View single post by javal1
 Posted: Sat Dec 22nd, 2007 08:28 pm
 PM  Quote  Reply  Full Topic 
javal1
Grumpy Geezer


Joined: Thu Sep 1st, 2005
Location: Tennessee USA
Posts: 1503
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

This has the possibility of being a fantastic thread. The problem, as alluded to in previous posts, is that you can't look at the problems the South may have today and ascribe them all to reconstruction. I do, by the way, happen to believe that reconstruction was a horrible setback for a country which, after 4 years of hell, finally had an opportunity to come together. And I certainly believe (which will draw the ire of all those Lincoln haters out there) that had he lived, things would have been done differently (and better).

Now at the risk of offending some Southerners, I think many of the problems they have today are the fault of norms and mores that they carried well into the 20th-century. Yes, the South still lags behind in many (most) statistics - education, per capita income, etc., but can that really be blamed on reconstruction? Is it possible that the overt racism of the 1940's, 50's, and 60's contributed? Before all the partisans jump on me and point out that the North was racist as well, I concede that. But give a black in the 40's, 50's, or 60's a choice of where to live, say Philadelphia, Mississippi or Philadelphia, Pa., where do you think they chose?

What does that have to do with why the South lags behind today? Much of the income to state's comes from the Federal government in the form of Block Grant's. Money given to state's by the US Gov't. to build schools, build roads, etc. How are they allocated? Population.

There are other issues that could be blamed, but the point is this - how do you differentiate between the the social problems caused by reconstruction and those caused by the behavior of the South in the 20th-century?

 Close Window