In your opinion what is the best name for the American Civil War.
In my opinion it should be the Southern Rebellion, as those rebel scum weren’t trying to take over the US government (like in a real civil war) but leave the Union.
“American Civil War” or “U.S. Civil War” are pretty simple and straightforward names.
War of Northern Aggression fits 
I’ve always been partial to “The Late Unpleasantness” myself.
[del]Greedo[/del] Edmund Ruffin fired first!
Thanks for the question. The American Revolution should have been called, The English-American Civil War. It was basically about who was going to collect taxes and benefit from the exploitation of a huge continent and its indigenous peoples.
To the point, what is called the Civil War should be called the American Revolution. In effect it was a coup by Wall Street bankers in concert with a coalescing military-industrial complex. It has proven quite durable.
“The War that wasn’t totally about slavery but some think it is”.
This came up on Friday night actually. I was poking around a flag store at the Mall of America and overheard a bit of commotion at the counter. The shop owner with a thick Eastern European accent was telling a customer that his business isn’t wanted and he can just leave the store. My SO and I casually edged closer to the counter to find out what’s going on. The customer was pointing to a confederate flag and said something we couldn’t hear and the shop owner replied “I don’t have time to give you a history lesson about the flag, so maybe you should leave”. The teenager left and the shop owner shook his head. Another customer filled us in that the teenager was upset by the fact that the store was selling “racist flags”.
I think either the Civil War or “The War of Southern Secession”
Damn straight. Also “The War of Arrogant Other States That Couldn’t Mind Their Own Damn Business” works as well…
ETA: And if it was this grand fight to liberate slaves, then why didn’t the North free the slaves in Maryland, Delaware, NJ, and PA?
Technically a “civil war” is when one faction is trying to take over the nation from another faction. Such as the Spanish Civil War. Franco was trying to take over the entire nation not just a piece of Spain wanting to break away
A “civil war” isn’t simply a war that takes place only in one country. Although this has come to mean this.
In the United States the South had no intention of taking over the national government so it wasn’t a “civil war” in the strict sense.
That said I think “The War Between The States,” fits best and is the most politically correct
Eh. . . “The Birth of a Nation”???
Since “The Recent Unpleasantness” is too vague, I vote for “War Between the States”.
The War in which the Republic of Texas Should Have Said, a Pox on Both Your Houses
“The Failed War To Save Slavery”
“The Lord’s Only Failure”
During and after the war was known as the “War of the Rebellion” in the North. It was used in federal legislation until the 20th century.
In Spanish it is called “The War of Secession”
I vote for “the late unpleasantness.” Except I feel like I should probably put on a hat and gloves before I say it.
I am very Southern and I hope that people realize that lots of people in the South defend the “The Late Unpleasantness” but they are also some of the most patriotic people in the U.S. today. It doesn’t make much sense but it is true. I guess I am guilty of being one of those just because I come from an extremely long line of slave-owners and my great-x-grandfather got shot in the foot by Union soldiers and it caused problems for the rest of his life.
Eh, the South had no objection to taking Federal (national) forts and arsenals.
Although it is true that a certain undercurrent of the war was about taxation (tarriff) and political rights, those issues themselves were “mostly in regards to slavery.” Many of the South’s leaders, before, during, and after the war maintained that it was about slavery first and foremost. People who say it was about slavery are merely repeating what they’ve been told – by the people who rebelled.
But a lot of self-delusion goes on even today.
Read Battle Cry of Freedom by James McPherson. He does a good job of debunking many of the myths about the war, particularly some of the “it wasn’t about slavery” ones.
It’s interesting to note that the first wave of seceding states did so before the federal government took any action. What drove them out was Lincoln’s election (and the coat-tail election of Republicans in general). Yet Lincoln had stated he would not destroy slavery – what the seceding states were really objecting to was the end of a decades-long Southern dominance in national politics out of proportion to their populations, income, and number of states. The message was essentially “we will pretend to be part of a democracy – as long as things go our way, we’ll participate. As soon as it’s clear we might not get that, we’re quitting.” which of course means you’re not really participating in democracy at all, if you only are as long as things go all your way.
Lincoln correctly understood this and eventually the north as a whole came to understand it.