overcome. The idea of rebuilding did not just involve rebuilding the country, it also involved the idea of rebuilding personalities by leveling up to the next level and learn how to be an American. The big word for that would be reuniting the country. Lets face it, a war has been fought, a war that hurt people mentally and physically, so the idea after the war would be to take something from the war and learn from it. If, that was not the case, and that people after the war still had the same beliefs and values, then people should not be saying it was the biggest war the U.S has been part of. After something outrageous like that happens, there must be something that has been taking away from it that will cause change. The Southerners did not, nor did the Northerners. Nobody in the country came close together hand in hand to fix things because the Congress or the people did not approach it that way, or what so ever hardly thought of it that way. Laws in their eyes were the only solution. For example, the Enforcement Acts made it illegal to force another person to vote by force, but in the end didnt the SOutherners found the loopholes to stop African Americans from voting ( History Alive, 2002). So maybe, the idea was that the country did not overcome anything from the war. In the end, reconstruction is not over yet and change could never emerge through laws. Why? Because of lack of collaboration, lack of judgements and understandings, and because there is still a lot to overcome by the country. If you think deeply about it, will reconstructions ever end? Nobody is perfect because we all make mistakes, and maybe it had nothing to do with reconstructing the country, but rather learning from past mistakes. You could always conclude that the government approached it the wrong way. It is almost like gay and straight. The government may make it legal for them to marry but, it will not change peoples opinion over the issue, but it could happen overtime it could. But! Overall, reconstruction is just an idea that people have,

because we are going to keep reconstructing again and again. Maybe, it s about learning from the past.