John J. Dwyer’s The War Between the States: America’s Uncivil War – A Detailed Examination
John J. Dwyer’s The War Between the States: America’s Uncivil War is a revisionist historical account that challenges the mainstream narrative of the Civil War.
Dwyer argues that the war was not solely about slavery but rather a constitutional struggle over states’ rights, economic control, and federal overreach. His book presents a Southern perspective, heavily influenced by the Lost Cause interpretation, and seeks to reframe the war as an unjustified invasion of sovereign states rather than a moral crusade against slavery.
Key Themes and Arguments
The War Was Not Primarily About Slavery
- Dwyer rejects the mainstream narrative that the Civil War was fought solely to end slavery.
- He emphasizes that many Northern leaders, including Abraham Lincoln, initially stated that their goal was to preserve the Union, not to abolish slavery.
- He points out that the Emancipation Proclamation (1863) only freed slaves in Confederate states, leaving slavery intact in the border states (Kentucky, Maryland, Missouri, and Delaware).
- The book highlights the economic and political conflicts between the North and South, particularly over tariffs, industrial policy, and state sovereignty.
The Right of Secession and the Founders’ Constitution
- Dwyer presents a strong constitutional defense of secession, arguing that the United States was created as a voluntary compact of sovereign states.
- He references the Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions (1798-1799), written by Thomas Jefferson and James Madison, which advocated for states nullifying federal laws they deemed unconstitutional.
- He argues that Lincoln violated the Constitution by waging war against states that were simply exercising their 10th Amendment rights to withdraw from the Union.
- Dwyer portrays Jefferson Davis and other Confederate leaders as defenders of the Founders’ vision, standing against an increasingly centralized and authoritarian federal government.
The Economic and Political Divide Between North and South
- The book delves into the economic oppression of the South, particularly the tariff policies that disproportionately benefited the industrial North at the expense of the agrarian South.
- Dwyer argues that the North sought to dominate Southern commerce and agriculture, which led to resentment and secession.
- He discusses how the North’s financial elite, through banking policies and industrial monopolization, aimed to subjugate the South economically, even before the war began.
Lincoln as a Tyrant and the Destruction of Civil Liberties
- Dwyer is highly critical of Abraham Lincoln, painting him as a tyrannical leader who disregarded the Constitution to preserve federal power.
- He discusses how Lincoln:
- Suspended habeas corpus and jailed thousands of political opponents without trial.
- Shut down newspapers that opposed his administration.
- Used military force to subjugate states rather than seeking a peaceful solution.
- Expanded federal power beyond its constitutional limits, setting a dangerous precedent.
- Dwyer argues that Lincoln’s actions permanently changed the American government, shifting it from a decentralized republic to a centralized national authority.
The Brutality of the Union Army and Total War Tactics
- The book condemns the total war strategies of Union generals like William Tecumseh Sherman and Philip Sheridan, who engaged in:
- Scorched-earth tactics, burning Southern cities, homes, and farms.
- Targeting civilians, resulting in mass suffering, starvation, and displacement.
- Destroying Southern infrastructure, not just to defeat the Confederate army but to economically cripple the South for generations.
- Dwyer portrays the Union’s actions as unjustified and excessive, arguing that they violated the principles of just war and the rules of engagement.
Reconstruction as a Second War Against the South
- The book presents Reconstruction (1865-1877) as a continuation of the war by other means, where the federal government imposed military rule over the South.
- Dwyer criticizes:
- The disenfranchisement of former Confederates while giving political control to carpetbaggers and newly freed slaves.
- The corruption and mismanagement of federal programs.
- The economic exploitation of the South, which was left in ruins while Northern industrialists profited.
The Legacy of the War: Dwyer’s Perspective
Dwyer argues that the Civil War fundamentally altered the United States, shifting it from a federation of states to a centralized national government.
- The war set a precedent for federal overreach, which has continued into modern times.
- The South, despite being reintegrated, was economically and politically marginalized for decades.
- The original constitutional order envisioned by the Founders was permanently lost.
Criticism of Dwyer’s The War Between the States
Dwyer’s book is highly controversial because it aligns closely with the Lost Cause interpretation of history, which:
- Downplays the role of slavery in causing the war.
- Portrays the Confederacy as fighting for noble principles rather than an economic system built on human bondage.
- Frames Lincoln as a dictator rather than a leader trying to preserve the Union.
Many mainstream historians argue that:
- Slavery was the central cause of secession, as explicitly stated in Confederate secession documents.
- The North did not wage war for economic control, but to preserve the Union (though economic factors played a role).
- The Confederacy was not a purely constitutional movement, but an attempt to maintain white supremacy and the institution of slavery.
Despite these criticisms, Dwyer’s book is valuable for those seeking a perspective outside the mainstream narrative. It forces readers to question the morality, legality, and long-term consequences of the war, while presenting evidence that challenges modern interpretations of Lincoln and the federal government’s role.
Conclusion: A Provocative Reinterpretation of the Civil War
John J. Dwyer’s The War Between the States: America’s Uncivil War is a revisionist, pro-Confederate analysis that challenges the conventional view of the Civil War as a righteous struggle against slavery. Instead, it presents the conflict as a constitutional war for state sovereignty, with the South fighting against an increasingly authoritarian federal government.
While many of Dwyer’s arguments align with Lost Cause doctrine, they also raise legitimate questions about the nature of federal power, Lincoln’s wartime policies, and the war’s long-term effects on American governance.
For those interested in Civil War history, states’ rights, and constitutional debates, Dwyer’s book offers a compelling, counter-narrative to mainstream historical accounts.
