The traditional view on Reconstruction labeled it as a terrible point in the democracy of America. According to this view, Andrew Johnson, like Abraham Lincoln, wished to pardon the Confederates and reunite them with the Union. Radical Republicans, who wished to dominate the South, disposed of Johnson’s plan and gave power to former slaves, carpetbaggers, and southern whites who cooperated with the Republican Party of the North, all of which were unfit to lead southern governments. In the end, this angered many in the South, including the Ku Klux Klan, who claimed patriotism to restore white supremacy. With this take on the Reconstruction in mind, it is hard to see how Lincoln would have made a difference in the events that occurred. Lincoln …show more content…
Lincoln is still portrayed similarly in some aspects, such as his willingness to pardon the Confederates in order to create loyal governments. He also tolerated variations on Reconstruction. It is also important to note that Lincoln was not looking for a social revolution in which African Americans would be given full voting rights. However, Lincoln differed from Johnson in that Lincoln was broad-minded, willing to change his mind and cooperate with others, and would have let his ideas progress positively during Reconstruction, whereas Johnson was obstinate, racist, and unable to hear criticisms. Congress eventually became tired of Johnson’s refusal to cooperate and implemented their own plans for Reconstruction, which included passing the Civil Rights Act of 1866 (all were equal before the law), the Fourteenth Amendment (equality was now in the Constitution), and the Reconstruction Acts of 1867 and 1868 (the South had new governments, and for the first time in American history, black males could vote). The House of Representatives then impeached Johnson (Johnson was acquitted) when he tried to stop the plans of