tv Book Discussion on The Cause of All Nations CSPAN September 1, 2015 8:53pm-9:53pm EDT
odds that women face? >> there are odds. there is no less discrimination still very difficult in some fields and is also still true, you if personally think the single biggest problem is the work place needs to be far more caretaker friendly, because you cannot have the best and the brightest meaning the majority of and the vast majority of graduates not able to be as productive and is able to do their best work as possible and still be a competitive society. i think that is a challenge that needs to be met. i also do feel and don't's get upset, modern women and men too, modern women are a bunch of sissies. compared to what these women went through it's just
remarkable. when somebody says to me i can't do at all like you like saying meet your great-grandmother and talk to her about it because really they did do it all and they didn't complain about it. they complained a little bit but -- [laughter] okay, thank you. >> i hope you will all pick up the book. i just want to thank her for coming and also for as i said earlier helping enrich our understanding of a very important aspect of our own history. i don't know there's another look at new but if there is i hope you'll come back to politics and prose and if you wouldn't mind holding up your chairs that will expedite the signing. [applause]
recounts efforts by the confederacy to win foreign support. this event held that president lincoln's cottage in washington d.c. is an hour. we'll. >> tonight we are delighted to post a story in don doyle and sidney blumenthal to discuss international relations and dr. to his latest book "the cause of all nations" an international history of the american civil war. don doyle is no cause on professor of history at the university of south carolina and director of the rain of the association for research on ethnicity and nationalism in the americas. before coming to south carolina he taught at vanderbilt university and the university of michigan dearborn. at usc doyle teaches a variety of undergraduate and graduate courses in u.s. history including the introductory survey course and nationalism in comparative perspective. fluent in four languages with some of you can attest to tonight in the q&a toilets been a visiting professor at the
university of rome italy the university of genoa italy and the university of leeds england and the, not even going to try that one. rio de janeiro brazil. the catholic university, and another catholic university being your neighbor giving him a unique aspect of that help shape the cause of all nations. sidney blumenthal is former assistant and senior adviser to president bill clinton senior adviser to hillary penton and adviser to the clinton foundation foundation. author big bucks his next project is a trilogy entitled the political life of abraham lincoln slated for release in 2016, 17 and 18. it's also been a writer and editor of the publications at the "washington post" new or public "vanity fair" and "the new yorker" specializing in foreign affairs and national politics. besides his literary career he also is executive producer for the academy award-winning documentary taxi to the dark side which won him any worse as well.
visited the troops at sydney point. they had a french visitor who was, i learned a relative and attending him, he asked the military band to play a song, the anthem of the french republic which had been banned under the second empire of napoleon the third. lincoln remarked papa pompously that it was odd he had to come to the america and he said i rather like that tune, played it again and they did. i'd also like to play the tune dixie for our guests who had never heard it. this now as federal property. we we fought hard for this.
it now belongs to us but i want everyone to know that in our country, unlike france, he didn't he didn't say but that is what he meant, the southerners are going to be free to hear that song. play it and they did. and then came back to washington. of course this was the day also that robert e lee surrendered the troops. it was not the end of the war but it was the beginning of the end and of course jefferson davis would not be apprehended until another month on may 10, i believe and of course the assassination on april 14 was intended to reignite the war. this was a momentous day and one full of expectation for the end of the war. >> i'd like to set the stage a little bit.
before i have done doyle talk about his book, i want to read you a few things from my forthcoming work too, as a kind of of prologue, i'd like to discuss the origins of abraham lincolns internationalism. why did lincoln think this was so important? where did this all come from? i'd like to take you back to a moment in 1852. lincoln has been congressman. he served one term. he is he is living in springfield, illinois. at the end of of this year, the leader of the failed hungarian revolution, lewis can sooth in the springtime of nations, the great great revolt of 1848, comes to new york and a crowd of
100,000 people, one quarter, one quarter of the population of new york greets him ecstatically. he marches down broadway on the greatest force of the mexican black warrior. there is a huge parade. let me just read you a little bit about lincoln and then i will turn to don and we are going to leap forward to the civil war. i want to get a sense of why lincoln cared so much about what the world thought. the hungarian leader brought along and entourage and he mentioned his electric presence would raise a million dollars
that would be handsomely redeemed in bonds. he mistook the the scale of his tumultuous greeting to be about his own glorious cause. he would flounder admits its mysterious realities. and then what happens is, after he is involved with several parties in washington and tries to go to the south to raise money and is spurned tries to make his way to the capitals of the provincial states of the country. he never never makes it to springfield. but there is a meeting in springfield about him. the town's mayor whose name was
ironically john calhoun who was democrat and had been lincoln's supervisor when he learned how to be a surveyor becomes the president of the meeting. the person who is put in charge of running the meeting is abraham lincoln. i'll just read you one of the springfield resolution. >> little noticed at the time it says that the sympathies of this country and the benefits should be exerted in favor of the people of every nation who are going to be free. this was organically connected to his objectives. he he would never travel abroad but he felt
the rise and fall of the revolutions of 1848. he saw them as democratic movements. they were suppressed by a consolation of the monarchial powers. he was eager and disappointed at their failure he did not link the european and anti- struggle slavery struggle. two years later, in his speech at peoria, on october 16, he did not hesitate to speak what had shortly before been politically unspeakable. on slavery he said, i hate i hate it. it deprives our republican example of its influence in the world.
