This well-argued collection of James McPherson's occasional pieces focuses primarily on what the author sees as the fundamental changes that the Civil War brought to America's polity, economics, culture, and self-identity. The first, second, third, and seventh of the essays deal especially with this theme. The middle fourth, fifth, and sixth essays are less directly related to it, but nonetheless offer fascinating explorations of Lincoln the total war president, Lincoln the wordsmith, and Lincoln the "hedgehog."

Many of the people who lived through the Civil War thought of it as a revolution. Many historians since have agreed, although for varying reasons. McPherson's main project in this book is to figure out whether and how the Civil War can be considered the "second American Revolution."
He believes that the war was in fact revolutionary on several counts.

First, the war shifted the economic and political power balance in the United States. The war's devastation of southern property and demographics, especially after it evolved from a limited to a total conflict, shifted economic superiority to northern industry and agriculture. Moreover, the southern states' virtual antebellum monopoly of the White House, as well as their immense congressional power, was broken for the next half century. This is what McPherson (and others) refer to as the "external" revolution.

But there was an "internal" revolution too in the realm of legal rights and national self-identity. Four million slaves were freed and granted civil and political rights, and the southern aristocracy, along with the entire way of life and set of values it maintained, disappeared (or at least went underground). Moreover, argues McPherson, the war brought about a shift from early Republic concentration on liberty as "freedom from" (negative liberty), which distrusted strong central government, to liberty as "freedom to" (positive liberty), which emphasized the responsibility of the federal government to guarantee civil rights. This shift helped create a new sense of national identity that focused on the nation rather than the region: hence McPherson's claim that the Civil War moved the country from a "union" to a "nation."

The influence of the political philosopher Isaiah Berlin is present throughout much of McPherson's thinking about liberty, and McPherson also draws on one of Berlin's most famous essays in designating Lincoln (Chapter VI) as a hedgehog in his single-minded devotion to preserving the union. McPherson might be drawing on the work of philosophers of language in his fascinating discussion (Chapter V) of Lincoln's influential talent for creating and manipulating "live" as opposed to "dead" metaphors in expressing his opinions and seeking support for his policies. In both these cases, McPherson nicely weaves some philosophical analysis into his historical interpretations.

Where I find McPherson less helpful is his rather uncritical discussion of Lincoln's suspension of habeas corpus (Chapter III). He rehearses the well-worn argument that the suspension was simply necessary from a pragmatic perspective--end of discussion. As Lincoln said in another context, "often a limb must be sacrificed to save a life." But this interpretation begs for a discussion of the moral and political short- and longterm trauma that the amputation inflicted on the body politic. How far can one go in suspending liberties in order to preserve liberty?

Nonetheless, the essays collected in Abraham Lincoln and the Second American Revolution are exactly what readers have come to expect from McPherson: illuminating, gracefully written, well-researched. They aren't the final word, and I suspect McPherson doesn't expect them to be. But they wonderfully enrich the on-going conversation.