theBaron
Major
- Joined
- Mar 27, 2008
- Messages
- 10,356
You have to consider the "political etymology" of the various terms, if you will allow the neologism.
"War Between the States" reflects a political view that sees our country as a federal union of independent states, with a relatively small federal government executing those duties specifically assigned it in the Constitution, and the several states. That is also the view behind the term "states' rights". The idea that a state was sovereign vis-a-vis the federal government, and could defy the federal government, even to the point of leaving the Union, was, from the moment the Constitution was ratified, right up to outbreak of the Civil War, a commonly held view in those states that did secede. So, it makes sense to call the war the War Between the States, if your political view coincides more or less with that view of the Constitution.
"War of Northern Agression" reflects a subset of that worldview, perhaps, or a set of views that overlaps, with a good dose of patriotism for your state, as opposed to the federal union, thrown in. That, too, was a view that obtained from colonial times, through the Revolution, right up through the Civil War-Lee, for example, considering himself a Virginian first-and it was after the war, that it generally fell into disrepute. I think this term rests on the idea that the states that seceded were executing their right to do so, and the federal government therefore pursued an agressive war to conquer those states.
In American usage, "The Civil War" is probably the most widely accepted term for the war, and the one that is recognized by the most people, who haven't necessarily studied the subject in any more depth than in a high school history class. For you folks outside the US, I wouldn't try to understand it, in terms of its literal, dictionary definition, but to remember the historical context.
By the way, I'm not advocating one term over any other, I'm only trying to provide some background into the terms (I'm a linguist, after all, by education).
Prost!
Brad
"War Between the States" reflects a political view that sees our country as a federal union of independent states, with a relatively small federal government executing those duties specifically assigned it in the Constitution, and the several states. That is also the view behind the term "states' rights". The idea that a state was sovereign vis-a-vis the federal government, and could defy the federal government, even to the point of leaving the Union, was, from the moment the Constitution was ratified, right up to outbreak of the Civil War, a commonly held view in those states that did secede. So, it makes sense to call the war the War Between the States, if your political view coincides more or less with that view of the Constitution.
"War of Northern Agression" reflects a subset of that worldview, perhaps, or a set of views that overlaps, with a good dose of patriotism for your state, as opposed to the federal union, thrown in. That, too, was a view that obtained from colonial times, through the Revolution, right up through the Civil War-Lee, for example, considering himself a Virginian first-and it was after the war, that it generally fell into disrepute. I think this term rests on the idea that the states that seceded were executing their right to do so, and the federal government therefore pursued an agressive war to conquer those states.
In American usage, "The Civil War" is probably the most widely accepted term for the war, and the one that is recognized by the most people, who haven't necessarily studied the subject in any more depth than in a high school history class. For you folks outside the US, I wouldn't try to understand it, in terms of its literal, dictionary definition, but to remember the historical context.
By the way, I'm not advocating one term over any other, I'm only trying to provide some background into the terms (I'm a linguist, after all, by education).
Prost!
Brad
