Opinion of the "Radical Republicans"

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

Some of the absolute greatest. Most of the stronger criticisms of them originated within deliberately and consciously ultra-reactionary and slavery-apologist schools of historiography in the early twentieth century.

[Del Tachi]

I'm quite a fan of them, although they could have been more effective in implementing their ideals.

Which would have assuredly led to another Civil War.  

Seriously though, turning the South in a despotic military state is a very un-American idea if you get down to it.  

As is slavery. Funny how that works out.

Yeah, but no one is calling the slaveowners "Freedom Fighters".  

[Sopranos Republican]

I'm quite a fan of them, although they could have been more effective in implementing their ideals.

Which would have assuredly led to another Civil War.  

Seriously though, turning the South in a despotic military state is a very un-American idea if you get down to it.  

As is slavery. Funny how that works out.

Yeah, but no one is calling the slaveowners "Freedom Fighters".  

Yeah, we're only calling their strongest opposition Freedom Fighters.

[Del Tachi]

I'm quite a fan of them, although they could have been more effective in implementing their ideals.

Which would have assuredly led to another Civil War. 

Seriously though, turning the South in a despotic military state is a very un-American idea if you get down to it. 

As is slavery. Funny how that works out.

Yeah, but no one is calling the slaveowners "Freedom Fighters". 

Yeah, we're only calling their strongest opposition Freedom Fighters.

Radical Republicanism had very little to do with slavery after a the Reconstruction Amendments were passed.  It was much more about subjugating the Southern people and treating them as a conquered nation.  Of course, that's terribly hypocritical considering that Republicans made the argument that the South never had actually seceded in the first place.

[I Will Not Be Wrong]

Freedom Fighters!

[Vega]

Horrible People.

[H. Ross Peron]

Horrible People.

Why?

[Citizen Hats]

I'm quite a fan of them, although they could have been more effective in implementing their ideals.

Which would have assuredly led to another Civil War. 

Seriously though, turning the South in a despotic military state is a very un-American idea if you get down to it. 

As is slavery. Funny how that works out.

Yeah, but no one is calling the slaveowners "Freedom Fighters". 

Yeah, we're only calling their strongest opposition Freedom Fighters.

Radical Republicanism had very little to do with slavery after a the Reconstruction Amendments were passed.  It was much more about subjugating the Southern people and treating them as a conquered nation.  Of course, that's terribly hypocritical considering that Republicans made the argument that the South never had actually seceded in the first place.

Of course, pitty the poor electorates whose first actions were to pass the Black Codes.  100 years of Southern History after the civil war demonstrate nothing if not that the Radical Republicans were right

[Mechaman]

I'm quite a fan of them, although they could have been more effective in implementing their ideals.

Which would have assuredly led to another Civil War.  

Seriously though, turning the South in a despotic military state is a very un-American idea if you get down to it.  

As is slavery. Funny how that works out.

Yeah, but no one is calling the slaveowners "Freedom Fighters".  

Yeah, we're only calling their strongest opposition Freedom Fighters.

Radical Republicanism had very little to do with slavery after a the Reconstruction Amendments were passed.  It was much more about subjugating the Southern people and treating them as a conquered nation.  Of course, that's terribly hypocritical considering that Republicans made the argument that the South never had actually seceded in the first place.

Well of course silly goose, once slavery was abolished they had little reason to continue to promote anti-slavery legislation.

Of course, Reconstruction was handled wrongly.  But that was more of a problem of the Republicans succumbing to a "sensible moderate direction" than them actually following through on the Radicals' ideas.  If they had gone all the way with the Radicals' plans the weight of the punishment for the South would've been targeted towards the real villains: the landowners.  Instead, what we got was a watered down Reconstruction that slapped the filthy landowners on the wrist while disenfranchising many poor whites in the region (and in reality putting the blunt of the blame on them, instead of the landowners and the Confederate leadership) and help create notoriously corrupt Republican regimes in the South that would set the stage for "the Redeemers".

[politicallefty]

I'd prefer the South have been punished, but only insofar as that would have been productive. Reconstruction's biggest failure is that it inevitably relegated African-Americans to second-class status in the South, with the federal government effectively useless on the issue until several decades later. The Radical Republicans absolutely had the right ideals in promoting equality. Jim Crow should never have been allowed to happen. I don't pretend to know what the best solution would have been at the time. I wouldn't have ruled out relegating certain states back to territorial status (or even redrawn the Southern states altogether), with re-admission contingent upon very strict protections of civil rights and civil liberties for African-Americans (and indeed, all residents for that matter).

[So rightwing that I broke the Political Compass!]

Thoroughly insane. It's not PC to say it, but the fact was a population of recently freed plantation slaves was not prepared for political and economic management, nor were the lower classes of whites. The entire idea of the RR's was to tear down the South's organic elite and give it's influence and responsibilities to corrupt carpetbaggers and an incapable proletariat, which inevitably would have meant the former's hegemony due to their superior competence whilst the collaborator populations focused on extracting whatever they could. In essence they were imperialist socialists, a bizarre and absurd combination if their ever was one.

[TNF]

Thoroughly insane. It's not PC to say it, but the fact was a population of recently freed plantation slaves was not prepared for political and economic management, nor were the lower classes of whites. The entire idea of the RR's was to tear down the South's organic elite and give it's influence and responsibilities to corrupt carpetbaggers and an incapable proletariat, which inevitably would have meant the former's hegemony due to their superior competence whilst the collaborator populations focused on extracting whatever they could. In essence they were imperialist socialists, a bizarre and absurd combination if their ever was one.

The only thing that the South's "organic elite" deserved after the war was the bayonet. It's rather unfortunate that they did not meet it en masse.