Comparing The Political Leadership Of Lincoln and Davis It may seem self- evident that Lincoln was the greater political leader; Lincoln led the winning side while Davis was defeated. It has though, been thought that once the Northern advantages and Southern disadvantages have been considered, that it is possible, that almost anyone could have led the North to victory. If this is so, was it Davis's strong leadership, which ensured that the confederacy survived as long as it did? Davis's government has inevitably been blamed for the way it ran the war. Certainly it made mistakes. But arguably it was no more mistake prone than Lincoln's government. Nor were the Southerners less dedicated than the Yankees. Most Southerners fought long and hard for their new nation, enduring far greater suffering and hardship than Northerners. The reality was that the South simply has less room for error. Given its "small battalions", the Confederacy needed to have better leadership, greater financial and economic initiative and more unity than its stronger adversary. Although ultimately not equal to the mighty challenge, the Confederacy's efforts on the home front were, in most respects, better than might have been expected. The bitter truth was that most of its domestic problems were essentially insurmountable. Lincoln did provide strong leadership. But he was no superman. He was always ready to admit that events controlled him rather than he controlled events. His administration did relatively little to manage the economic resources, which ultimately produced victory. In a sense the Northern economy ran itself. Fortunately for Lincoln, Northern... ... middle of paper ... ...s (including Grant) on a leash, for appointing the final winning military team, for picking able administrative subordinates, and for knowing how to delegate. Davis, on the other hand is often seen as austere, rigid, humourless and prone to making enemies: his feuds with two of his top generals, Beauregard and Joe Johnston, undoubtedly harmed the Southern war effort. Lincoln's superiority to Davis might seem self- evident. But Lee could think of no Confederate leader who had done a better job than Davis. And Lincoln did make mistakes. He went through six failures as commanders in the Virginia theatre before he found the right general. Some of his other military appointments and strategic decisions can also be criticised. It is worth remembering Wendell Phillips' view of him: 'He is a first-rate, second-rate man'.
It is April 1861; the Civil War has just begun with the first attack on Fort Sumter. The Southern states have already seceded from the Union and formed the Confederate States of America. Now the country is split, Union in the North and the Confederacy in the South. Both the Union and the Confederacy will soon be in need of resources especially since war is about to be declared by Abraham Lincoln. Leadership for the Union and the Confederate armies are given away mostly to those with seniority rather than to those who deserve it by merit. James Ewell Brown (“Jeb”) Stuart is among the Confederacy leaders to gain his position as general not only because of his age but also because of his experience with fighting the Indians and other whites on the frontier in Bleeding Kansas. Jeb Stuart along with thirteen other Virginian’s was part of the Confederate leadership which was made up of a total forty-four men. Jeb Stuart was given his position because of the seniority he had over the other men signed up for the war, but did he also earn the position by merit and if so, does he keep his merit throughout the Civil War?
Jefferson Davis, president of the Confederate States of America, showed weaknesses within his leadership which may have contributed to the confederacy’s loss and the unions win . Davis failed in three vital ways. These ways were: his relations with other confederate authorities and with the people, as well as in his fundamental concept of his job as president and in his organization and specific handling of his role as commander in chief . Davis failed in maintaining communication with leaders and with his people, often unable to admit when he is wrong which led to lack organization in his role . In addition, Davis was a conservative leader, not a revolutionary one which meant that his strength was often in protocol and convention rather than in innovation . Studying each of these aspects that represented a weakness in Jefferson Davis’s leadership, Lincoln in comparison provided more admirable and outstanding qualities within his leadership which in many ways affected the outcome of the war
Several factors played in to the American Civil War that made it have the outcome that it did. Although the South had better trained officials due to their military school, the North was far more advanced than they. The North had the advantage over the South in several ways. However, the outcome of the Civil War was not inevitable: it was determined as much by human decisions and human willpower as by physical resources, although the North’s resources gave them an edge over the South.
I agree with the idea that the North had won the Civil War before it began to the extent of Lincoln’s conservative political stands. Trying to receive the favor of the South while winning in the North would require Lincoln to take neutral stands in heated political issues like slavery. It wasn’t really wan by the North until he broke away from these stands to enact the Emancipation Proclamation and turn the tides of war in favor of the North. “This Lincoln always publicly condemned the abolitionists who fought slavery by extra constitutional means – and condemned also the mobs who deprived them of their right of free speech and free press.” (Holfstadter, Lincoln and the Self-Made Myth) Other than that, the North had the upper hand in nearly all aspects that really mattered in times of war. With this information it is clear that without Lincoln’s conservative political stands a “Quick War” would have been much more realistic. Either way, the North had won the Civil War before it began. While the North thought about attacking and invading, the South thought about defending and causing attrition.
