The Conservative Basis of Radical Reconstruction.
Topic The topic of this paper by Michail Les Benedict is presented in a very scholarly fashion. The details of his work almost hide the subject he is addressing. His topic concerns the lasting affects the Republicans unwillingness to push for stronger nationalistic control over state rights. His arguments are well documented and take to task other scholars. In particular he speaks of McKitrick, Brock, and Kelley for their lack of analysis of why Republicans failed to achieve their goals of bringing the south back into the union while encouraging Negro suffrage. The lack of republican desire to intervene during this critical time in history has led to many searching for the rights that they thought was the purpose of winning the Civil War. .
The thesis of Benedict's article is quite clear. He restates it in his closing paragraph. "After 100 years, the constitutional conservatism which prevented Republicans from protecting adequately the rights of citizens remains a part of American political character." This clearly .
2.
states his position on what he believes to be a gross error on the part of the Republican leadership in the time of Reconstruction.
By bring the 13th, 14th, and 15th amendments up to show the shortcomings of all three, Benedict attacks the very freedom that Republicans were trying to cope with and trying to establish for the south. The politics of the day can only be judged by time, and time has been kind to the outcome. It seems the product of the Republicans lack of ability to make a stronger attempt toward pulling for greater national protection of citizen's rights. We hold these truths to be self-evident did not seem to apply to the long-term freedom of blacks and to the securing a government that ensured these rights. Republicans failed to see the long-term effects their lack of leadership would cause. Benedict establishes the idea of three sources of national power over states rights.