Week 1 Blog Post Part 2

Week 1 Blog Post Part 2

Regarding Perman and Taylor’s book Major Problems in the Civil War and Reconstruction, I thought that McPherson supported his thesis in his essay “The Second American Revolution” (Perman & Taylor, pp. 3-14). The author uses a good analogy to begin his essay with Garfield as a radical Republican who wanted the federal government to confiscate the property of the southern planters following the Civil War as was done to the Tories during the Revolutionary War. Including Karl Marx’s view of the American Civil War provides another perspective not usually found in the American survey history textbooks. I doubt that hardly any of our politicians would approve of the analogy between the American Civil War and a Communist Revolution. McPherson points out that the Civil War does not dovetail well with “Marxian interpretation” despite Charles A. Beard’s assertion (pp. 5-7). Also significant to his argument was the percentage increase in black literacy following the Civil War to 1900 (p. 11). I agree with McPherson that it is more appropriate to evaluate black progress as the result of the Civil War based upon 19th century circumstances rather than the present.

Leeann Whites’ thesis in “The Civil War as a Crisis in Gender” (Perman & Taylor, pp. 14-24) that the Civil War was an assertion of manhood for both Northern and Southern white men as well as for black men is significant but not necessarily novel. From my viewpoint, all wars throughout history have been a test and assertion of manhood. Since the addition of women into the armed forces (unofficially during the Civil War and officially as early as WWI in the U.S.), war has become a test of both manhood and womanhood. It is part of being human to want to not only prove one’s own worth, but also to prove that one is better than the next person or, in war, the enemy.

Whites points out that the northern white men initially did not want the black men to fight in the Union Army (p. 17). The Union officers felt compelled to include blacks later only due to the outstanding rate of attrition among the enlisted ranks. Both northern and southern whites did not want the blacks to share in any of the glory that might result from combat. The Civil War brought women outside of their domestic sphere and into the public/political sphere. Yet, Whites emphasizes that, after the war, neither black men nor white and black women achieved the equality and freedom they had been hoping for (p. 24).

The essay, “The First Occupation,” by Edward L. Ayers was very insightful. (Perman & Taylor, pp. 24-27) It was written for the general public since it was published in the New York Times Magazine in 2005. Due to the timing, it was obviously intended to be a commentary upon and warning for U.S. conduct in the war/reconstruction in Iraq. Supposedly, as Bush declared, we had already won the war in Iraq well before May 2005 and were engaged in reconstruction. Considering that there were still frequent bombings and battles occurring at that time, it is hard to insist that the war was over. Reconstruction is a lot more difficult when those engaged in it fear for their lives. Northern white men and women that came to the South to help blacks after the Civil War were threatened and attacked as well.

Ayers point number six is an excellent observation. When the duration of reconstruction stretches into years, it is likely to be viewed by the native population as oppression (p. 26). This was true for Iraq almost from the start. Reconstruction in the American South lasted almost ten years (1867-77). It is easy to understand why the Southern whites wanted the Northerners and the Union Army out.

Ayers concludes his essay by saying that “the reconstructor must transform a society in its own image without appearing selfish or self-righteous.” (Perman & Taylor, p. 27) I do not think that is a realistic possibility regardless of the intent of the participants in reconstruction. Even when the motives of the reconstructors are good, those among the conquered who do not want their society changed will view them as invaders. This is simply an unavoidable part of human nature that should not be overlooked when embarking on a reconstruction project in any nation.

Written by Molly Kettler