Henry Steele Commager’s essay “The Defeat of the Confederacy: An Overview” is more summary than argument. Commager is more concerned with highlighting the complex causality of the war’s end rather than attempting to give a definitive answer. Commager briefly muses over both the South’s strengths
The 1864 presidential election was one of the important elections in the American History. In the middle of a devastating civil war, the United States had held its presidential election almost without discussing any alternative (American President: A Reference Resource). None of the other Democratic nations had ever conducted a national election during the time of war. While there was still talk going in postponing the election. That was when Lincoln pointed out that America needs a free government and without conducting the election we have ruined ourselves (Boller P.115). So, before even the year had ended United States had gone forward with its voting just as in peacetime.
hand, Davis was both admired and hated. Lincoln had a different view of how the
...iled to gain the recognition of the European nations, North's superior resources made the outcome inevitable, and moral of the South towards the end of the war. The Civil War was a trying time for both the North and the South alike, but the question of its outcome was obvious from the start. The North was guaranteed a decisive victory over the ill-equipped South. Northerners, prepared to endure the deficit of war, were startled to find that they were experiencing an enormous industrial boom even after the first year of war. To the South, however, the war was a draining and debilitating leech, sucking the land dry of any appearance of economical formidability. The debate continues whether or not the South could have won the Civil war. It’s always going to be a bunch of “what ifs?”
...ld not protect the interest of the Southern states. Coupled with the hostilities, lack of votes for Lincoln from the South and disregard for the constitutional protection of slavery is a justifiable reason from the Southern leaders to secede from the Union.
General Lee knows that we have inexperienced men and aims at improving the quality of the troops. He upgrades the quality by tightening command and discipline, improving morale, and convincing the soldiers that the confederacy was in full command of the situation. Lee knew that we are lacking, and devised initiatives to nullify the Union’s superiority in manpower, armaments, and supply by destroying their prearranged plans.
Sears’ thesis is the Union could have won the war faster. McClellan was an incompetent commander and to take the initiative to attack an defeat the Confederate army. The Army of Northern Virginia, under...
...f wearing down the north's patience. The south's idea of northerns as "city slickers" who did not know how to ride or shoot was wrong. Many of the men who formed the Union forces came from rural backgrounds and were just as familiar with riding and shooting as their southern enemies. Finally, the south's confidence in its ability to fund through sales of export crops such as cotton did not take into consideration the northern blockade. France and Britain were not willing to become involved in a military conflict for the sake of something they had already stockpiled. The help the south had received from France and Britain turned out to be a lot less than they expected. In conclusion, while all the south's reasons for confidence were based on reality, they were too hopeful. The south's commitment to a cause was probably what caused their blindness to reality.
The Civil War that took place in the United States from 1861 to 1865 could have easily swung either way at several points during the conflict. There is however several reasons that the North would emerge victorious from this bloody war that pit brother against brother. Some of the main contributing factors are superior industrial capabilities, more efficient logistical support, greater naval power, and a largely lopsided population in favor of the Union. Also one of the advantages the Union had was that of an experienced government, an advantage that very well might have been one of the greatest contributing factors to their success. There are many reasons factors that lead to the North's victory, and each of these elements in and amongst themselves was extremely vital to the effectiveness of the Northern military forces. Had any one of these factors not been in place the outcome of the war could have been significantly different, and the United States as we know it today could be quite a different place to live.
More confederates than unions were illiterate due to the fact that most held professional or white-collard jobs (36). To make the Union soldiers sample fair sense most blacks couldn’t read or write, 2 who could were included in the sample (36). The levels of patriotism differed from the upper and lower south given to the fact that the upper south were mainly cotton states. The confederates felt as if it was a “rich mans woar but the poor man has to do the fifting” (16). The confederates were mainly fighting for “independence, property and way of life” (27). Some characteristics the soldiers had in common were McPherson’s calculations for the Union. He came to seeing that out of 562 Union soldier’s letters read only 67 percent voice strong patriotic motives. This is the same as the two-thirds of Confederates. As a result from reading McPherson’s book, research showed that the Union and Confederate soldiers expressed about the same degree of patriotic and ideological convictions. Even though they both had different reasons for fighting the levels of sincerity and dedication in their notes were
Abraham Lincoln (12 Feb. 1809-15 Apr. 1865) the 16th president (civilwar.org) of the United States of America was one of the main public persons that influence the civil war in many aspects. Even though the civil war may have been the last resource the nation had, it could be argue that Lincoln’s governments try its best to find a different solution. The civil war was a conflict that destroyed the nation; it perhaps could have been avoided if the second party had work for a solution. But it is true that maybe both parts could have looked out for the benefits of the people as a whole instead of their personal benefits. Lincoln principal positive effect on the civil war was actually before and during the war when Lincoln’s government had many attempts to prevent the confrontation, and when this one began he took the right decisions to win the war. One of the biggest effects on the civil war was the Emancipation Proclamation in 1863, which gave the slaves their liberty. Many would agree is that Abraham’s Lincoln effect on the civil war was positive but Lincoln made many mistakes or misjudgments during the war as well. Perhaps the biggest mistake Lincoln did was underestimating the South what caused many unnecessary deaths. He also did had misjudgments that cause many causalities. Since the beginning of time humanity has fought for what they thought was right. In April 12 of 1861(civilwar.org) The US would begin a fight for civic and moral rights, a civil war that perhaps was the last option for a country to reunite its values. Abraham Lincoln was the president of the time and the person the influence the most the course the war took. I strongly believe that Lincoln’s decisions influence or had more positive effects on the country. Being the president at times like the civil war is without doubt it is one of the toughest jobs, and one way or another there is going to be correct and incorrect decisions but I can agree president Lincoln did what he thought it was the best at that moment.