A major publisher for the US Army, Army University Press, has now decided to make several woke changes to key terms concerning the US civil war.
For instance, according to the new guidelines the terms ‘Union Army’ and ‘Union Forces’ will now be replaced by the words ‘U.S. Army’ and ‘Federals.’ (Army University Press):
Similarly, citizens in states who remained loyal to the United States did not all feel a strong commitment towards dissolving the institution of slavery, nor did they believe Lincoln’s views represented their own. Thus, while the historiography has traditionally referred to the “Union” in the American Civil War as “the northern states loyal to the United States government,” the fact is that the term “Union” always referred to all the states together, which clearly was not the situation at all. In light of this, the reader will discover that the word “Union” will be largely replaced by the more historically accurate “Federal Government” or “U.S. Government.” “Union forces” or “Union army” will largely be replaced by the terms “U.S. Army,” “Federals,” or “Federal Army.”
i am making a good salary from home 1200 to 2500 Dollars per week.which is amazing, under a year back I was jobless in a horrible economy. I thank God every day I was blessed with these instructions and now it’s my duty to pay it forward and share it with Everyone,…. Cashapp3.com
GET LOST FROM HERE! MAMA HAS YOUR BOTTLE WARMED UP FOR YOU!
You are making a good salary from home actually on the corner of 42nd St. and 5th Ave. in New York with a mattress strapped to your back and a coin changer on your belt, okay, Sparky? GTFO–it’s 2021…no one’s buying your schtick.
Stfu loser
There might be some truth in what they said about the “Union”, but the words they chose instead are even less accurate than the ones they rejected. Just another example of the “never-ending woke competition” that is the Democrat party.
Actually, it is more accurate. The war was presented as a fight to save the union, but the existence of the union was never threatened, only its territorial size was. The US invaded the Confederate states to force them back into the union; the rest was propaganda.
Wonder if anyone reading this has family that was in the Civil War? Their ideas would be welcomed.
It is NOT more accurate, and it likewise lacks all understanding of the orders of battle that comprised the various forces who fought for the north. I am both a Veteran USAF Senior Historian as well as a family genealogist since the 1970s. I have likewise specialized in Civil War history from the perspective of the Michigan Volunteer for more than 40 years. Having been formally schooled in historiography and the “purity of historical reporting” by Air University and the University of Maryland (back in the days when OBJECTIVE TRUTH was still recognized as the only truth there was) there is ZERO ROOM for latter-day revisionism in accurate history reporting. This kind of baloney– catering to kiss tail-feathers and to appeal to the prevailing present-day partisan ideology sets my teeth on edge.
I have multiple family family members who served in several different units of the Michigan Volunteers, both in Infantry and Cavalry regiments. They prided themselves on fighting for the “UNION” in their own personal letters to family back home. Several members of our family have those very letters, or have donated them to Michigan historical societies or museum collections. That was the prevailing terminology used by the north back then, as opposed to the terms this misguided lackey suggests. They made it a very key point they were NOT specifically fighting for Mr. Lincoln, nor to quell the evil institution that consumed 11 American states. They were fighting to prevent “rebel upstarts, and arrogant secessionists from threatening the nation”. These folks from all the various individual states, after being mustered, after having equipment and uniforms issued, and after having been run through a modicum of their paces in drill and marksmanship, were NEVER considered part of the official active-duty U.S. Army at that time, which, being career soldiers, was a distinct and separate entity from the poorly-disciplined, less-than-uniform, State’s “Volunteers” each of the northern states were calling up and throwing into the fray. It is an insult of major proportions to assume they were equal in any way to the REAL Federal Army at that time, save perhaps for the similarity of uniform, arms, equipment and organization. And yes, while these units mustered and were “federalized” for a number of months and years of good and faithful service, once the war was over (and in many cases, disserting BEFORE it ended), these part-time Volunteer state forces were only too happy to return to their families and farms, and having nothing more to do with REAL U.S. Army life!!!!!!
Yet DURING the Civil war ‘union’ and ‘confederate’ were the terms used to refer to the 2 armies, when more insulting terms weren’t used.
Who are they to change history?
If they really want to be more accurate they shouldn’t call it a civil war but a war between the United States of America and the Confederate States of America.
Actually, The War of Northern Aggression.
The war of the Northern Army vs the southern inbred hillbillies
There was nothing hillbilly about the Southern people just because they were farmers.
True dat and the left leftist or what ever you want to call them can all go straight to lleh
besides, Danial Webster defined ‘hillbilly’ as a western Michigan farmer.
You are the hillbilly dumbass
Just stop…
Actually it was the Unionists vs the Secessionists (aka the Rebels). Unionists wanted the country to stay united and the Secessionists felt that holding onto slavery was more important.
I can see that you are a civil war expert, The secessionist fought for states rights not just slavery there was a lot more to it than that. some people in the north that were pro slavery. I contend that no human has the right to claim ownership of another human. Slavery is the worst thing that one can do to another and the worst that can be done to one. Slavery was abolished with the 13th amendment( which by the way democrats vehemently opposed) except for the human trafficking and sex slave trade coming across the southern border supported by the Dems. A little more study of the real history would help you in seeing the whole picture instead of the snap shots that are selectively chosen
Just as one example, the declaration of secession by the State of Mississippi stated that Slavery was reason for their leaving the Union, the loss of property worth four billion dollars. These declarations of secession can all be found by searching the internet.
