Such as? I'm not familiar with the term.
"You want to make the Civil War about one issue, a moral issue, and wash everything that Lincoln and his party did on that basis. It is you who are oversimplifying, you who are working a factious agenda."
You, again, mischaracterize my position. I have little or nothing with regard to Lincoln on this thread. I have commented on the obvious southern motivation for attempting secession. It was insurrectionist, unilateral secession that led to war. It was protecting and expanding slavery that led to secession.
I notice you have not commented on the Rhett's editorial yet (#234)? It goes directly to the point. Is the truth too much for you to swallow?
[You, sidestepping and being coy] Such as? I'm not familiar with the term.
Marxists talk about vanguard-led revolution and wars of liberation as a validator of vanguard (Marxist) leadership. Liberation of the masses washes clean and exalts violence against the bourgeoisie and other oppressor classes, and it validates the despotic power of the visionary leadership and its right to lead policy. McPherson's writing applies that conceptual framework to the Civil War and American society.
You haven't heard of "wars of liberation"? Of vanguardism?