It's April 1865 and you're President Andrew Johnson

[steve2470]

What do you do about the South ? We already know what he did and did not do.

This is NOT a South-bashing thread. I'm a Southerner myself.

I'm not really sure what he should have done, but he was too easy on the South, I think.
Of course, had he been "more stern" about AA civil rights and de-Confederacizing the South, would this have started the war all over again ? I don't know. Your thoughts ? I'm going to read and interject when I have something halfway intelligent to add

[Warren DeMontague]

1. Would it have started the war all over again? Maybe. But the South had already lost once.

Maybe it would have been difficult, clearly it would have been tumultuous, but imagine if civil rights had taken 30 years, or even 50... instead of 100.

[steve2470]

2. I've read that there was no real political will in the North for sterner measures

Grant did his Klan-suppression thing in 1872 and (I think) deployed the Army to a few states. Of course we all know this wasn't enough. There was the Freedmen's Bureau (which was under-funded and not rigorously protected). Perhaps the war would not have been restarted. Yes, you make a very valid point.

[Marooned]

3. What more would you have wanted him to do?

The entire South was devastated. Rail lines were destroyed, many of the larger cities were destroyed, the economy was in ruins (it took over 100 years for most of the South to recover). Carpetbaggers, occupation forces that enriched themselves stealing anything they could get their hands on, not to mention murdering innocent civilians. I'd say Johnson did enough.

[steve2470]

5. certainly no more economic or infrastructure destruction

Two things come to mind:

1- Adequately fund and protect the Freedmen's Bureaus
2- Adequately protect AA's trying to vote

However, I concede that another war, or, at a minimum, a guerilla war may have erupted. There was intense opposition to AA civil rights in the South. It was clearly an extremely difficult issue.

[LuvNewcastle]

4. The 40 acres and a mule idea was good.

If the former slaves had been given a start, American history could have turned out much differently. Most of them already had a lot of knowledge about agriculture, so if they'd had land to cultivate and a mule to plow their fields with, they could have at least fed themselves and would not have remained so dependent on white people for their survival. However, that land would have needed to be taken from some of the white people and it would have been a monumental task to seize all that land and issue deeds to all the new owners and of course there would have been plenty of resistance from white property owners. You're right, it probably would have started the war all over again. It was pretty much an impossible situation, and the injustice of it all was so terrible that it's no wonder we're still dealing with the fallout.

[steve2470]

6. good points nt

[Confusious]

7. He couldn't do anything

The republicans controlled congress, and almost impeached him.

Look to them as the problem.

Is this an "Obama is powerless" sneak?

[steve2470]

8. not at all

a thought experiment, like the one I did last year.

eta: You are correct about the Radical Republicans. They wanted to be harsher (debatable about too harsh) on the South and Johnson disagreed. So, one can say that by 1869 the overall situation could be laid at both Congress' and Johnson's feet. As I've implied above, it was a damned-if-you-do-damned-if-you-don't situation: be stricter with the South and risk another war or guerilla war, or do it Johnson's way and be seen as "too easy" on the South.

[JustAnotherGen]

9. It's not Jackson

It was Grant, the Whiskey Ring and the Compromise of 1877.

In the 12 years after the Civil War - when my great great grandfather returned to Alabama (he ran away to Mexico in 1860 and made a lot of money as a mercenary of sorts for the French - paid in silver pieces) - our family prospered.


Were there idiots they had to deal with? Sure! And we continued to prosper as best as we could (owned a farm outright that started the wealth being built) - in spite of an oppressive regime.

Had the Republicans not painted themselves into a corner with their shenanigans over Whiskey revenue - they could have pushed forward in spite of the country's Reconstruction fatigue. But they caved.

Jackson did the best he could and was a man of his time. Though - I agree 40 Acres and a Mule would have helped. Or one acre and a blacksmith shop, or a half acre and a seamstress shop, etc etc. It would have changed the lives of millions of black Americans TODAY. For those whose ancestors could not beat the system and get one up on the oppressors - I raise a glass.

How different their lives would have been had the Republicans not thrown us under the bus in 1877.

[steve2470]

10. anyone else ? nt