29 of 32 people found the following review helpful:
4.0 out of 5 stars
Great Analysis, Poor Editing, March 19, 2003
This review is from: Abraham Lincoln and the Second American Revolution (Paperback)
James McPherson is not only the preeminent Historian of the US Civil War, but one of the greatest historians working today. He offers razor sharp analysis of complicated issues, with fair consideration of all points of view. Best of all, McPherson does all that in clear, concise and at times poetic language, that is remarkably easy to read.
'Abraham Lincoln and the Second American Revolution' enjoys all the benefits of McPherson's considerable scholarship. Its problems are almost exclusively editorial.
This thin volume (152 pages of text; 20 more pages for notes, bibliography and an index) contains seven essays about the two themes in the title - The US Civil war seen as the second American Revolution, and Abraham Lincoln's role in it.
The first essay argues convincingly that the Civil War did radically change the Unites States. From a Slaveholding Republic, it became a free one. Politically, the center of gravity moved from the South to the north. Economically, the Industrial revolution, earlier contained in New England, spread out and defeated the plantation economy. In the South, the prevailing order was weakened, although not surmounted, and the situation of Blacks improved considerably, although equality was still very far. The theme McPherson is most interested in, however, is the change from a philosophy of negative liberty - freedom from government oppression - to one of positive liberty - the right for protection - guaranteed by the Federal government.
The second essay discusses Lincoln's role as the leader of the revolution. Lincoln, McPherson argues, was a pragmatic revolutionary. The revolution, which he brought on America, was caused by Lincoln's accurate assessment of necessities, not by a strong ideological tie to the revolution. Lincoln was no Lenin - he held sternly to the one principle of democracy, and the second American Revolution happened as a by-product of defending this principle.
In the third essay, 'Lincoln and Liberty', McPherson discusses how Lincoln's struggle for positive liberty was seen as despotic by those holding the principles of negative liberty. The Republicans wanted to restrict and ultimately destroy the rights of Southerners to hold slaves - and to enforce these restrictions by government action, if that was what it took.
Lincoln's role as supreme military commander is a neglected issue in Civil War historiography, claims McPherson, and he sets out to remedy that in the following essay. Lincoln's most important contribution, he concludes, was his unyielding hold on the doctrine of Unconditional Surrender. This issue also returns in Essay number 6, which compares Lincoln to Northerners who were not nearly as clear about the goal of fighting as he was.
Lincoln's rhetoric and the use of metaphors is the subject of the fifth essay. In an interesting comparison with Jefferson Davis, McPherson concludes that Lincoln's usage of metaphors in writing and speaking made him a superb communicator, which Davis wasn't. Thus, McPherson agrees with David Potter that had Lincoln been the leader of the South in the war, the confederacy might have maintained its independence.
One weakness of the collection is the lack of coherence in topics. The illuminating comparison between Jefferson Davis and Abraham Lincoln in this essay, for example, is sadly missing from other chapters. Take War Leadership -Lincoln's grasp of the northern grand strategy made him replace popular generals who nonetheless could not follow his concept of total war. Jeff Davis on the other hand, despite his superior military background (as a war hero and a West-Point graduate), never articulated war aims as Lincoln did, and the Confederate war policy was constructed de facto by the decision of its irregularly brilliant generals. Lincoln would have made much better use of Robert E. Lee than Davis did.
The absence of such themes concurring through the book weakens the narrative, and it remains more an anthology than a focused monograph. Another such problem is the repetition between the essays. The final essay repeats almost all of the discussion about Isaiah Berlin's concepts of positive and negative liberty, before launching into the new theme. That theme, the turning away from positive liberty back to negative liberty during reconstruction, is fascinating. During reconstruction, Republicans had to constantly use the military in order to enforce equality for blacks on the unwilling Southrons. The disillusionment from Reconstruction and the resurrected fear from governmental tyranny left the racist policies of the South for another century, when Martin Luther King finished that job that Abraham Lincoln has began.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
22 of 26 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Without a doubt, a complete revolution of American ideals., January 12, 1998
By A Customer
This review is from: Abraham Lincoln and the Second American Revolution (Paperback)
As any Lincoln fan knows, the struggle that our 16th President endured during the Civil War was enourmous. This book offers more insights into the constitutional questions that dominated the Civil War. And makes it seem that, unlike any other man in our history save George Washington, Lincoln completely loved, admired, respected, and protected American democracy. Yet, the book also gives us an insight into the counterarguements of the time, something many reviews fail to provide. Over all, this book reinforces every notion of courage, intelligence, and sacrifice that Lincoln has recieved since his death. He truly did lead us through a second revolution.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No