Opinion: Trump's remarks on the Civil War are more appalling than Nikki Haley's
Former President Donald Trump's controversial claim that the Civil War could have been prevented through skillful diplomacy sparks outrage Gain insights into why Dean Obeidallah finds this assertion to be outrageous in his opinion Subscribe to our newsletter for more updates
At a campaign event in Iowa this weekend, former President Donald Trump told supporters that he proposed a way to prevent the bloody and intractable Civil War that tore America apart: to strike a deal between the slave-holding states and non-slave holding ones.
Dean Obeidallah
CNN
Trump described the conflict as "terrible, but also fascinating" at a campaign rally on Saturday. He stated that "numerous mistakes were made" during the war, which took place between 1861 and 1865 and resulted in over 600,000 deaths. Secessionist states chose to leave the Union rather than give up the brutal practice of owning Black individuals as property. "It was a challenging time for our country," Trump remarked.
He went on to say, "I believe that there could have been negotiations, to be honest. I think it could have been negotiated." Trump also commented, "If Abraham Lincoln had negotiated it, you might not even know who he was."
One can't help but question what Trump hoped to achieve through negotiation during a time in history when the only options were slavery or war, as noted by numerous historians. His comments are reminiscent of a recent gaffe made by former South Carolina governor Nikki Haley, who is competing with Trump for the 2024 Republican presidential nomination and also made controversial remarks about the Civil War.
Former President Donald Trump, a Republican presidential candidate, arrives to speak at the Pray Vote Stand Summit at the Omni Shoreham Hotel on September 15, 2023 in Washington, DC. The summit showcased various 2024 Republican Presidential candidates as they presented their platform to conservative audience members. (Photo by Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images)
Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images
Opinion: The Supreme Court could correct Mitch McConnells huge mistake
At a campaign event, Haley's failure to mention slavery as a cause of the Civil War was a significant misstep. This oversight was particularly glaring given that secession declarations from her own state and others in the South unambiguously cited slavery as the primary reason for leaving the Union. Despite later acknowledging slavery as the main cause, Haley continued to assert a list of vague factors, including government operations, freedoms, and restrictions, as other contributing causes.
Haley's remarks were a significant mistake, but Trump's were much more damaging. This was not a situation where the former president could claim, as he often does, that he didn't really understand the details of the issue being discussed- in this case, the Civil War.
In fact, just two days before the rally on Sunday, he criticized Haley for not acknowledging slavery as the cause of the conflict between the states. During the campaign event on Friday, Trump told supporters: "She didn't mention slavery, which was interesting." He then added, "I'd say slavery is the obvious answer."
The inevitable question arises: What would the act of "negotiating" on the topic of slavery have meant for Trump? Is he implying that he would have permitted slavery to persist indefinitely as the slave-owning states desired?
Trump supporters and security forces clashed as they attempted to storm the US Capitol on January 6, 2021 in Washington, DC. Demonstrators breached security and entered the Capitol building while Congress debated the certification of the 2020 presidential election Electoral Vote.
Republican attempts to counterprogram the January 6 hearings will not succeed, as emphasized by former Republican House member Liz Cheney. She questioned the part of the Civil War that could have been negotiated, such as the issue of slavery, secession, or Lincoln's preservation of the Union. Cheney challenged GOP members who endorsed Donald Trump, asking how they could possibly defend his actions.
Cheney was not the only Republican to criticize Trump's remarks. Christian Vanderbrouk, a writer for The Bulwark and a former member of former President George W. Bush's administration, expressed on X, "Trump nostalgically considers the idea of allowing the South to have continued the practice of slavery."
Some may downplay Trump's thoughts about a potential deal to avoid the Civil War, but I don't. It seems that when a political issue involves race, Trump's intentions are more troubling. Cheney and Vanderbrouk were emphasizing this by questioning whether Trump would have considered allowing the Southern states to keep owning Black people as property.
Sign up for our weekly newsletter now.
Sign up for CNN Opinions newsletter
Join us on Twitter and Facebook
Aside from those comments, Trump has a history of making racist remarks, such as derogatory comments about immigrants from African countries and Haiti, which he referred to as "shithole countries." Additionally, he refused to denounce White supremacy during the September 2020 presidential debate. This is the lens through which we must consider Trump's statement that there could have been a way to negotiate an end to the Civil War.
The issue for consideration is not whether Lincoln could have brokered a deal to satisfy the slave-owning states enough to keep them in the Union. Rather, the question is which side Trump would have supported in the Civil War: the Confederacy or the United States of America. Given the president's track record and the accusations of attempting his own insurrection, which he denies, it seems the answer is clear.
