Bests & Worsts Reviews from Amazon

Having read the book after seeing all the negative reviews, I don't find any evidence of the "Yankee bias" that the negative reviewers of this book claim exists. What I see instead is a comprehensive and engaging narrative of how the culture and commerce of the Antebellum South thrived on the institution of slavery and how deep and widespread the South's dependence on slave labor was, not just in shaping its economic structure but also its moral worldview. By focusing on the devastating cultural and social effects of the Civil War on this colossal edifice, the volume nicely complements others primarily dealing with military campaigns. At the same time the military campaigns provide a recurring background to the author's narrative. The story is illuminated by valuable diary entries and testimonies from a handful of key Southerners and slave-owners, most prominently the Edmondstons of North Carolina and the Stones of Louisiana. In addition Levine draws upon the words of dozens of major and minor players, including generals, privates, politicians, slaves, non slave-owning commoners, religious leaders and merchants. Their words showcase the diversity of opinions about slavery, the Union and the Civil War dispersed across multiple social strata. Levine starts by providing us with an overview of the astounding affluence that slave labor made possible for Southerners and the sheer size of the slave-based economy. The combined value of the slaves in the South was a gargantuan $3 billion and one in three persons was a bonded laborer. Levine then documents the slave policies perpetuated by masters in the south and the self-serving justifications that they came up with for sustaining this labor. While economic reasons always loomed large in their calculations, it was clear that the longtime dependence of their families on this system had allowed them to come up with all kinds of convenient moral, religious and social reasons for supporting a way of life fundamentally grounded in slavery. In addition they regularly appeased poor, white non-slave owners with gifts of slaves, money and social status to keep them from commiserating with the slaves and turning against them. And while the friction that their policies caused with the North was often couched in terms of states' rights, it was clear - and Levine details this through words explicitly uttered by many prominent slave owners and Southern leaders themselves- that slavery was always the main issue at stake; Southern slave owners simply could not envision a system without bonded labor and the question of states' rights was often at best a secondary issue. The perpetuation of slavery was explicitly codified in the Confederate Constitution. These are all cold facts supported by extensive documented evidence (the bibliography runs to more than 150 pages), and not bias on the part of the author as the negative reviewers would have us believe. Levine provides an excellent run-up to 1860 when matters came to a head with the election of Lincoln. The book does a very good job of describing how Lincoln's thinking changed over time, from wanting to simply preserve the Union by only gradually setting the stage for abolition to becoming a convert aligned with Thaddeus Stevens and other "radical" Republicans. As the Northern states decided on various progressive policies including the abolition of slavery in new states, the Southern states felt the noose tightening. It's interesting to note that the Republicans did not try to outlaw slavery outright, but it was the South's constant opposition to their policies (especially pertaining to newly admitted states and the fugitive slave law) and the concurrent secession that made compromise impossible. Levine also sheds valuable light on pro-Union Southerners, especially in the upper Southern states, whose conflicting views about the war were shaped by political, economic and even moral concerns. After laying this groundwork, the book then deals with the systematic demolition by the Civil War of this decades-old way of life. Levine charts the changing, initially upbeat, attitudes of slaveless whites and even blacks about the war as chances of victory started looking slim. Confederate armies started finding little support among pro-Union Southerners in states like Kentucky and Missouri and poor whites grew disillusioned about what they increasingly saw as a rich man's war. Concomitantly, the recruitment of black soldiers in large numbers was a breath of fresh air to slaves in the South who were accustomed to thinking of themselves as perpetually indentured. Levine also details the rising aspirations among free black people in the North even as they dreamt of a future of literacy, money and freedom for their children. Another interesting statistic cited by Levine is the enthusiastic support in favor of the Union among immigrant Irish and German military recruits who made up almost a quarter of the Union army. Military engagements are succinctly described, but they provide a backdrop to the far more consequential uprooting of traditions and customs that the conflict brought about, engendering deep feelings of fear and hatred but also hope and understanding. Families which had owned and exploited slavery for three generations suddenly found themselves literally out on the streets. This demolition caused a seismic shift in the whole nature of the South and irreversibly affected the social structure and politics of the entire country. While one does sometimes sympathize with the plight of folks whose entire world came crashing down around them, it's clear that we were dealing with two fundamentally opposed systems which simply could not co-exist. Perhaps the greatest irony in the end is that it was the Confederacy which hastened the end of slavery. The book thus is basically a descriptive account of the depth to which slavery was woven into the South's existence and how massively the Civil War overturned this basic social foundation. It's a historical account dealing with the facts, not a moral one in which the author doles out his personal judgement. And unless you actually think that slavery was a good thing, there's no way in which you can accuse the author of having ulterior motives. I think the simplest explanation of the negative reviews (which are almost all one line pronouncements) is that they have been written by folks who haven't actually read the book. Based on my reading, I strongly urge readers to take a look at the book themselves and decide if the vitriol makes sense.