1answer.
Ask question
Login Signup
Ask question
All categories
  • English
  • Mathematics
  • Social Studies
  • Business
  • History
  • Health
  • Geography
  • Biology
  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Computers and Technology
  • Arts
  • World Languages
  • Spanish
  • French
  • German
  • Advanced Placement (AP)
  • SAT
  • Medicine
  • Law
  • Engineering
marysya [2.9K]
3 years ago
10

What strategy did politicians known as redeemers employ to gain political power

History
1 answer:
svp [43]3 years ago
8 0

The <em>redeemers</em> were a political coalition in the Southern states during the Reconstruction Era after the Civil War. During this time, the south was occupied by federal forces, and their governments dominated by Republicans, who tried to guarantee the new civil rights obtained by black people. This was very unpopular for Southerners, who refused to lose their power to black people. So they employed violent measures to prevent them from participating in politics, attacking them and other republicans. The most infamous example of these paramilitary organizations is the Ku Klux Klan, other less known are the White League in Louisiana and the Red Shirts in Mississippi and North Carolina.

So, the strategy they used is violence and threats to undermine the Republican vote. They finally succeeded with the Compromise of 1877, when Hayes became president with the votes of the south in exchange for favors to them, such as the removal of federal forces. This led to the end of the Reconstruction.

You might be interested in
What were the international implications of southern nationalism?
Zepler [3.9K]
This debate isn't merely historical. As could be gleaned from the flaps surrounding statements by Attorney General John Ashcroft and Interior Secretary Gale Norton during their confirmation periods, issues stemming from the Civil War go to the heart of many current political debates: What is the proper role of the federal government? Is a strong national government the best guarantor of rights against local despots? Or do state governments stand as a bulwark against federal tyranny? And just what rights are these governments to protect? Those of the individual or those of society? Such matters are far from settled.

So why was the Civil War fought? That seems a simple enough question to answer: Just look at what those fighting the war had to say. If we do that, the lines are clear. Southern leaders said they were fighting to preserve slavery. Abraham Lincoln said the North fought to preserve the Union, and later, to end slavery.

Some can't accept such simple answers. Among them is Charles Adams. Given Adams' other books, which include For Good and Evil: The Impact of Taxes on the Course of Civilization and Those Dirty Rotten Taxes: The Tax Revolts that Built America, it isn't surprising that he sees the Civil War as a fight about taxes, specifically tariffs.

In When in the Course of Human Events, he argues that the war had nothing to do with slavery or union. Rather, it was entirely about tariffs, which the South hated. The tariff not only drove up the price of the manufactured goods that agrarian Southerners bought, it invited other countries to enact their own levies on Southern cotton. In this telling, Lincoln, and the North, wanted more than anything to raise tariffs, both to support a public works agenda and to protect Northern goods from competition with imports.

Openly partisan to the South, Adams believes that the Civil War truly was one of Northern aggression. He believes that the Southern states had the right to secede and he believes that the war's true legacy is the centralization of power in Washington and the deification of the "tyrant" Abraham Lincoln. To this end, he collects all the damaging evidence he can find against Lincoln and the North. And he omits things that might tarnish his image of the South as a small-government wonderland.

Thus, we hear of Lincoln's use of federal troops to make sure that Maryland didn't secede. We don't learn that Confederate troops occupied eastern Tennessee to keep it from splitting from the rest of the state. Adams tells us of Union Gen. William Sherman's actions against civilians, which he persuasively argues were war crimes. But he doesn't tell us of Confederate troops capturing free blacks in Pennsylvania and sending them south to slavery. Nor does he mention the Confederate policy of killing captured black Union soldiers. He tells us that Lincoln suspended habeas corpus; he doesn't mention that the Confederacy did also.

Adams argues that Lincoln's call to maintain the Union was at root a call to keep tariff revenues coming in from Southern ports. Lincoln, he notes, had vowed repeatedly during the 1860 presidential campaign that he would act to limit the spread of slavery to the West, but he would not move to end it in the South. Lincoln was firmly committed to an economic program of internal improvements -- building infrastructure, in modern terms -- that would be paid for through higher tariffs. When the first Southern states seceded just after Lincoln's election, Adams argues, it was to escape these higher taxes. Indeed, even before Lincoln took office, Congress -- minus representatives from rebel Southern states -- raised tariffs to an average of almost 47 percent, more than doubling the levy on most goods.

7 0
3 years ago
Post your list of three selected events and your explanation of the impact of each event from Step 1 and Step 2 in the Discussio
Vesnalui [34]
It is your mom lol loser
6 0
2 years ago
Which people had privilege in Athenian society? What was life like for them?
-Dominant- [34]

Answer:

In Athens, where they were most numerous, they occupied an intermediate position between visiting foreigners and citizens, having both privileges and duties. ... Sign up here to see what happened On This Day, every day in your inbox! ... The state consists, most broadly, of the agreement of the individuals on the means ...

4 0
2 years ago
PLEASE HELP ILL GIVE BRAINLIEST <br> can someone please help me with this question
34kurt

Answer: A

Explanation: He was

6 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
The best definition of subsistence agriculture is
lakkis [162]
The best definition of subsistence agriculture is <span>(4) producing just enough food for a family’s use.
</span>



7 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Other questions:
  • What is true about party politics?
    11·1 answer
  • How did the Hindu belief in reincarnation contribute to people's acceptance of the jati system?
    14·1 answer
  • Why did patricians pass a set of laws called the Twelve Tables?
    12·1 answer
  • Which european power was first to establish permanent colonies in the americas
    8·1 answer
  • The knights would attack peasants in order to keep them submissive to the ____ of the castle
    14·1 answer
  • who did Donatello associate with? what factors influenced their work? list at least 4 of their major accomplishments
    10·1 answer
  • What was Frederick Douglass contribution to abolitionism?
    15·2 answers
  • Who was the War of 1812 fought against?
    6·1 answer
  • Pls help really fast
    12·1 answer
  • No spam no links no petty answers (I will report u) 20points + brainliest for best answer
    6·1 answer
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!