Honestly, when I first picked up Apostles of Disunion, I didn’t really know what to think. I’m not one to read history books very often and the Civil War is not exactly my favorite subject. A little bit of reading on Charles B. Dew, the author, and I find he’s a college professor of 23 years, with a PhD in history, multiple books published and recognition from multiple prestigious colleges as a historical researcher, as evident by his citations of the various research efforts he’s put into the book. This immediately lets me know that Dew is someone who can talk on this situation with some level of authority. As I began reading, I expected nothing more than some guy with a PhD to drone on and on about the Southern commissioners and their all-important…show more content… He spends the first couple of pages of Chapter 1 talking about the INS (Immigration and Naturalization Service) and its double answer to the question of why the Civil War started on the naturalization form. The two answers posed are slavery or states’ rights. This sets up Dew to discuss current or historically recent events that showcase why either answer is correct, citing resources such as the controversy of the mural of Robert E. Lee in Richmond in 1999 (5), the Confederate Battle Flag flying over the South Carolina Capitol Building in 2000 (7), and the League of the South, a pro southern secession group (9). Dew uses these events and organizations to show how even during modern times, the Confederacy has yet to fully leave the South. He finally hammers his point home by stating that “A defense of states’ rights is there…but no attempt to hide the concern over the fate of the South’s slave system” (11). This brings Dew to his main point, allowing him to further expand his main idea that although states’ rights was a inseparable problem with the Southern secession, slavery was the key factor and the primary reason as to why the South
