Question #f09e3
1 Answer
Relative to U.S. History, a "Moderate" favored rapid restoration of the Southern states without "punishment. A "Radical" insisted on punitive actions as well as the loss of between the States.
Explanation:
The terms are used with slightly different definitions or applications at different times and places in history. The BEST starting point is really the accepted definitions of the terms. A "Moderate" is not extreme, but takes a "middle road". A "Radical" desires a rapid change to a NEW form. That is in contrast also to a "Reactionary" who desires a rapid change to an OLD form (or at least, NOT changing the form they have).
http://www.differencebetween.com/difference-between-moderate-and-vs-radical/
An example in English-Indian history is here:
http://www.zahie.com/categories/details/history/difference-between-moderates-and-radicals.html
For U.S. History this relates primarily to the War Between the States.
Moderate Republicans agreed with President Lincoln that the seceded states should be restored to the Union as simply and swiftly as reasonable but only on Congress plans, not the President's. The Radical Republicans, on the other hand, believed that the South needed to be painfully punished for their sins.
http://www.answers.com/Q/How_were_Radical_Republicans_and_moderate_Republicans_similar_and_different
