Why Is Reconstruction Good Or Bad

Reconstruction: Revolutionary or Rotten? There is no doubt that the final outcome of the Reconstruction Era could have been argued as both a success and failure. Its successes may have been seen through the political changes and major constitutional amendments, while it could be disputed that its failures of the non-permanency of political changes and immoral practices trumped the attempts made during the period. In the words of Eric Foner, “[Reconstruction was] an unfinished Revolution,” meaning that many of the decisions made during the era were revolutionary, despite their execution was never fully carried out. Directly after the war the 13th amendment was ratified, legally abolishing slavery. This made all African Americans free of their masters and allowed them to move, attempt to find their families, and work how and when they want. This amendment was the basis for many political, economic, and moral decisions to come: an undisputed long-term success. After Congress took power in 1867, and Johnson lost his democratic influence, more influential constitutional amendments were passed. The 14th amendment, passed in 1868, granted anyone born in the United States citizenship and equal protection under the law. The 14th amendment was passed in response to the uprising of white supremacy through Black Codes in attempt to limit the white elite power in the south. The 15th amendment was passed in 1870 at the peak of Reconstruction and …show more content…
Reconstruction allowed many platforms to be created that changed America and her future in the long-run; however, in the short-run the strong discrimination and feeling of white supremacy diminished any hope for quick, radical change. By taking both the short- and long-run effects into account, reconstruction was not either a success or failure, but a constitutional success and an on-the-ground