Wow the American civil war with a twist. Surely breaks down some views of Lincoln as bringer of justice peace and emancipation. The entire history with its great heroes and persons al seem like a political game. It supports the view that history isn't just black and white, good vs evil but is flooded with gray.

I never did understand what the justification was for killing Native Americans and I still don't.

I'm no expert in the US Civil War so I'm in no position to gage the validty of DiLorenzo's argument here.

However, I did look up who this "Dr. Thomas DiLorenzo" is.  His Wiki-entry is  suggests that the fellow is an ideological warrior and will find something to critique on any general who was not a Confederate General (where his heart obviously lays).

I will say that there are "saints" and "monsters" in every war, on both sides, and indeed, often inside the same people.  Nothing new about that.

Yes, the victors do write the history and sometimes that history needs to be 'corrected' down the road.

However, I respectfully submit that the scholarship that ultimately effects this comes not from partisan ideologues re-writing history from the opposite bias but rather from the slow process of academia itself gradually building up a case that the original historical view was 'incorrect'.

American academia of the social sciences and humanities tend to be rather ideologically suffocating places generally speaking. 

Thankfully, this particularity seems to be uniquely American (and yes I do have personal knowledge and experience in these fields at the graduate level inside and outside the USA -- in Canada and UK).



 

There was an interesting discussion we had in one of my US history classes about "removing" the Native Americans from their homes. Of course I thought it was and never will be justified but a couple classmates said that they understood the motives of the settlers. One of them even commented on this so-called Colorado War, and said that the settlers needed the buffalo also.