Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

--- foster_what_s_not_in_a_name [2025/01/16 05:49] – tgilliki
+++ foster_what_s_not_in_a_name [2025/01/17 21:01] (current) – ovanrooy
@@ Line 19: / Line 19: @@
 In the south, people often referred to the war using neutral terms in the immediate aftermath of the war, most commonly “The War Between the States”. However, in the early twentieth century, this would shift with the rise of the lost cause narrative. This would popularize names like “The War of Northern Aggression”. This would help in the attempts to shift the narrative around the war from being one about differing ideology of the two sides, to a tyrannical act of the North. (Tanner Gillikin)
-For many African Americans, especially Frederick Douglass, they wanted to focus the name of the war on the issue of slavery. They would have called it “The Abolition War” or “The War of Emancipation”. These names would highlight the abject horror of slavery, and how it was the utmost important cause in why the Confederacy attempted to succeed. That is notably different from the more neutral names like “Civil War” which effectively glosses over the issue of slavery. (Tanner Gillikin
+For many African Americans, especially Frederick Douglass, they wanted to focus the name of the war on the issue of slavery. They would have called it “The Abolition War” or “The War of Emancipation”. These names would highlight the abject horror of slavery, and how it was the utmost important cause in why the Confederacy attempted to succeed. That is notably different from the more neutral names like “Civil War” which effectively glosses over the issue of slavery. (Tanner Gillikin)
+It is incredibly interesting how the leaders of America at the time sought to emphasize the countries unity despite the existing internal conflict. It was important to present a united front and a strong nation despite the "civil war." Early on no mentions were mad eof civil war but focus was placed on it being an uprising or revolution. -Declan F.
+The term rebellion allowed for Americans to gloss over the major reason for the war, a conflict over slavery. The politics of the war were more relevant to its beginnings yet we see focus placed on insurrection rather than whether or not slavery should be legal. Declan F.
+It's amazing how a name can change the meaning of a war. This constant decision on what the war should be called and the way the name actively changes until "Civil War" was eventually decided on is really intriguing. Both the South and the North came up with different names to identify the conflict that was going on. Some common terms in the North were "Rebellion, Slaveholderrs' Rebellion, and Abolition War", while the South had "Confederate War, War of Northern Aggression, and Late Unpleasantness". Both sides focused on names that pitted blame on the other end, fueling this idea that one side was the cause of all this violence while the other was fighting for justice. The name "Civil War" gave both sides a leeway to both give and take responsibility for war that had taken place. (Lexi St. John)
+During and after the Civil War, many African Americans were surveyed about what they called the war. While most of them named it the “Civil War,” Foster explains that some African Americans used names that cited slavery as one of the causes of the Civil War. Some of these names included, “Slavery War,” “Freedom War,” and “the War for Freedom.” - Lauren V.
+Foster explains that the use of the name, “War between the States” became immensely popular during the 1950s and 60s with white southerners as racial and governmental tensions rose with the rise of civil rights movements. Foster explains that this name was used by white southerners to cite that states rights were the primary cause of the Civil War. - Lauren V.
+Another name used by white southerners and white supremacists was, “The War of Northern Aggression.” Foster explains that this name was used in direct responses to southerners being displeased with the racial change that civil rights movements were causing. - Lauren V.
+It is fascinating that the ultimate goal of using "Civil War" is to enable either side to pick their perceived cause of the war. At the end of the reading, Foster also mentioned "mutual innocence." It is an interesting way to describe remaining attitudes surrounding the Civil War. Is there a way that describing combatants in a war as having mutual innocence could be moral? -Sarah M.
+Foster’s article highlights the development of the label for the American Civil War.  Interestingly, northerners and southerners had their own names for the conflict that either blamed the other side or tried to reach justification for the violence.  For example, Foster explains that the name “The War between the States”, proposed by white Southerners, implies that the Civil War was constitutionally legal and avoid the term “Rebellion.”  Eventually, “Civil War” was the name that was adopted for the conflict because it is a neutral term that afforded no accountability or justification. - Ian Tiblin
+Lincoln deliberately called the war a "rebellion" when it came to putting down southern legitimacy. He then switched to civil war in speeches where he was trying to invoke reconciliation. Lincoln was using different names to invoke different connotations to the war. (Guy)
+-The term “abolition war” was actually used by White Southerners to rally the south to their cause, knowing that Whites would be mobilized by the threat on slavery. It was also used by Northern peace Democrats to criticize the American government for making the war too much about slavery (421). Abolitionists like Frederick Douglas used the term abolition war to reaffirm what the war was really about (slavery). He saw the abolition of slavery as the only way to preserve the union and the constitution (422). -Sophia Prewitt
+-The “War Between the States” became a very popular term after it appeared in a former confederate book. The term was popular because it stood on the idea that America was never one whole body, and that it was regularly divided between a Northern and Southern Republic, therefore it was a war between these two long standing American Republics (It also emphasized State Rights) (425).-Sophia Prewitt
+-There were a few times, namely in 1907 and 1911, where the name for the war was brought before congress. In both instances, Southerners objected to terms like “Rebellion” and instead wanted the term “The Civil War.” In actuality, Southerners preferred terms like “War Between the States,” but recognized the controversy, so settled for Civil War. Also missing from these debates were any mentions of slavery, which likely had to do with the early 20th century rise of radical white racism (434).- Sophia Prewitt
+During the early stages of the Civil War, Lincoln repeatedly flipped between names. The two most consistent names he would use early on were “Rebellion” and “Insurrection”. There are many legal implications to the language Lincoln used. The most notable being the suspension of Habeas Corpus. (Hank L)
+Later in the War, the different names of the Civil War were looked at more closely. One of the main reasons for this was because Lincoln wanted to reunite the North and South. By calling it the “Civil War”, there are less political implications. Unification would have been much more difficult had the Union continued to call the war an “insurrection” or “rebellion”. (Hank L)
+By calling the Civil War the “Civil War”, there can be many interpretations for its causes. For example, Southerners may say that the war was for States’ rights; while many Northerns would say that the South wanted to preserve slavery. This generic name allowed for everyone to see their respective causes as right. (Hank L)
+The final term "Civil War" was ultimately a compromise between white Northerners and Southerners. Both had adopted it since it was generic and "inoffensive" enough for them to not only directly call the other out for its cause, but also so that they could project their own meanings and interpretations onto. Of course, this obscured the central cause of slavery from its wording and pushed out any African-American memory building around the naming convention of the war. (Orion van Rooy)