Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

The Calculus of Violence: How Americans Fought the Civil War by Aaron Sheehan-Dean (review)

The Calculus of Violence: How Americans Fought the Civil War by Aaron Sheehan-Dean (review) as a group they resisted emancipation as a dangerous deviation from the pure original goal of preserving the Union that had granted this largely immigrant community key political rights. But they also saw the Union war in instrumental terms, for “Union victory would ‘keep aloft the banner of democracy’ abroad,” notably in Ireland. And their participation in the Union armed forces would allow them “to dispel concerns about their reli- gion” among hostile Protestants (91). Moreover, Kurtz’s essay effectively demonstrates just how divided among itself this religious community was. Fellow immigrant Lieber likewise saw the Union’s vital importance in the context of the global struggle for liberty. But as Dilbeck sums it up, he also argued that “the only Union worth saving was a Union saved by a justly waged war, one waged in accordance with the highest ideals of a free and enlightened people” (159). In light of all this variety and division, many readers may rightly wonder what held the Unionist coalition together, or even whether it ultimately held together. After all, by 1864 Bates found his position in an increasingly radical Lincoln administration untenable. In the introduction, Gallagher and Varon attempt to identify “three core convictions” http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png The Journal of the Civil War Era University of North Carolina Press

The Calculus of Violence: How Americans Fought the Civil War by Aaron Sheehan-Dean (review)

The Journal of the Civil War Era , Volume 10 (3) – Aug 28, 2020

Loading next page...
 
/lp/university-of-north-carolina-press/the-calculus-of-violence-how-americans-fought-the-civil-war-by-aaron-lK7yvUvgYT
Publisher
University of North Carolina Press
Copyright
Copyright @ The University of North Carolina Press
ISSN
2159-9807

Abstract

as a group they resisted emancipation as a dangerous deviation from the pure original goal of preserving the Union that had granted this largely immigrant community key political rights. But they also saw the Union war in instrumental terms, for “Union victory would ‘keep aloft the banner of democracy’ abroad,” notably in Ireland. And their participation in the Union armed forces would allow them “to dispel concerns about their reli- gion” among hostile Protestants (91). Moreover, Kurtz’s essay effectively demonstrates just how divided among itself this religious community was. Fellow immigrant Lieber likewise saw the Union’s vital importance in the context of the global struggle for liberty. But as Dilbeck sums it up, he also argued that “the only Union worth saving was a Union saved by a justly waged war, one waged in accordance with the highest ideals of a free and enlightened people” (159). In light of all this variety and division, many readers may rightly wonder what held the Unionist coalition together, or even whether it ultimately held together. After all, by 1864 Bates found his position in an increasingly radical Lincoln administration untenable. In the introduction, Gallagher and Varon attempt to identify “three core convictions”

Journal

The Journal of the Civil War EraUniversity of North Carolina Press

Published: Aug 28, 2020

There are no references for this article.