this writer speaks of what is called the civil war as the war between the states, which is a bit more accurate, but should really be called the war of succession. he spends a bit more time calling out 'leftists' than i think productive but that is the direction our current re-write of history is coming from. in this 'land of the free' history is frequently re-written even though when i was in school we were taught that only tyrannies did such things. if you've been looking around instead of just watching what the tv tells you is real, you'll notice we haven't been the 'land of the free' for some time. this article gets into several corners and looks around;

History as a (Leftist) Weapon
Gail Jarvis

There is a tendency for each generation to assume its opinions are the ultimate correct opinions. But each generation’s beliefs are typically modified by succeeding generations. Unfortunately, societal structures are sometimes altered based on contemporary notions that lose credence over time. This is the case with Social Justice Warriors in this generation. They demand that whatever doesn’t suit present-day social theories must be “eliminated.”

One of the justifications for this cultural cleansing is this generation’s historical interpretation of the War Between the States (WBTS). Some assume that this current version – moral opposition to slavery caused the North to fight the South – has a long-standing consensus among historians. But this is only one of countless interpretations historians have produced over the years. Various historians, writing at different times and places, have created diverse interpretations of the WBTS. These history reinterpretations are often influenced by major events occurring in later generations. 

One of these major events was World War I. This war was broadly viewed as “futile” – not only unnecessary, but instigated by a “bungling generation.” Like the WBTS, historians put forth various causes for this fruitless World War. It was supposed to be the war to end all wars, but it created more problems than it solved. The severe measures that the Treaty of Versailles imposed on Germany soon led to WWII. Many historians were influenced by this problematic war which made them skeptical of the purposes and relevance of the WBTS. Some decided that, like WWI, the WBTS could have been avoided. They also minimized the importance of slavery as a cause of the War and maintained that the basic conflict was economics.

At the other extreme was WWII. This war was deemed necessary as the ruthless Nazi Party must be stopped. The immense destruction of European cites had to be halted. Also the inhumane treatment and mass executions of those incarcerated in concentration camps – Communists, Socialists, Jews, and other “enemies of the state” had to be ended. WWII caused many historians to rethink the WBTS. These historians again made slavery an essential cause of the WBTS . They also maintained that the War was necessary because it ended slavery and saved the Union.

http://www.silverbearcafe.com/private/09.18/weapon.html