Arguing until Doomsday: Stephen Douglas, Jefferson Davis, and the Struggle for American Democracy (Civil War America) Hardcover – April 27, 2020

In 1827, the primary architect of what would become the Democratic Party, Martin Van Buren, wrote that he intended to unite the "plain republicans of the north" and the "planters of the south" in a coalition that would resurrect Jeffersonian ideals and get Andrew Jackson elected president. Michael E. Wood's magnificent new book shows how Van Buren's strategy worked in practice by focusing his attention on the lives and political careers of Stephen Douglas and Jefferson Davis. Part dual biography and part history of the antebellum Democratic Party, Woods skillfully presents Douglas and Davis as the embodiments of those "plain republicans" (Douglas) and the "planters" (Davis) who shaped the development--and, ultimately, by 1860, the destruction--of the party Van Buren had launched decades earlier. Ultimately, the tension inherent in the coalition, best represented by Douglas's commitment to majoritarian rule and Davis's determination to preserve the property rights of southern slaveholders, doomed the Union and forced a realignment in the party.Woods has crafted an impressively researched (it seems he has read everything relevant to his topic) and elegantly written book that is notable for its original insights. The pace never flags and the amount of detail the book contains never overwhelms the reader. Woods also has a finely honed sense of irony--and there are plenty of ironies in the history he narrates. This is a terrific book that makes a significant contribution to our understanding of why and how the Civil War came.

Illinois’s Stephen Douglas and Mississippi’s Jefferson Davis had different ideas on what the Democratic Party stood for and what was in the best interest of the United States, the South and the Northwest sections of the nation. The two men forced many party members to realize that major issue differences and sectional issues causes the ultimate rupture of the party into two when faced with the Presidential election of 1860. Strain over property rights and democracy, majority versus minority rule, popular sovereignty versus complete rights of slave holders, westward expansion, and whether one person had the interests of the South or the Northwest internal improvements. Both men were statesman, had Presidential asperations, and were stubborn. Where Douglas often worked to compromise with many partisan party members, Davis was generally concerned with how every bill or action would help Southern slave holders, the region’s economic and political rights of white people and continuing slavery. In the end, both leading antebellum politicians were unable to compromise enough to prevent secession by the South from the Union and the Civil War.According to Michael Woods, author of this new dual biography, Abraham Lincoln predicted after his 1858 Senatorial election loss to the ‘Little Giant” that Judge Douglas would not be able to keep the Democratic Party united for very long due to the interests of slave holders. Lincoln was correct and ultimately Douglas and Davis did agree on one thing, being against the 1860 presidential election of the Republican Party candidate. In the end, even the rail splitter could not appease the South over being half free and half slave after becoming the 16th president in March of 1861. Douglas went on support the interests of the U.S. while Davis became the President of the Confederate States of America. On June 3, 1861, shortly after the conflict started, Douglas died. Davis during the four-year war viewed slavery as a source of unity for the C.S.A. and therefore would be safe. His decisions and opinion were dead wrong and ultimately the South lost the conflict and slavery ended with the passage of the 13th amendment in 1965.This excellent historian is able to portray both individuals as statesmen with differences over the best interests of the Struggle for American Democracy. This work was able to provide readers with an important reappraisal of Douglas and Davis. Woods was able analyze both men’s analogous lives and evaluate their careers that contributed to the demise of the Democratic Party. Douglas was born in Vermont which was admitted to the United States as a free state in 1791, and Davis was born in Kentucky which was admitted as a slave state to the U.S. in 1792. Both had young wives and children who died. They both benefitted from upward mobility and through western expansion with the belief that manifest destiny would bring important and positive changes to the nation and the sectional interests of the North and South. Finally, these two politicians failed to make their party and country safe for slavery, and from struggle and war, which ultimately tore them both apart.Woods has written a superior new treatment of both Stephen Douglas and Jefferson Davis in Arguing until Doomsday. UNC superior new book includes images of three important maps of different regions of the U.S. prior to Civil War as well as an important halftone of the Democratic party’s candidates for President in 1860. It would have benefitted enthusiasts to have viewed several more photographs of the people discussed in this monograph. Additionally, notes, a very helpful bibliography, and an index were included in this volume.The author has successfully produced an enlightening new monograph which is fast-paced, lucid, and a tapestry that buffs will not want to put down until they finish this important study. He is a first-rate writer and story teller as well as a bold biographer.This reviewer highly recommends this outstanding title.