it enables others to taunt us as hypocrites. he would ask repeat his exact phrase in his debate and during the decade he would a friend many exile revolutionaries from germany lincoln understood the civil war as an international event of the greatest magnitude. the cause of the united states, a little republic, it was this idea that led him, in 1862 to call the united states the last best hope of earth.
now are entering the cause of all nations, prof. doyle's book, and one of the great figures of the european revolution plays a central role in our civil war. that figure appears at the beginning of the war and he appears at a key turning point in the war. i wondered if you could explain to us how important garibaldi is to americans. this is. >> this is what got me interested in the story. i was a professor in italy and at that time, in the mid- 90s italy was divided, the north was talking about the section and another was calling for a separate government. i learned about the story of garibaldi and it seems to me a bizarre curiosity and it had been dealt with before by
historians who have kind of ignored and forgotten or were treated as just a curiosity but i wanted to learn more. that opened up the whole story that i followed that produce this book. i use the first chapter as garibaldi's question. question. at this time, everyone knew who garibaldi was. they knew what he stood for, why he was famous. he was the hero of two worlds in south america and north america as well as in europe. he was the first global hero and by that i mean he existed in prince and in images. everybody knew knew what he looked like. women adored garibaldi. they adopted the the garibaldi fashion with large red blouses and sometimes military jackets. for americans, garibaldi was an
important figure and they wanted him on both the federate and union side, there were regiments named after garibaldi. there was news that he was going to join the union. it was a rumor that echoed across the america all through the summer of 1861 and i later found out that the rumor began back at this little island as his lieutenant advisors were assaulting the press with these stories. he might come in raise his sward for america. this happened immediately after the battle of bull run. with lincoln's approval, the
secretary of state invited this soldier of freedom to come and fight for the unity and liberty of america. he sent one of his most trusted diplomats to belgium and unofficially the head of secret service in the union diplomatic corps to this tiny island out in the middle of the mediterranean to ask garibaldi if he would serve in the union army. he had two conditions. one is he wanted complete command of all union forces. [laughter] a pilot must be in control of his ship. second he wanted to know was this war about the ami emancipation of the negroes or not? if it's not about slavery or universal emancipation, then it then it will be just another
civil world war in the world will have no interest. the union would have a good answer for that in november of 61. it created, it underscored the need for a moral purpose and it's the beginning, at least of this reconsideration on the union side of what it was they were fighting for. at the end of the book. >> i'm going to leave the head, you tell a wonderful story about garibaldi. at the moment when it appears that the european powers may recognize the confederacy, now we know that is the key thing the confederacy is fighting for. if they get recognition from the european powers, then they can exist as a separate nation and those powers would break the union blockade and it would be the end of the united states as we knew it.
