A review by archytas
The Scorpion's Sting: Antislavery and the Coming of the Civil War by James Oakes

2.0

I picked this book up because I rather foolishly thought it might look at the movements against slavery - both the Northern anti-abolitionist movements, and the activities and actions of slaves themselves, the latter of which was decisive in defeating slavery, and yet, somehow, never seems to warrant serious consideration. Rather, this is a tightly written analysis of the writings of major Republicans and Democrats - mostly Lincoln - in the lead up to the war. Cause heaven knows, the world needs another look at that. The author is seeking to argue that the Republicans believed slavery could be dispensed with by making it untenable, without ever having to centrally abolish it; and then; in a final chapter the length of the rest of the book, argues that wartime emancipation was well-recognised as a legitimate war time tactic. I can only assume that this book was written to refute a Confederate view that the war was all about states rights, and that emancipating a man's slaves was downright unfair tactically. I shudder to think such an argument is needed, but that doesn't mean it isn't.
Having said that, I just end up finding this approach, like most civil war scholarship, so dismissive it is offensive. The reason that emancipating slaves is an *effective* war time tactic is that it provides a scant increase in hope to slaves. African-American slaves who fought back, who ran, who joined the Union Armies in staggering numbers, who sabotaged and destroyed equipment, are not just a white man's tactic. They were men and women who fought for and won an end to enslavement. So why is it so hard to find their stories?