| Papers [1-15] of 100 :: [Page 1 of 7] | | Go to page : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 —> | Search results on "RECONSTRUCTION CIVIL WAR": |
|
|
Reconstruction and the American Civil War, 2007.
An analysis of the decade of Reconstruction, following the American Civil War, and its implications to Americans.
1,031 words (approx. 4.1 pages), 4 sources, MLA, $ 36.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper discusses the scope and effects of the American Civil War on American society. It then attempts to provide an explanation for the peculiar trend that the war's denouement and crucial aftermath (the decade of Reconstruction) is so noticeably absent from historical accounts. The paper look at the ways in which Reconstruction is a painful and divisive topic for all Americans, even today.
From the Paper
"Despite some successes, the complicated, limited, 'unfinished' nature of both Reconstructions is most likely the reason for the gap in the scholarship on this topic amongst people who were in favour of Reconstruction, as well as their reluctance to create further antagonism over an issue that continues to divide America. This is not to say there is no literature on Reconstruction, but of the works that do exist, many contradict one another over lines of time, race, location and political affiliation. There does not seem to be consensus over many issues at all, and it seems that no conclusion has been reached with regard to this period's real meaning and significance. It is not surprising that those people who were 'anti-Reconstruction' (many of whom subscribe to the ideas of the 'Lost Cause') remained equally quiet and divided over an issue that incites such passion. They too feel the failure of the period (perhaps more specifically the 20th Century version) in that black people did improve their position substantially from what it was under slavery, and did enjoy gains that so threatened white citizens of the South (provoking the brutality which for some, may be a source of shame). It is no surprise these people remain reluctant to dredge up old scars."
| |
|
Reconstruction After the Civil War, 2002.
This paper takes a close look at the period following the end of the Civil War in the United States.
2,937 words (approx. 11.7 pages), 15 sources, MLA, $ 86.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The paper studies the period of Reconstruction when the country set out to rebuild and to revive the economy of the devastated South. One of the major changes brought about by the Civil War was the end of slavery, as signaled by the Emancipation Proclamation of Abraham Lincoln. The writer traces the steps taken by U.S. leaders to reclaim the South and integrate freed slaves into American society.
From the Paper
"There were divisions among the black political class at this time as well. In 1865, various black groups entered the political arena in Louisiana. The Equal Rights League formed in that year and held a convention to demand black suffrage and equal access to the city's streetcars, and speakers at the convention denounced the state legislature for poor treatment of blacks. Newspapers saw the convention as evidence of the unity of the black population, but in fact, most of the delegates were New Orleans free blacks. Another group, the emancipated slaves, also entered the political arena at this time, and it seems logical that the rural freedmen would place as much emphasis on the land and labor questions as upon suffrage (Foner 65)."
| |
|
"Ordeal by Fire: The Civil War and Reconstruction", 2002.
This paper reviews James McPherson's "Ordeal by Fire: The Civil War and Reconstruction".
1,150 words (approx. 4.6 pages), 4 sources, $ 44.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper discusses James McPherson's book, "Ordeal by Fire: The Civil War and Reconstruction" The author believes that this book presents a wider perspective on this era.
| |
|
Civil War and Reconstruction, 2002.
Examines the politics of the Democrats towards President Lincoln and the Republicans during the Cvil War.
2,650 words (approx. 10.6 pages), 4 sources, $ 97.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The Civil War was a conflict between two different societies over which one would control the political, economic, and social destiny of the nation. This paper addresses the politics of Democrats toward Lincoln and the Republican party.
| |
|
Post-Civil War Politics, 2005.
A look at the Democratic and Republican parties after the American Civil War and during Reconstruction.
857 words (approx. 3.4 pages), 2 sources, MLA, $ 30.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The impact of the Civil War and Reconstruction era upon the Democratic Party was one that seemed would never be forgotten as the politics of this party suffered an adverse effect due to the decisions made in view of the Civil War and the side which this party choose to support. This paper explains that the Democratic Convention suffered a party split in 1860 due to differences on territorial rights of new states and the choice, or lack of choice, concerning the issues of slavery. It also discusses how the panic of 1893 resulted in a split of the Democratic Party and the newly formed image of each party. This paper demonstrates the political shifts, as well as national shifts from industrialism in the 1880s to reform at the beginning of the 20th century, and finally, on the threshold of the era of the World Wars as the election of 1912 took place.
From the Paper
"Politics were in a stage of ?hyper? activity during the last couple of decades of the 1800?s and the first decade of the 1900?s. The Republican and Democratic parties split only to reframe and then split again only to re-emerge. President Ulysses Grant a Republic, won the Presidential Election of 1868 however his projection of harsh policies toward the Reconstruction South was viewed as a ?radical? rule due to ?corruption and misrule in the South? resulted in a party split and forming of the Liberal Republican Party. The Liberals, as did the Radicals, supported emancipation, the 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments, as well as preservation of the Union."
| |
|
Reconstruction of the South After the Civil War, 1999.