that's what everybody was playing for and all the battlefield here. garibaldi, you've done a fantastic work of scholarship in weaving together what happened at this very moment involving garibaldi. the usual story that we have is that the major powers of europe, britain and france were conspiring to intervene in the u.s. war. >> by intervention this meant that they would offer mediation if the north refused and the south accepted that would give them reason to recognize the south. recognition isn't just a formality, it meant that they existed under international law. it meant the condition for the blockade would have to meet a much higher standard and it probably meant war or the threat
of war between the united states and britain and france. it it would have been old world war. >> the usual story is that lincoln opposes the man's a patient proclamation in the news arrives in europe just in time to diffuse this plot of the great powers of europe to intervene. that's not it. in fact the exchanges between he and his foreign minister indicate, especially for russell, the idea that the united states was about to enact emancipation and to an egg napped a race warfare in america. they encourage them on this plan to intervention. what foiled their plan was a little-known incident, but it was garibaldi leading his band of troops in southern italy on a
march to rome. rome or or death was the slogan. at the end of september, at the end of august, garibaldi standing on a hill was wounded by italian soldiers whom he was hoping would come over and join him in this march to liberate rome from the pope and make it the control of united italy. he went to prison. many. many thought he would be executed as a rebel against the state and all of europe was in an uproar over the fate of garibaldi. huge rights rights took place in hyde park london on that sunday surrounding this
issue. there were demonstrations in favor of garibaldi but this wasn't just garibaldi, but the whole cause of liberty and republicanism. to cause a crisis in the french government and napoleon fired his foreign secretary. it meant the french in the reddish could no longer collaborate during this period. it created turmoil. in the meantime, garibaldi sends a letter to the english nation that calls on britain to stand by her daughter america who is now fighting for emancipation and against the traders in human flesh and it just puts this whole war into a completely different perspective. what's interesting is that garibaldi's letter to the english nation was written on september 28 before 28th before he knew anything about the make emancipation proclamation. it's as though he knows before lincoln dawes that
this war, whatever they've said, is going to be about slavery and emancipation and so it became. garibaldi is not the only pro-american in in europe and in britain who is supporting the united states and who is instrumental in this struggle. >> one of the others is somebody who's picture many people don't know but we just looked at this picture, it's it's the picture of lincoln presenting the emancipation proclamation to his cabinet. in the corner of that picture you can see a portrait. it is the portrait of an english liberal, john bright, who lincoln revered. lincoln had two portraits in his study in the white house. one was of andrew jackson because of his proclamation on notification which guided lincoln in his thinking on succession and the other was
john bright. to to him this represented the liberal cause in the world. tell us something about john bright and how important he was in britain and his relationship with lincoln himself. >> they never met. bright bright never came to america but he was a tremendous force during the civil war and an international voice. he he was a quaker. he was a cotton mill worker. he should've been on the side of the confederacy but he wasn't. as a quaker he was opposed to war and he was also opposed to the english aristotle city because he was a quaker and he was an minority. he became an advocate of reform in england and particularly reform of voting rights.
he wanted what was called universal suffrage which really meant for men only but it was for all men. he wanted it american style democracy. >> during 1861, the union had apprehended at sea, to confederate emissaries and it created an international crisis. the press and britain was flipping up the public into a lather for war and it looked like britain was on the verge of war in that december of 1861. john bright stood up and made up terrific speech to his own constituency in the north of england and spoke out against this war fever and also embrace the union cause as the same cause for democracy or for
expansion of the suffrage in britain. it reminded britain of the common bond that went back to colonial times and evoked this idea of a transatlantic nation that was, that had gone to war before and regretfully, and still have this bond of brotherhood across the sea. he came up very powerful voice for the union and also cast the war of one of democratic forces against those of slavery. >> lincoln was fascinated and had in his pockets various artifacts. various personal items in one of them was the clipping of an article from a london paper paper by john bright. >> is in that right?
>> lincoln sent to john bright some resolutions to present at public meetings and were ratified a huge public meetings there. one of those who organize one of those meetings, he was also very influential journalist. he was living in london and he wrote for an american paper from london on the civil war and i want to read you, from your own book, about what he wrote. he said the present struggle between the south in the north is a struggle between two social systems. the system of slavery in the system of preen labor. tell us about about marks in the civil war.
>> he wrote for the new york tribune, probably the largest newspapers, one of the largest in the world, out of new york which had a real interest in the revolutionary movements that have been coming out of europe. especially in 1848. he rehired him and paid him the equivalent of about $10 of about $10 a week. he lived on that. he was writing and lived in a suburb. they were fascinated with the american war. they saw they saw this as the last stand in this kind of futile a stick aristocracy. he was clear. he was on the side of the bush was a. he saw the u.s. as an exemplar of this democracy.
