• LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        4 months ago

        I mean not saying he’s the worst, but wasn’t he famously corrupt? I have a hard time getting past that one.

        • PugJesus@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          22
          ·
          4 months ago

          His administration was very corrupt, which is a black mark that can’t really be re-evaluated away. Grant himself is widely accepted to have been innocent - the man died nearly penniless, and was never a prodigious spender - but he was trusting and loyal to his friends. These are actually really BAD traits for a politician, in which trust and loyalty are a big “USE ME” sign painted on your back.

          However, Grant’s overwhelmingly negative reputation has a lot to do with the domination of Lost Causers in historical academia up until the 70s. He was positively radical on civil rights, crushed the First KKK, pursued a policy of negotiation and attempted coexistence rather than war with Native American tribes, set up reform within the civil service, was positively inclined towards women’s suffrage, created the country’s first national parks, supported public schooling, and elevated African-Americans and Jewish-Americans to high posts within the government despite the racism and religious prejudice rampant in the period.

          • cmbabul@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            4 months ago

            Very very unfortunately, trust and loyalty are a “USE ME” sign painted on one’s back in many parts of the modern world .

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      4 months ago

      He committed the unforgivable sin of actually trying to do Reconstruction, and no modern American historical revisionist can tolerate that shit.