A historical analysis of the post-Civil War Reconstruction of the South and the differences between the different stages of Reconstruction.
685 words (approx. 2.7 pages), 4 sources, $ 24.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
From the Paper
"Although the American Civil War effectively ended in April, 1865 with the surrenders of Confederate Generals Robert E. Lee and Albert S. Johnston in Virginia and North Carolina, respectively, the fight for the peace, that is, reconstruction, had merely begun. Reconstruction involved federal control of Southern state governments and the South?s reincorporation into the union, its political reconstruction. Reconstruction began at the end of the Civil War, under the presidency of Andrew Johnson. Presidential reconstruction was essentially conservative. However, Congressional reconstruction, which effectively superceded the Reconstruction efforts of the politically enfeebled Johnson, was radical in nature. Radical reconstruction was intended to be both punitive, and to amend Southern society."
| |
|
The Civil War, 2002.
A discussion of the economic costs of the American Civil War.
803 words (approx. 3.2 pages), 1 source, MLA, $ 28.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper provides a brief insight into the direct repercussions of the American Civil War and discusses how it took a toll on both Confederates and Unionists, with about $6 billion in total war costs and over one million war casualties. It analyzes how economic, military and diplomatic repercussions of the Civil War were all in some way related to abolition. It looks at how in order to be reaccepted into the Union, Southern states were forced to redraft their constitutions and elect new legislators and how this reconstruction of the southern state governments came with a large financial, political and social cost.
From the Paper
"Reconstruction also affected domestic armies and led to an upsurge in informal Confederate militia groups like the Ku Klux Klan. Needing an outlet for their frustrations, decommissioned Confederate Army soldiers and anti-abolitionists formed and joined such paramilitary organizations. Union army officers enjoyed positions of power in the federal government, while Southern war generals suffered loss of livelihood and pride. Furthermore, for the economy and the new social order in the South to remain stable, the federal government divided the south into five military districts immediately following the end of the war."
| |
|
Civil War, 2004.
This paper looks at the changes in the social, political and intellectual ideologies of American culture as a result of the Civil War.
1,350 words (approx. 5.4 pages), 10 sources, MLA, $ 47.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper studies the changes in the social, political and intellectual ideologies of American culture as an outcome of the Civil War. The paper looks at what happened in the South and how the people responded to reconstruction.
From the Paper
"The Civil War altered political social and intellectual ideologies of American culture. Introduction: By that time cotton was no longer king in the South and many Southerners were calling for a more diversified economy. There was an increasing move from a farm economy to an industrial one and their industrialization of the South, with increased capital investment in the Southern economy, was endorsed by many. At the same time Anglo-Americans were now settling millions of acres and overcoming resistance from Native Americans in the Indian Wars."
| |
|
Post-Civil War Black History, 2007.
This paper discusses the post-Civil War struggle for equality for African- Americans.
2,195 words (approx. 8.8 pages), 8 sources, APA, $ 68.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper explains that the era following the Civil War was not a smooth transition from a slave-owning to a free-black society, but rather was characterized by conflict over the needs of the Southern states in the reconstruction of their ruined lands and fragmented social and political order. The author points out that this period is significantly important to subsequent African-American history because it enabled later periods of de-facto segregation and traditional issues of daily prejudice; however, it also marked the beginning of a constitutional move to demand free-men's rights equal to those of white men. The paper relates that the black codes, which eventually were named the Jim Crow Laws, allowed for officially sanctioned freedoms as well as restrictions that created legal segregation on many levels all over the South and reinforced those that already existed in the North.
From the Paper
"From these movements local Southern activists emerged, like Fannie Lou Hammer, who spent the majority of her life fighting one campaign after another for local equality. The changes in the movement, demonstrated a concerted effort by national activists to include the voice of the people in the fight. The effort was successful in many ways because it helped create a system of people who were willing to endure countless personal and often violent attacks but who knew the local community and could create grassroots support for change."
| |
|
Rail Resources in the Civil War, 2008.
This paper explores the U.S. government's strategic control of railroad resources during the Civil War.
5,557 words (approx. 22.2 pages), 18 sources, MLA, $ 135.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The paper discusses how the ability of President Lincoln to harness the power of the U.S. transportation infrastructure was essential to eventual victory on the part of the Union forces. The paper looks at Herman Haupt's role in controlling the railroads and maintaining the war effort and shows how the ensuing end of the war and reconstruction cemented both the need and the ability of the US government to control this essential developmental resource.
From the Paper
"One of the most important issues with regard to armed conflict is resources, who has them or can get them and who does not and cannot. It would seem that to a large degree resources can make the difference between the winner and the loser in any regional or international conflict. In fact resources are so crucial that most use the availability of resources, rather than the righteousness of the cause as one of the fundamental decision factors of whether to enter into armed conflict at all. In the case of civil wars the issue frequently becomes more complicated, as the control of such resources, as they exists and can be manipulated, determines to some degree the outcome."
| |
|
The End Of The Civil War and Reconstruction, 1995.