and an example of free labor. not in europe, not not in the most industrialized area but in america. that's the way he framed it. now as the new york tribune abandoned its overseas correspondents because they wanted to do more coverage of the war itself, he got cut off sometime after the grant crisis but he continued to write on the american civil war for the european press in the german-speaking press. he he was very influential in depicting the war as this epic battle in a historic struggle between forces of free labor and liberalism. it set the stage for the final revolution but he was a friend of america and a very articulate
one. >> in the communist manifesto which he wrote in 1948, he said the specter was haunting europe and all the forces of reaction are against it. among them he named the pope. now the pope was an important figure in the politics of europe at the time. he was a figure of reaction. in the middle of the war he issued a a statement called the syllabus of heirs. why don't you tell us about his role in the civil war in his view in the syllabus of heirs about what the united states was up to. >> this is another unexpected fire in civil war politics. stalin once asked how many battalions does the pope path. not very many but he was an important political figure. he had an appeal to catholic
europe and was especially important because of his indirect influence over french public which was a great power and sympathetic toward the confederacy and the government. neutral but but sympathetic toward the confederacy. pope pius ix actually began what they hoped would be a liberal pope and then during the revolution garibaldi came into rome and set up the republic of rome and pope pius was expelled from rome and came back with the help of the french and the french continued to garrison, the city of rome to protect what was the people's state. the pope is becoming a reactionary figure against all things modern, the syllabus of heirs denounces toleration of religion, free speech, free
thought. the confederates see a friend in pope pius ix and they sent emissaries over there to get him to side with the confederacy in its war against these zealous. since who were ransacking churches in louisiana and desecrating the catholic churches in other parts of the country. the pope wrote a letter that essentially said he regretted this intestinal war as they called it and hoped for peace but on the envelope it was addressed, in latin of course, to what someone translated as the president of the confederate states of america. so they man held this up and said we are recognized by the greatest pontiff in europe. this is the first of the great
monarchs of europe to recognize this. put this in the archives. well it wasn't quite that but it was very effective, especially effective, especially in discouraging irish immigrants in ireland and also in the united states from fighting for these zealous puritans as they depicted it. religion becomes wrapped wrapped up in this as well as ideology. >> you mentioned the confederate diplomatic effort. we think of what the union does but the confederacy was quite active and doing everything it could to enlist the european powers on its side. why do you tell us a little bit about some of these confederate diplomats. >> this is all important to them and probably not important enough in that they didn't really put that much stock in diplomacy but his secretary of
state is actually his third secretary of state. they had a couple fillings there that weren't very interesting the first year. i think they lost valuable time by the way. benjamin was a supportive jewish family that more migrated from spain to portugal. he was a cosmetology cosmetology and and a logger. he knew a lot about international law. he was a senator senator from louisiana and married a french louisiana and. he was a man of heart and knew the languages in the law. he recognized we can't outlast the union. they have more men and we can outlast this politically. we can't press our population to four or five years of war. we have to win this through recognition and so he began to fund public policy programs what
we might call propaganda but it was efforts to persuade public opinion abroad. there were a number of them and their often depicted as cartoonish figures. they were spitting tobacco and behaving poorly in europe but they got some very sappy invoice. john seidel in paris was fluent in french and married a french woman and was very good at diplomacy. he had worked his way into napoleon the third's court and did a lot to advance the interest of the confederacy. james mason in london was not as effective or quite as diplomatic but both of them had reason to believe that sooner or later the great powers of europe are going to recognize the south. they would put aside whatever moral qualms they or their public had and recognize the south to end
the war out of humanitarian concerns and out and also out of concern of king cotton. they had to have the cotton from the south. they were they were supplying 80% of the world cotton and the economies of britain and much of europe depended on cotton. it wasn't just businessmen but the fear of social revolution a massive unemployment. there was real real concern that the longest this war went on, the more danger europe, economically and socially, would would be in. >> well, you know, benjamin served in the senate with william stewart. they they were both senators together. on one evening, benjamin was delivering a speech announcing seward who was himself considered to be one of the most anti- slavery senators. he was
from new york. seward said to him, as him, as he was speaking, when you're finished, senator enginemen, please give me one of those fine cigars that you are smoking. tell us a little bit about the famous team of rivals. he became the secretary of state and they didn't always get along that they later became, he and lincoln, an indispensable an indispensable team. >> yes. i found, in that relationship, really good working relationship, and if they disagreed at times, it was a real healthy disagreement. so here was seward, he was the inevitable nominee for the republican party it was really because he became too well known for the ear is irrepressible
believes and he was considered a moderate and less well known. he had been in illinois for most of his career and served as a congressman for just one term. except for the lincoln douglas debate which brought him some national notoriety, he didn't he didn't have as much baggage as seward did. so now seward seward the jealous rival, disappointed by being the secretary of state, seward was jealous and somewhat condescending at time, but they work together. there is one incident where, on on april 1, they write this memo and everyone uses this to the packed seward as this warmonger that some called the april
