Analysis Of James Mcpherson's What They Fought For

James McPherson, in his short What they Fought For, makes the argument that American and Confederate soldiers had numerous reasons for fighting in the Civil War. According to McPherson, soldiers were acutely aware of the complex political, moral, and economic reasons for the American conflict, and these reasons factored into their decision to fight for one side or the other. To come to this conclusion McPherson uses the letters from numerous soldiers on both sides of the conflict, most of which are written to their family members or significant others back at home. This is where the fault lays in McPherson’s idea that the soldiers had some type of high minded political or ethical reasons for fighting in the Civil War. The idea that soldiers would be willing to march into ferocious battle, where the possibility of death or disfigurement is appallingly high for political reasons is nonsensical. It is much more likely that they fought due to the fact that they knew that they had fellow soldiers depending on them, and they didn’t want to let them down.
The idea that

soldiers fight for the fellow soldiers at their sides isn’t one that was plucked from the air. In fact, McPherson quotes in his book a United States Army General who makes a similar argument “It is not “belief in a cause” that motivates men to fight…”a man fights to help the man next to him...Men do not fight for a cause but because they do not want to let their comrades down(McPherson, 3) .” That argument can be applied to virtually any conflict, including the American Civil War.
McPherson’s argument is mainly built from the letters that these Confederate and Union soldiers wrote home to their families. He makes the logical leap that these men genuinely believed what they were writing to their families, and that’s where the fault in his logic is found. How could these soldiers explain to their families the true horrors of war? It would only serve further worry already anxious mothers and wives back at home. How could these soldiers express the feelings that they had in regards to the relationships that they had built with fellow soldiers. The feelings built over long marches, brutal fighting, and horrendous conditions weren’t something that could be adequately expressed in written form to family who had no relatable experience. Instead of inadequately attempting to explain these emotions to their families back home soldiers instead wrote about various things they saw in newspapers.
There is one area where McPherson’s argument being accurate is a remote possibility.

If he had asked the question as to why these soldiers had originally enlisted with the Union or Confederacy in the first place then his conclusion would be much more reasonable. The men who voluntarily enlisted almost certainly took the political causes of the war into consideration in their decision to join in the fighting(obviously draftees had entirely different reasons for fighting). If James McPherson had decided to title his book “Why They Enlisted” or “What They Joined For” than his theory of politics, morality, or religion being a major factor in the men’s decision to go fight, and face possible death or grievous injury, would have been much more apt. Yet, McPherson didn’t title his book thusly or ask why it was men initially enlisted so instead we’re left with a somewhat faulty premise for an

argument.
McPherson’s argument that men fight and die for political reasons isn’t totally without merit. Politics, or other ideological causes, can be found as the basis if not the direct cause of most conflicts. These men can just as easily get swept up in the clamor and initial enthusiasm for war that sweeps over most of the population. Soldiers very well may run off to war to fight after hearing an ideologue’s stirring speech. Eventually though it won’t be the speech, the politics, or the economic realities of Northern industry versus Southern agrarian policies that will keep a soldier marching and shooting. What men ultimately fight for is the men fighting alongside them, but it’s just not the kind of thing they end up writing home about for researchers to examine centuries later.