Buy on

This book is an eye-opener for those who still believe the American Civil War, fought between 1861 and 1865, which killed at least 1,030,000 which was about 3% of the population.

50,000 civilians and 620,000 soldier deaths. Maybe these figures are higher.

Of course, this accounted for more American deaths than all of the other wars America has been involved in. If you thought that this war was fought for the sake of freeing the slaves, you will be convinced otherwise……

Carol Duff, VT

Washington, D.C – If you think the Civil war was fought to end slavery, you’ve been duped.

Bestselling military historian Samuel W. Mitcham Jr. makes the case in his provocative new book and his argument will change the way you think about Lincoln, the Emancipation Proclamation, and the legacy of America’s momentous Civil War.

It wasn’t it about slavery?

  1. No political party advocated freeing the slaves in the presidential election of 1860
  2. The Republican Party platform opposed the expansion of slavery to the Western states, but it did not embrace abolition.

What caused the bloodiest war on American soil if it wasn’t the abolition of slavery?

  1. Money
  • The South financed most of the federal government before the war—because the federal government was funded by tariffs, which were paid disproportionately by the agricultural South, which important manufactured goods
  • Most federal government spending and subsidies benefited the North
  1. Self-determination
  • The South wanted a more limited federal government and lower tariffs and when it couldn’t get them it opted for independence
  • Lincoln decided to use force to bring back the seceded Southern states—and their tariff money—back

Well-documented and compelling, It Wasn’t About Slavery: Exposing the Great Lie of the Civil War is the much-needed challenger to accepted, yet skewed history and teaches the true, yet ignored causes of the Civil War.

Excerpt from the book:

History has been re-written by the North–Page  xvii

The war for Southern Self-determination was not solely about slavery.  Freeing the slaves was a result of the war, not the casus belli.

In my view, slavery was part of the Cold War-like struggle between the North and South, whose economic, customs, religious values and ways of life were increasingly divergent. If culture is defined as the total way of life of a people, they had distinct cultures from the beginning.

Only with the evolution of modern historical thought, heavily influenced by the ideas and tactics of Marx and Stalin, did the Civil War become “all about slavery.” Marxist history validates the words of Confederate Major General Patrick Cleburne, who warned his men, “Surrender means that the history of this heroic struggle will be written by the enemy;  that our youth will be trained by Northern school teachers their version of the war; will be impressed by all the influences of history and education to regard our gallant dead as traitors, and our maimed veterans as fit subjects for derision.”

About the author: Dr. Samuel W. Mitcham Jr. is the author of more than forty books, most of which are centered on World War II.  He has appeared on the History Channel and the BBC, been a visiting professor at West Point, and served as an Army helicopter pilot during the Vietnam War. It Wasn’t About Slavery: Exposing the Great Lie of the Civil War

CounterPoint from The Daily Beast: The Civil War’s Dirty Secret: It Was Always About Slavery


We See The World From All Sides and Want YOU To Be Fully Informed
In fact, intentional disinformation is a disgraceful scourge in media today. So to assuage any possible errant incorrect information posted herein, we strongly encourage you to seek corroboration from other non-VT sources before forming an educated opinion.

About VT - Policies & Disclosures - Comment Policy
Due to the nature of uncensored content posted by VT's fully independent international writers, VT cannot guarantee absolute validity. All content is owned by the author exclusively. Expressed opinions are NOT necessarily the views of VT, other authors, affiliates, advertisers, sponsors, partners, or technicians. Some content may be satirical in nature. All images are the full responsibility of the article author and NOT VT.


  1. During the War of Independence John Adams observed, “All our misfortune arises from a single source, the reluctance of the Southern colonies to republican government … The difficulties lie in forming constitutions for particular colonies, and a continental constitution. This can only be done on popular principles and maxims which are so abhorrent to the inclinations of the barons of the South, and the proprietary interests in the middle colonies, as well as that avarice of land which has made upon this continent so many votaries to Mammon that I sometimes dread the consequences.”

    The five slaveholding states were richer by several orders of magnitude than the eight free states. Their leaders perceived the federal union as a temporary stopgap measure, a necessary evil because in 1783 they were too weak to stand as an independent nation. After nearly eighty years of dominating the national government, using its military power and diplomatic influence to add six large new

  2. I think the picture is more complicated than what has been presented here. Slavery certainly played a role and If you can believe the words of the Confederacy’s highest ranking leaders, slavery played a role in the south’s decision to secede, and it was significant. Jefferson Davis, who lead the Confederacy, stated that slavery was, “The issue of transcendent magnitude.” He didn’t order the summary execution of any white officer leading black troops because he was troubled by tariffs. The author should read his vice president, Alexander Stephens,’ “Cornerstone” speech. In it, Stephens states that the reason for the South’s secession was to build a new society predicated on slavery. He makes no mention of “states rights” or tariffs. The same sentiment can be found in most of the Confederate states articles of secession.
    I don’t disagree that there were significant economic motivations as well. But the claim that they were the only factors is a distortion. It is interesting to me that there is such a remarkable willingness to completely ignore the words of the Confederacy’s leadership in rewriting the Civil War’s history.

  3. Morrill Tarriff of 18t9, placed 39% tarriff on southern cotton and tobacco. Passed by 22 northern states with 20 million citizens against 13 southern states with 10 million citizens. The cotton tax benefited northern textile mills, northern manufactured goods, northern shipping and NORTHERN BANKING. All banking was controlled by Rothschild since Waterloo. British navy depended on cotton sail cloth, so production was shifted to the India slave colony. End feudalism.

  4. Dishonest Abe was “elected” by 39%. As a kid growing up in a small town in California I read some of the many volumes on him by Carl Sandburg. I later changed my mind on him. He went through general after general until he came upon a drunk and a psychopath to do his dirty job of illegally seeking to use armed force to prevent the Southern States from leaving the Union. See if you can find words in the Constitution authorizing killing over 1 million and plundering over half the country to keep the Union together. He could have said, “Go you will be back in 20 years and we will welcome you back.” Grant owned slaves. Today are not we all virtual slaves to government working over half our lives just to pay taxes and their prepare-rs? New York was built by black slave labor. The slave market was about a block from the NYSE. Lincoln is not a hero but an unindicted war criminal along with Grant and Sherman. This was also the first ratcheting up of federal power against the good intentions of the Founders. History books are full of lies. The South was being taxed at 40%! The South is still suffering from that horrible illegal war by Dishonest Abe. Isn’t it time for all states to leave and tell our lying Donald Adolf and the whores in Congress to Shove it?

  5. The author should investigate who owned the slave ships, who ran the slave trade, who owned many large plantations and who ran the cotton trade. Guess who? Bingo, the jews.

Comments are closed.