1. Analyze the Goals and Strategies of Reconstruction for President Lincoln and Congressional Republicans (Pick two of three).
President Abraham Lincoln was considering a reconstruction of the rebellious southern states before the Civil War was over. He intended to reunite the United States as swiftly and simply as possible. Congressional Republicans, on the other hand, felt that the entire southern way of life had to be completely revamped. During the entire course of Reconstruction from 1865 to 1877, the goals and strategies differed between President and Congress.
Lincoln felt that the Confederate States represented a minority that had never officially left the Union. His stated goal at the beginning of the Civil War was preservation of the Union. As a result, his Reconstruction policy was fairly lenient; it required at least ten percent of a rebel state’s voters to swear an oath of allegiance to the Union and to pledge to abide by emancipation. States that complied with these two terms were to be swiftly readmitted. Lincoln did not support a strong reeducation of the South early in his second term. He refused to sign the Wade-Davis Bill, which required at least fifty percent of a state’s voters to swear the oath of allegiance and emancipation pledge.
Congressional Republicans included both Moderates and Radicals, with the latter becoming the majority during the administration of President Andrew Johnson. Radicals felt that the southern states in question had left the Union and were to be treated as conquered provinces. Radicals believed that before the South could be readmitted into the Union, its existing social order had to be destroyed. Radicals forced ratification of the fourteenth and fifteen amendments, which extended citizenship to all races and gave black males suffrage, as requirements for readmission. In addition, Radicals pushed for military presence in the South in order for Republican governments ensuring black rights to be founded.
No conclusion, but what do you think so far?
pretty good, you may want to expand your introduction a bit. Also, take into account if you turned this in on the Ap exam you'd get around a 4. If you were doing this on the AP exam I would: write a rebuttal paragraph, add in more historical data, leave conclussion out all together.
[IMG]http://img471.imageshack.us/img471/9462/11thcommandment8fl.jpg[/IMG]
True Dedication for a cause:
[IMG]http://img108.imageshack.us/img108/5046/dedicationue6.jpg[/IMG]
Thanks for the input! The rebuttal is the hard part for me. Just trying to think about a counterargument to my thesis while solidifying my own [thesis]!
I pretty much agree with GoPunchRocks. Get some more info in there. I personally never used rebuttal paragraphs, but put my rebuttal into my main paragraphs. I never really felt comfortable having a paragraph that contradicts your whole point. I'd rather take it little by little, but to each his own. I also like conclusions...but again, that's just me.
Oh, and I would try and make it flow a little better. Try to find a link between your two body paragraphs (or however many you have) and write a sentence to show the connection. It make the essay much easier to read.
[=RoyalBlue][=Comic Sans MS]
"I refuse to prove that I exist," says God, "for proof denies faith, and without faith I am nothing."
"But," say Man, "the Babel fish is a dead giveaway, isn't it? It could not have evolved by chance. It