fools' day memo. he's advising the president. let's have a war with spain or france or both. his idea was this would unite than north and south and south carolina, seeing the enemy ships coming into the harbor would come and fight for the union. still, he, he was a little off on some of that and lincoln did not take his advice but his aggressive foreign policy that threatened europe, that that hard power line that remained intact, he was not correct and that was very important to the success of the war. >> when we think of international relations of the civil war, we think about europe but one of the most important
factors was mexico. mexico was crucial to the war and constantly talked about. why don't you explain to us why this was so. >> by the beginning of the war, right after spain took over santa domingo, france spain and britain met in london and formed a tripartite alliance in which they agreed for an allied invasion of mexico. it was supposed to be cheery cover foreign debt but everyone knew that france had this plan, napoleon's grand design to topple the war as government, the republican that had just had his party elected. he took office at the same time lincoln did to topple then and to install european monarch and to demonstrate to all of latin
america that monarchy can stabilize and bring peace to latin america of course napoleon the third wanted the confederacy to win to create a buffer state between his latin catholic empire that would be seated in mexico and the anglo saxon democracy from the north. that became very, very important to the war. at the end of the war one of the great french supporters of the united states a history professor, makes a suggestion that there should be a gesture to the united states why don't you explain what that jester is and what happened. >> he is one of my favorites because he is a history professor but just loved
america. he could admire a nation from a distance napoleon the third was an oppressive dictatorship and they saw the united states as an example of the values that they wished would exist in their own country they admired america because without kings and without priests and without this kind of aristocracy they have been able to conduct government without assassinations and without revolutions they've gone
through advancements of multiple chains of governments in revolutions and all kinds of murderous violence and he saw america as an example of stability until 1861. now the whole experiment in self-government, government by the people seemed to be in jeopardy. he found his pen in his mind to the union cause and became a very effective agent of john bigelow, future future u.s. ambassador to france. he was used very effectively, calling upon the american people to stand up and defend lincoln and the union in this experiment for democracy. when lincoln was assassinated, he was so depressed and he and a number of other republicans met at this country place outside of paris. they couldn't really meet publicly under napoleon's regime. they had no had an idea for a monument to america to this friendship between france and the united states. he went back to 1778 and the commitment to liberty. out of
that, one of the members at this dinner party, the artist from the group that later had the idea for what we now call the statue of liberty. it was liberty enlightening the world. it would take 20 years before they actually erected that in new york harbor but the idea was born in that summer of 1855. that statue is our work gratis civil war monument. not just for america, but, but for all the world because it is liberty enlightening the world. >> that statue, which most people are quite familiar with, don't know that at the feet of the statue of liberty live broken change representing emancipation. she is holding the declaration of independence, all men are created equal, lincoln's credo,'s credo, and holding up the lamp of enlightenment.
>> that's right. >> and values and deliberately facing europe. >> and striving toward europe. >> and as he explains, the lamp, not the torch not the symbol of revolution, not stepping over dead course is, the lamp of enlightenment. it's it's a wonderful story. >> thank you so much. [applause]. >> we have some time for questions. >> i think the press, as an african-american have seen hundred and 50 years go by where lincoln has been put up as almost a saintlike figure on one hand and then parochial eyes but it has taken scholars like you to to find these new pieces. it
it seems to me, this parochialism, lincoln was a limited purpose person in this stuff about foreign affairs and even how the capital turned from a sleepy southern town to a northern town because of him, it seems to go against the screen in american history until you guys come along. i think think it has been perpetuated by white southerners and maybe even conservatives to this day that he was a limited purpose hero. i'm serious. he was a limited purpose hero and we just have to look at him and not in this broad spectrum that people like you have done in international affairs and other scholars that have talked in the past about the city itself and the cause of
african-american advancement in freedom, even even during the five years during the war. do you have any opinion as to why we look at him, even schoolchildren these days see him as a limited purpose hero instead of seeing this broad concept of international affairs and local policy here in washington. >> lincoln is always a surprise. i think he was depicted at the beginning of his campaign as eating this prairie lawyer who didn't know anything about the world. very early in his career he had this awareness that america was part of this larger world and if this was an experiment by the people that it mattered to the world in the world would matter to america. he learns and he grows during the war. he's not just what he was at the beginning. he listens a listens a lot and that was the secret to the diplomatic program
overseas to send his diplomats over and say tell us what they are saying. what are they saying in the press? the? the dispatch is coming back to washington filled with these reports of the public lying as they called it and the idea that there was a public that was out there to an important to their understanding and strategy. he listened and and learned and answered together. this is an enormous subject. it's about abraham lincoln. >> the last thing you should do is apologize because you have asked the central question about lincoln. >> some people say lincoln of all, he didn't really care about slavery and some people say he was just in his own time he was
a half politician he was a low class character people say you know he just wanted to get by well the truth is, as lincoln himself said, i was naturally anti-slavery. he was born into this. now this is a this is a long long discussion. the truth is his father in kentucky got away from slavery. his parents were members of small printed baptists emancipation churches. people generally don't know this. as lincoln himself said, he was raised to be anti-slavery. he went down to new orleans twice. he was shocked at what he saw. the open-air auctions and his cousin said he would strike a blow against slavery.