How about “illegal invaders to a sovereign land”
HERE WE GO AGAIN, not only POLITICIZING the Military, now CHANGING HISTORY WITH THE NEW MARXIST LIBERAL CRAP OF CONFUSSION!
Here they go . Rewriting in our History books . Take down Our Statues ,the rewrite the History books . Does this sound familiar ?
rewriting history is another step in communist take over, Those who do not know their history are doomed to repeat it, so dumb down the youth and spoon feed them only what you want them to believe and you control them. WAKE UP AMERICA
If your position is SO WEAK that you have to re-write history to muster support, YOU ARE ON THE WRONG SIDE.
“Those who don’t know history are doomed to repeat it.”
― Edmund Burke
Thus the communists, dictators, and leftists are determined to hide or change history so know one will know it.
I hate all this WOKE cr*p.
With the lack of real history being taught, will this dicing of words really make a significant difference in the understanding of that time in history?
Rewriting history by pawns of the communist party What a farce!! They’re not woke they are Zombies idiots
Some Antics or Semantics? The former is most likely. Technically, the Union still existed as an entity in spite of the secession of 11 States from the Union of States. There was still a Union of 20 States. Secession didn’t dissolve the Union. It set up a Confederation of States determined to keep Slavery as an institution, opposed to a Union of States determined to end the practice.
Just as there were some individuals in the Union, who didn’t give a fiddler’s fart whether slavery ended or not, there were individuals in the Confederacy who wanted it to end.
General Thomas “Stonewall” Jackson, Robert E Lee’s Right Arm, personally found Slavery repugnant and not something a good Christian should engage in (Jackson was very devout). He expressed on more than one occassion his prayers that the South’s leaders would recognize how Unchristian the practice of slavery was, yet still he fought for the Confederacy.
From a historical perspective, the Union our Founder’s envisioned, was at best a loose association of States with some common traits and goals. After the Civil War, we were truly a Union aftervthe ratification of the 14th Amendment guaranteed the Rights and Protections the Constitution guaranteed to all people, the States were beholden to follow as well. If the Federal government is prevented from denying those Rights, the State governments must likewise be prevented from infringing upon those Rights too.
What this publisher is doing is the typical Extreme Left Wing Academia’a deficit of vocabulary knowledge as they try to redefine words.
So that’s all these army brass jugheads have to worry about ???Russian/Chinese-irainian trying to start kick their p.c. asses seems to be a Kumbaya moment
Biden and his boss Obama and all that support them are a POS and should be in the ground for attempting to destroy the U S.
Biden is not and never will be the president of the United States. The people of this country know that he was not elected and he is nothing but a fraud placed in office by a total fraudlant election.
George Orwell in action. First task of tyranny: control he language (Newspeak).
More fake news. The fact is that the “Union forces” were attacking the Confederate forces to force them to submit to the Union. The historical term is accurate. The change is a effort to enshroud the Federal or Union side in the mantle of rightness.
What – ?
Similarly, citizens in states who remained loyal to the United States did not all feel a strong commitment towards dissolving the institution of slavery, nor did they believe Lincoln’s views represented their own.
But by changing the language they are changing the organizational borders. It was the Rebels (Democrats) that had no allegiance to the Union but rather wanted to secede to maintain the institution of slavery. Also the reasoning behind 3/5 person and the Electoral College. Otherwise slavery would still exist. You now have to carefully define your terms otherwise history goes down the Orwellian memory hole.
Whaaaaaaat?
pro-slavery democrats is the way to keep the history real & democrats are still the most racist among US
How about we change the word” publisher “to the word,” moron”?
Why is is this shit necessary ?
If accuracy is your goal, you will use the terms which were used at the time. Any re-write of those terms is consistent with the “cancel culture” now clamoring for creditability. Any re-write by its nature is a form of propaganda and consistent with the goals of the “cancel culture”.
As far as the war occurring between 1861 and 1865, it was anything but a ‘Civil War’. The Southern States simply withdrew from the existing union. The CSA did not want to overthrow the government in D.C. They simply wanted their own government and chose not to affiliate with the government in D.C. The war beginning in 1775 was a ‘Civil War’ as the colonial combatants wanted to overthrow the existing government.
This is the greatest travesty to our great history. What happened, happened and it cannot be changed. Trying to appease the snowflakes on the left is sheer lunacy. l have been a historian, researcher and teacher of the the last several decades. History was meant to be taught about what happened, why it happened and the outcome of the situation. It wasn’t meant to be politically correct. This is sure to come back to bite the army publisher in the ass.
PEOPLE NEED TO STAND UP TO THE COMMUNIST “WOKE” bull CRAP
At the Lincoln Presidential Library Museum you will learn that Lincoln was as much despised and ridiculed by both sides. History does repeat itself. The words are just terminology and semantics. The history remains the same.