Reconstruction Argumentative Analysis

723 Words 3 Pages
Currently, three plans have been proposed as to the reconstruction of the South and the United States as whole after the Civil War, also known as The War of Northern Aggression in the South. These plans have been proposed by the late President, Abraham Lincoln, President Andrew Johnson, and leader of the Radical Republican faction of the Republican party, Thaddeus Stevens. Each plan has varying degrees of punishments towards seceders and varying views upon slavery and the former Confederacy. With the late president's’ plan being the most lenient and Stevens’ plan being the harshest. So what is the point of my writing today, well I believe that Mr. Thaddeus Steven’s plan is the best for our country now and in the future, the other plans do not …show more content…
The first issue I want to address is the question of African American Rights, In our plan African Americans would become full citizens with complete voting rights and easy access to a scholarly education. They would have the same rights as any white person does in the entirety of the United states. This is similar to Stevens’ plan where he states, “Have not loyal blacks quite as good a right to choose rulers and make laws as rebel whites?” (Stevens 1) However in the other two plans no statement is made about African American suffrage. In all plans African American are made citizens and in only Lincoln’s and Stevens’ plan are they promised an education. I believe that a radical push for equality is the only way to make this country …show more content…
Our plan shall adopt the propositions and restrictions of thee oath in Johnson’s plan, the oath binds the former confederates to a certain path that the federal government can control, which can and will lead to a reduction in disobedience from former

Related Documents