lincoln, when he he was a state legislator in illinois which, i'm from illinois, was the most racist statement in the north at the time. lincoln is a state legislator in the 1930s. he proposed in the illinois state legislator a bill for emancipation in the district of columbia. that was the most forward thinking thing that you could do at the time. while it's true that he evolved that he grew, he deepened, his thoughts in response to events and
circumstances and reading in his own experiences, he was always antislavery. in slavery. in 1858, before he was president and his house divided, in his house divided speech, he said he is determined to put slavery on the course of ultimate distinction. began in 1854 with his speeches in springfield and peoria and they're very explicit about slavery. if slavery is not wrong, nothing is wrong lincoln was also a politician. he had very difficult circumstances. he. he had to cope with this. of course after his death and after reconstruction there was a whole lost cause movement and the southerners and i think don could speak to this some other time took over the historical profession in the writing on the civil war and they created a mythology. only in recent years is it being
broken. this book is one of these breakthroughs in my view. i think i think you've asked a central question i hope i can come back in about a year and when my book is published and talk about this issue in detail. i think everyone needs to encounter lincoln again and you are quite right. >> can you expand a little bit on the sentiment that would lead great britain toward the south giving that it is sort of counter intuitive. they abolished slavery through the colonies and everything else, and also, as part of that to what extent was any financial or other actual support given to the confederacy by the european powers?
>> britain was divided. we talk about britain, one of the distinctions that needs to be made for any country is first the government and then the public mind to the extent that that could be identified. palmer's and who was the prime minister was anti- democratic. many of the british governing class were just delighted to see what one called the republican bubble burst. this was proof that self-government didn't work they were arguing with john bright whom we discussed earlier in this whole idea that they should expand the franchise. that sentiment was important. the other was of course just a concern about cotton and a lot of free trade liberals who might be antislavery would say well if the union isn't fighting against slavery then what do we have against trading with the south.
if they believe in free trade, by this time they had passed a high tariff, going the other way was pro-democracy in the public of great britain and that was important. they maintained neutrality throughout. you. you asked about material health. and help. the government turned turned a blind eye to the construction of confederate readers in the alabama. that was one of the most deadly forces on the open sea. there were others there in london, excuse me in england and they wanted to do the same in france. there was unofficial help but officially they remain neutral.
you're right, those are the contending forces that were in play. >> to the back please. >> was there any influence of the civil war in the south american countries or countries other than the european area did the civil war influence any future revolutions in those countries? >> the european intervention in mexico and in santa domingo, which had been the dominican republic, seem to be precursors, in my chapter i call it the empires return. they are coming coming back to take back lost colonies and establish monarchies in different latin american countries, and many latin americans began to see this as a contest in which they had a stake in their main
concern was about this european imperialism. they they saw the defeat of the union as being a big blow to them what we think of now as kind of an excuse for u.s. imperialism, latin american diplomats were going to washington, begging america to defend it and to stand up for the doctrine that europe would no longer be allowed to just come in and carve up the western hemisphere. after the war, at the end of the war, 17 empires all retreat. british, north america which had been a collection of different british possessions were now formed into what we know as canada. it was a a self-governing, still belonging to britain but self-governing.
russian retreat. and of course maximilian meets his doom and 1867 at the hands of a republican firing squad in mexico. some call it the last battle of of the civil war. cuba begins a revolution in 1868 against slavery but also for freedom of cuba. there were a number of different complications a rough doing at the end of the american civil war and at the ends, europe has withdrawn from the western hemisphere. there were big states for latin america in this war. >> one more question. >> we must have another question. >> right here please. >> we were facing a world war and that's just a startling comment to me and i wondered if