The coverage on the Civil War is incredibly biased, reductionist, replete with factual errors and ideological obfuscation. For example, it states no Southern States had referendums before secession-- this is blatantly untrue. Then it says, the war was all about slavery. Sheesh... Lincoln is said to dislike Sherman because Sherman was a racist... and what was Lincoln?
Now, Lincoln had no intention of treating the south the way it was ultimately treated during reconstruction, and I personally believe that this is a major part of why he was killed, but that is simply my own opinion. I also know that he was inspired to this extent...the Union HAD to hold. Events in the next fifty to ninety years proved this. Without a united America, despite the underlying harm done to her and the Constitution after the war and by FDR, the world would have come under tyranical subjugation because the powers in Europe would have played the two resulting nations (CSA and USA) off against one another and the US would not have been strong enough to prevail.
IMHO, the good Lord knew this and the Union had to hold.
So, do I agree with every represetation of the civil was in PHUS...no, but does it get the essential message and intrinsic issues right...IMHO, yes.
The critical issue is whether we all, now, can be true to our roots and restore our constitutionla and moral heritage. I believe this book goes a long way in helping in that regard.
Thanks, paleo. I'll skip the book.