An discussion of how Johnson's plan for reconstruction was very different from what Lincoln had envisioned. Deals with this in terms of: political reconstruction; economics and labor and religion and society.
900 words (approx. 3.6 pages), 1 source, $ 31.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
From the Paper
"THE END OF THE CIVIL WAR AND THE RECONSTRUCTION
INTRODUCTION
Lincoln's plan of reconstruction was designed to restore the Southern states to the Union with maximum speed and a minimum of Federal intervention. The great majority of white southerners would receive amnesty and full power to reestablish loyal state government. In contrast, Andrew Johnson romanticized the self-sufficient farmer, and seemed to dream of an agrarian utopia free of the influence of the rich planter aristocracy. But he also viewed the future economic role of blacks as no more than that of an unskilled agricultural worker. Johnson's agrarian vision was never realized and the old southern aristocracy which he originally criticized, gradually regained much of its former influence ..."
| |
|
The Nature of post-Civil War Reconstruction in the US, 1999.
A look at the problems engendered by the various reconstructions schemes after the American Civil War.
1,323 words (approx. 5.3 pages), 8 sources, $ 44.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
From the Paper
"The inherent sectional conflict in America between the North and the South realized itself in the Civil War. With the north's eventual victory, the problem of how to restore the South to the union became a major controversy, and the method of reconstruction decided upon was by no means faultless. Not only did reconstruction create disunion because of disagreements over various means to enact reconstruction, but Southerners were generally dissatisfied. Further, the emancipated slaves were still in a poor condition. Some were essentially still slaves, despite programs to ameliorate their suffering. Overall, reconstruction, though its goals were well-intentioned, created the very type of sectional discord which it sought to eliminate. "
| |
|
The Reconstruction Era, 2007.
This paper discusses the difficulties and diverse processes used to direct the slow and confusing political evolution of the South during the Reconstruction era after the end of the Civil War.
2,835 words (approx. 11.3 pages), 15 sources, APA, $ 84.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper stresses that, although the era of reconstruction after the Civil War is often referred to as "The Tragic Era" or "The Age of Hate", the treatment given the South is considered to be the mildest punishment ever inflicted after an unsuccessful Civil War. The author points out that the fact that the Civil War brought forth the inherent differences of the people of the North and the South underscores the success of the political leadership of the North and the adaptability of the South in ultimately unifying the country. The paper explains that the three phases of political reconstruction of the South---the presidential, radical and redemption periods---not only reconstructed the South but also strengthened the entire country's political system.
From the Paper
"The redemption period of reconstruction between the years of 1873-77 brought more trouble and many conclude this was the ending stage of reconstruction. The North "would help the return of decent government, and whatever elements obstruct the attainment of so desirable an end, whether ignorance, lust power or greed of plunder will be thrust aside". The Republican Party was divided because of racial tensions. The radical Republicans didn't want blacks to hold office, but would allow them to vote. This disagreement allowed Democrats to increase in strength. The poor blacks and whites ... "
| |
|
Reconstruction, 2002.
An evaluation of the success of the Reconstruction period after the Civil War.
1,417 words (approx. 5.7 pages), 6 sources, APA, $ 47.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper looks at how the Reconstruction period after the Civil War was a time when America attempted to rebuild the structures and societal elements that had been lost during the war. It examines how reconstruction was not only about building the structures again, but was also about rebuilding and redefining American values and how the entire economic structure and socioeconomic culture needed to be re-defined. It explores the issues of the success or failure of the Civil War on the basis of whether the goals of the war were realized in the reconstruction period. It supports the position that the reconstruction was a success and that the accomplishments during this time period laid the foundation groundwork for future reforms.
From the Paper
"Many who support the idea that the Civil War was a splendid failure, including Foner, do so on the grounds that the condition of the blacks in the North was not an immediate and drastic improvement. They were not afforded the same benefits and status of the whites. However, one must remember that they could at least earn a wage, and as slaves this opportunity did not exist. The black person may have had to work longer and harder than the whites for less pay and a substandard lifestyle, but we must remember that in the South, they had substandard living conditions and did not have the chance to earn a wage. Working in the northern factories gave the blacks a way out; some worked and saved their money. They could buy themselves education and eventually became a force to be reckoned with and a voice to be heard in the years to come."
| |
|
Reconstruction: The Failure of The Union, 2002.
Examines the Union's approach to reconstruction after the American Civil War, some of the errors it made during reconstruction, and the ramifications of those errors.
2,650 words (approx. 10.6 pages), 6 sources, $ 97.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The American Civil War was thought to be the end of conflict in the United States. However, in many ways it was the beginning of many new problems. The Union that had gained control of the country is seen as building on victory, yet in this endeavour they made many mistakes which were to have long term consequences. This paper considers the mistakes, what they were, how they were made and why they were made along with the impact they had on the future.
|
|
|
