Dbq Reconstruction

The Reconstruction debate has haunted historians since the process began. First, both politicians and citizens argued about how the ordeal should be carried out. Then, the historians analyzed and debated over the success of Reconstruction and the true motives of those who pushed for Reconstruction; for instance, questions regarding whether the radical Republicans really cared about obtaining freedoms for freed African Americans (rather than solely caring about revenge and power) and whether Reconstruction actually worked reigned. To answer such questions, various historians over time set forth different theories. The first interpretation of Reconstruction was set forth by William Dunning in his work Reconstruction, Political and Economic

E. B. Du Bois was a black scholar who was the first to challenge the Dunning school of thought in his 1935 book, Black Reconstruction. Du Bois believed that Reconstruction was a true effort (on both sides) to create a democratic society. He claimed that the misdeeds of the government, reaping profits for example, were exaggerated. For instance, Du Bois argued that the governments were so expensive and used so much money because they attempted to provide public education and other services on a scale that had never before been attempted. This theory lost its credibility due to Du Bois’s use of Marxist

This argued that the Republicans, although not entirely innocent, had engaged in a genuine effort to solve the problem of race in the South by providing protections to the newly-freed. The Radicals were not solely motivated by immoral purposes. Further, these historians purported that there was no “black rule” as they had played only a small role in government, and there was corruption in both the North and the South. Finally, Reconstruction failed to gain true justice and freedom from discrimination for blacks. The final theory of Reconstruction purported in Belz’s 1976 work, A New Birth of Freedom emphasized the positive aspects of Reconstruction such as the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments. Belz argued that these amendments transferred the duty to protect the rights of citizens from the states to the federal